>> i just said to you, i don't know whether aid was being held up. >> we're going to release these transcripts for people to see. we will get to the bottom of this. >> this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john berman. >> beautiful sunrise there. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. this is "new day." we want to start with breaking news for you. brand-new polls in six key battleground states that could determine whether president trump wins a second term. "the new york times"/siena college polls gauge voters in pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin, florida, arizona, and north carolina, states that carried mr. trump to the white house in 2016. voters were asked to choose between the president and each of the leading democratic contenders in head-to-head matchups. the results are very interesting. only joe biden beats the president in fooive of those si states. harry entin will break down the numbers in a moment. >> four witnesses were scheduled to testify in the house impeachment inquiry, but none of

them, none are going to show up. it looks like there will be more stonewalling as the week goes on. the president and his top allies are demanding to hear also from the whistle-blower who triggered the impeachment inquiry. that flouts the law. they want his or her identity revealed. the whistle-blower's lawyer says his client is willing to answer written questions from republican lawmakers. and this comes as republicans have been teeing up what is their last-ditch argument ahead of public hearings that there was a quid pro quo, but it's not impeachable. let's get the breaking news, though, on these new battleground state polls. cnn senior political writer and analyst, harry entin joins us with that. sir? >> sir, how are you? okeydokey. let's take a look. i want to set the stage here. remember 2016, right? what we saw was hillary clinton winning that popular vote, 48-46. but the key thing was those six closest states that trump won. arizona, florida, michigan, north carolina, pennsylvania and wisconsin. what you saw there was a small trump margin, but good enough to get him over the top. those are the states that matter. so let's take a look at how the

leading democrats are doing against donald trump at this point in the cycle. so nationwide, what we see is, biden, sanders, and warren all leading donald trump between by 5 percentage points for elizabeth warren, 8 percentage points for joe biden. take a look at those six closest states that trump won in 2016. we see a very different picture. we see biden fairly out ahead, within the margin of error, up by a point. the rest of the democrats do worse. sanders, down by a point to donald trump. and elizabeth warren, doing the worst among them, down by three points. that is a meaningful difference, especially when you break it down by the states. what you see is in the northern battleground states, that is the states of michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin, we see consistently across the board that joe biden is doing better than elizabeth warren. up by one in michigan, up by one in pennsylvania, up by two in wisconsin while warren trails in all three of those states. bernie sanders somewhere in the middle, leading in michigan, but losing in pennsylvania and a tie in wisconsin. and again, i just emphasized this. it's seen across the board.

so go to the southern battleground states. arizona, florida, north carolina. what do we see? we see biden doing better than warren across the board. up by two in arizona, two in florida, and down by two in north carolina, but warren pretty much trailing in all of them, florida and north korea a north carolina and a tie in arizona. one last thing i'll point out. this is not just about name recognition. in iowa, elizabeth warren does the worst of any of the democrats, including doing worse than pete buttigieg, who has a much lower name i.d. so two things to take away from these polls, very, very close in the battleground states and joe biden running ahead of elizabeth warren. >> harry, thank you very much. those numbers are fascinating. thank you for all of those -- that breaking news. and we'll be talking to mayor pete buttigieg later in the program. >> yes, we will. >> about all of this and more. >> he wasn't testing, but i think he'll have an interesting take on it all. >> joining us now, paul begala. also with us, cnn's senior

global affairs correspondent, bianna golodryga and van jones. you all have an interesting take on everything we've just seen. paul, as a die-hard democrat, you can't be happy about those battleground poll numbers right now. >> it's not going to be an easy race. it's not. donald trump is formidable. i do think if you turn it around, if i'm working for donald trump, okay, we have a -- booming -- not just strong, booming economy. we've had, thank god, no terrorists at home, no major foreign terrorist attacks at home. and i ain't got nothing going on. in other words, he ain't no better than he was. he was good enough then and this is good enough for him to win now. democrats, turn around and put on my democratic hat. the country, i think is ready to fire president trump. the country is not ready for socialism. and i think that's what the voters are trying to tell the democrats. is that we want to replace this guy, but just give us somebody -- if joe biden is not doing better than his rivals

because he's more exciting or running a better campaign. it's because i think voters just want something normal. just get out of my face, mr. president, just for a few days. and i think when you look at elizabeth warren friday night, she gave a great speech. she used "fight" in every single sentence. and it could be that voters are tired of fights and they want a little healing. >> van, for a while, you've been the chair of the don't get cocky caucus for democrats here, so i bet you weren't surprised by these numbers. but what do you think is going on? why? >> not surprised. i would say, elizabeth warren, if we were six months ago, seven months ago, she shouldn't even be on the board. be clear, her trajectory has been up, up, up the whole time. so i think that the party has a challenge. does electability mean, as you were just saying, somebody we can calm the water and bring people together, or does the ability to electrify make you electable. and elizabeth warren is

electrifying people right now that were not electrfied before. i think that the progressive wing of our party needs top recognize, this is a much tougher fight -- if we want to go with real structural fixes, we say, listen, we can't just win the election and leave people out there to continue suffering and they'll throw us back out two years later. then you've got a much harder case to make than i think most people recognize. >> do these battleground polls, fresh off the presses, show that impeachment is working for president trump? that in battlegrounds, they are not holding it against president trump thus far? >> look at the democrat's message. it's not necessarily about what's politically right, right. it's what is right for the country, not what's right for where we stand in the polls. and at this point, she feels that her hands are tied with regard to impeachment and they believe there's enough evidence to pursue impeachment. nationwide, we know more and more americans are starting to fossil suit. but i go back to what van said. there is a difference between

saying what we see right now is not normal and we want change in the white house versus let's just blow everything up. so the loudest voices in the room in terms of rallies and messaging don't necessarily reflect what americans specifically in those battleground states want right now. and what they're not saying, and what they haven't been saying, up until elizabeth warren started talking and bernie sanders were talking about revolutionizing health care, was medicare for all. we saw what happened in 2018. we saw that republicans got really hammered, because democrats said, you're not taking away our health care. and now there's a situation in terms of what we saw over the weekend with elizabeth warren's new $20 trillion proposal, where 250 million americans may have their health insurance taken away from them. so there's a big question of, do we want change in the white house or do we want to blow the system up? and i think those are two questions and two situations that a lot of democrats are finding themselves in and are concerned about. >> to be fair, taken away and replaced with something much better, much cheaper, and more

universally covered. but that -- >> but we don't know it yet. >> sure. we're asking for people to have faith. that we can do better with a publicly supported set of options, rather than privately supported set of options. that is a big risk. some people would say, listen, just say that you don't want to take away all the stuff that the republicans want to take away and you're going to go for lower costs and universal coverage. don't get into all of these thick thickets and weeds. but we've got a bunch of people in our party who want -- the other problem in our party is a lack of trust with the party. that if you throw somebody in there without a real plan, we're not going to get a problem solved. >> we're going to move on to impeachment, because there are some major developments over the weekend. and the development that i think is the most important, and we may disagree on this, is that i think republicans retreated to what they see as their last defensible position on all of this, which is that, okay, the president did it. he maybe even did all of it. there maybe even was a quid pro quo. all of it. but it's not impeachable. let me just play kellyanne conway with dana over the

weekend. because this exchange was interesting. >> so you feel totally confident that at the core of this, the heart of this, there was no quid pro quo? >> here's what i feel confident about. i feel confident about the fact that ukraine has that aid and is using it right now. that it's because of this president that they have it. the last administration -- >> kellyanne, you very notably won't say yes or no. quid pro quo, yes or no. >> first of all, i just said, i don't know whether aid was being held up and for how long. >> if kellyanne conway won't tell dana whether aid was being held up, it's because she can't. because she knows, presumably, that it was. and this is the last line for republicans here. okay, we'll concede everything here. we still don't think you're going to -- this is their alibi. >> they've given up on whether there was a quid pro quo. and maybe they can hold that line, maybe they can. i've got to say, give dana bash a gold medal for that. kel kellyanne is slippier than an

eel in a bucket of vaseline. >> and that's praise. she's completely disingenuous. she works for me, and she owes the taxpayers who pay her salary an honest answer. and the honest answer is they withheld the funds from ukraine in order to get political advantage. that's a crime. if they want to say that's not impeachable, that's fine. many of them decided it was an affair. it doesn't raise to the level of a consensual adult affair, but it's extortion with our taxpayer money and our national security. >> and let's go backwards. if all of this was okay and quid pro quo is something that happens all the time and republicans are okay with it, what would have happened if the president was public about it. what if that money had been appropriated by congress and the president said, you know what, before we hand over that money, there's some biden mess that i want to look into in ukraine. and let's take to this congress, let's ask republicans in congress if they are okay with me holding this money as

leverage over president zelensky's head until he investigates the biden's relationship with burisma and what have you and any of that corruption. what would have republicans have said? there's a reason this happened behind closed doors. there's a reason that transcript was moved over into a secret server. so for them to now say, three weeks later, four weeks later, that, oh, okay, we're okay with it, it's a clear indication that their back is against the wall and this is their last way out here. >> that's a good litmus test. i mean, if you put it through that lens, obviously, and the lens of what if hillary clinton had done it. but we've been hearing this more than just over the weekend. we started hearing it from some of the president's surrogates, that this is not impeachable. this is ant high crime, they say. obviously, the problem is, the founders did leave that open to interpretation. >> well, a number of things are happening here. first of all, you know, if you just are a normal person who is watching this, you've got decorated war veterans coming forward. these are not partisan people. these are not hacks.

these are people who serve the country saying, what i saw disturbed me so badly that i spoke out about it and i'm here risking my career to talk about it. that should -- that should be a moment that everybody takes a breath and says, hold on a second. what did you see, sir? what's wrong with that? the idea that you rush past that to the so what defense. like, so what. that's our defense. so what? that lets me know that we're in a real crisis, and not just a constitutional one. a moral one, a spiritual one. that's not the way that the republican party should be treating veterans who speak up, period. >> and again, i'm just surprised that we got to so what before the public hearings. >> where are we going to be next week. >> it's early to concede all of that. thank you all very much. the 2020 candidates are sharpening their attacks now on each other. we'll break down the latest points of criticism, next.

the one for you when you know you just know love is her love is him love is us ♪ the vera wang love collection designed for zales, the diamond store.

val, vern... i'm off to college and i'm not gonna be around... i'm worried about my parents' retirement. oh, don't worry. voya helps them to and through retirement... ...dealing with today's expenses... ...like college... ...while helping plan, invest and protect for the future. so they'll be okay... without me? um... and when we knock out this wall imagine the closet space? yes! oh hey, son. yeah, i think they'll be fine. voya. helping you to and through retirement.

as of this moment, the iowa caucuses are just three months away. three months from today. how can you tell? well, you can look at the calendar. but there is another way. because the candidates are sharpening their attacks on each other. arlette saenz here with the details on all of that. arlette? >> joe biden has really been increasingly sharpening his criticism against his progressive opponents, as the race in iowa is narrowing. and biden's team is also downplaying expectations in the state, with his campaign manager telling "the wall street journal," quote, i think we're the only one who is don't have to win iowa, honestly, because our strength is the fact that we have a broad and diverse

coalition. with the iowa caucuses 91 days away, joe biden is intensifying his showdown with his progressive rivals. >> it takes a lot more than plans. we're not electing the planner. >> reporter: a pair of national polls released sunday show biden with a clear lead, while a third gives the former vice president a slight edge over senator elizabeth warren. but within the margin of error. recent polls in the first two nominating states also find a much closer contest. as the 2020 race tightens, biden is challenging the democratic party's progressive wing, preaching a pragmatic approach to governing. >> but they all talk about how, yeah, joe is always able to get big things done across the aisle. but things have changed. can't do that anymore. well, folks, we can donate that anymore, we're in real trouble. >> reporter: one frequent target for biden, medicare for all. the proposal written by bernie sanders and backed by warren. biden's campaign calling warren's recent plan to pay for

the policy mathematical gymnastics and unrealistic. >> i just think getting that plan through, even a democratic congress, would be difficult. >> reporter: as she defended her plan, warren leveling her own critique of biden. >> if anyone wants to defend keeping those high profits for insurance companies and those high profits for drug companies and not making the top 1% pay a fair share in taxes and not making corporations pay a fair share in taxes, then i think they're running in the wrong presidential primary. >> reporter: that comment prompting the former vice president to push back. >> some of the opponents want to very much characterize views in terms of whether you're thinking big, and you criticize something that you think is outlandish, you must be a republican. ladies and gentlemen. the vision i have for this country, there's nothing small

about it. >> reporter: also in iowa this weekend, pete buttigieg, who's seen a boost in recent polls. and is pitching himself as a pragmatic alternative to biden. >> i didn't just come here to end the era of donald trump. i'm here to launch the era that must come next. >> reporter: buttigieg also this weekend said the 2020 contest is shaping into a two-way race between himself and warren. that comment drawing some criticism. kamala harris saying it's naive to say the race is set this early. and buttigieg admitted his comments didn't come out right. >> and some ream startling from jim clyburn who said that older african-american voters not ready, necessarily, for a gay candidate. thank you, arlette, for that report. the president and his allies in congress stepping up their efforts to unmask the whistle-blower. is that legal. imagine a disease is caused by too much of a bad protein, but a company develops a way to actually attack it.

what drew me to capital allocation in health sciences was the potential to help many people through investments that help fund medical innovation. my team and i often choose to invest at the very early stages of human trials. investing lets me use everything i've learned as a doctor to help make a positive impact. so that's why i go beyond the numbers. here's the story of green mountain coffee roasters costa rica paraíso. meet sergio. and his daughter, maria. sergio's coffee tastes spectacular. because costa rica is spectacular. so we support farmers who use natural compost. to help keep the soil healthy. and the coffee delicious. for future generations. all for a smoother tasting cup. green mountain coffee roasters.

dana-farber cancer institute discovered the pd-l1 pathway. pd-l1. they changed how the world fights cancer. blocking the pd-l1 protein, lets the immune system attack, attack, attack cancer. pd-l1 transformed, revolutionized, immunotherapy. pd-l1 saved my life. saved my life. saved my life. what we do here at dana-faber, changes lives everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. everywhere.

president trump and his allies are ramping up efforts to unmask the whistle-blower. listen to this. >> there have been stories written about a certain individual, a male, and they say he's the whistle-blower. if he's the whistle-blower, he has no credibility. because he's a brennan guy, he's a susan rice guy, he's an obama guy. and he hates trump. >> hmm. well, because the whistle-blower's identity is not public, he can say whatever he wants about the whistle-blower. >> but, what he just said is

nonsense. there's honestly, not a shred of evidence any of that is true. and it's more than that, which is the president is asking to out a whistle-blower. which in and of itself is something that should raise eyebrows. >> let's check in with our guests. joining us now is cnn chief legal analyst, jeffrey toobin and laura coates. great to have both of you. jeffrey, is unmasking the whistle-blower intentionally illegal? >> yes, it's illegal. i mean, there's a whistle-blower protection act. if this were a private company, the board would fire the ceo for behaving this way towards a whistle-blower. this is -- the whole whistle-blower idea is that they should have -- >> anonymity! >> protections, anonymity, much less be attacked by the president of the united states. and here, the whistle-blower is factually irrelevant. because the whistle-blower just said from the beginning, i have secondhand information. go talk to the people who have firsthand. that's what's been done. so, i mean, this is just pure harassment.

>> and every substantiative element that the whistle-blower outlined has basically been confirmed and/or furthered by what we know from this testimony, laura. so you see this, and it's just a side show. it's just a distraction gig from the president. >> it is. it's essentially saying to yourself, let's shoot the messenger, which you should not obviously do in any realm of life. but it's more than that. just last week, the president up until that point has been complaining that the whole reason he wanted the whistle-blower outed is because he wanted to be able to confront his accuser, cross-examine the person, test their credibility. guess what. a resolution was passed just last week from the house of representatives that said, you'll have an opportunity to do that for those witnesses that do testify, that did already cooperate the substantiative aspects. and you'll have that opportunity. now he's just trying to essentially have a distraction moment here, which is not useful. and more importantly, as jeffrey talked about, not only is it illegal, it should be illegal. because it will have a very chilling effect on anyone who wants to come forward and report abuses of power. not just in the government, but

everywhere else. imagine where we'd be if over the course of history, from the pentagon papers on, we did not have people willing to come forward and say, excuse me, here is what happened. here's what i know. and by definition win am credible, because i was in the room. >> i think that voters get confused, jeffrey, when they hear that something is illegal, that the president is doing in public, in wide open. so, does that become an article of impeachment? i mean, what do you -- the fact that he is -- well, he's not breaking the law by asking for the identity to be revealed. he would break the law if he revealed the identity, right? >> yes, although, harassment, which i think this clearly is, is illegal. but, you know, this is one of the tests of our democracy under donald trump. that, you know, he has violated so many enormous. he has violated so many laws like this one, that, you know, we -- you know, we have to decide what our priorities are. i mean, so many -- he lies so much and tells -- and says so

many crazy things. he tweeted over the weekend that the republicans should put out their own transcripts of the hearings that are going on in private now. i mean, there are official court reporters there. there's not going to be more than one transcript. there's no question about the legality of the transcripts. crazy stuff like that, we've just sort of learned to discount that, oh, well, you know, that's just trump talking. but i think that has a cost. the whistle-blower thing has a -- and also, there's a human being there who was around great deal of threat. >> look, it could be obstructive, it could be abuse of power. that's ultimately for the house of representatives to decide. and they may choose to focus on other priorities, right? laura, there is something else interesting when it comes to the whistle-blower, which is that the whistle-blower's attorney is now saying that he or she will answer questions to republicans if they want, in written form. now, people will -- the republicans will say, no, no, no, no, that's not enough. and people will say, what about the irony of the fact that president trump only answered

questions in written form to the mueller report. i see this as a sideshow. what do you see? i see a sideshow. the notion of saying, we're going to have a response that's vetted. normally you're talking about the president of the united states or any other fact witness, you would kind of shrink away from that and say, i would like to hear to test the person's credibility. but the whistle-blower protection act, this is something that's very generous and magnanimous, frankly, of a whistle-blower who followed the proper channels, did the proper vehicles, and everything he or she was supposed to do. and now is being asked to deliver even more information than that. so they may actually do it will be a little odder, given the fact that you've got more than a dozen witnesses who have come forward, even voluntarily or under subpoena to the house, and have said exactly what the whistle-blower has said. and the biggest corroborator in all of this, by the way, is the president of the united states himself through the actual transcript. the biggest parts of that whistle-blower complaint about the notion of the quid pro quo, although that language is not

used, can be found in the very thing the president wanted to have a fireside chat reading about, just last week. and so, it's odd to me that he would want to do that. especially given the fact that you have this protection that says, you need not be the person who testify when you have fact witnesses who were in the room, including people like lieutenant colonel just last week, who said, not only was i in the room, i was on the call. and i reported it to the attorneys who should have done something about it. >> laura, jeffrey, thank you very much for all of the legal expertise that you provide. and on top of all of this, it could be the most important development in the impeachment inquiry over the weekend. republicans with what could be their last defense. acknowledging the president made the call, made the request, even it could have been a quid pro quo, but in their minds, not enough for impeachment. a closer look at where the strategy goes from here, next. ♪

♪ only lexus asks questions like these, because we believe the most amazing machines are inspired by you. experience the rewards of our curiosity. hour 36 in the stakeout. ♪ limu emu & doug as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ]

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

here, hello! starts with -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.

as the impeachment inquiry enters week seven, it appears that investigators have heard from the witness who willing to talk. president trump is pushing back against a report that a growing number of senate republicans are ready to acknowledge that the president admitted a quid pro quo, but that the president's actions were not illegal and do not rise to the level of impeachment. joining us now, "new york times" columnist, tom friedman. he's the author of the national book award winner "from beirut to jerusalem," the single greatest book almost ever written about the middle east. >> or ever written. >> so, tom, in the intro there, what republicans including the president in a tweet this weekend are basically suggesting, even if i did it all, all of it, including a quid pro quo with military aid to investigate the bidens, it's not impeachable. >> i've seen this coming for a while. it was very clear. they were going to try to attract the process, john. that didn't work, especially

when you had these independent civil servants coming out, including uniformed military officers. in the end, nair all going to rally around, he did it. and i think they'll even get to the point where it was wrong, but not impeachable. let the american people decide. >> what does that say about them and us that that -- >> it says that the republican party position is that if you take an advantage of an intern in the white house, we will impeach you. if you abuse the country, we will not impeach you. >> not a single republican in the house even voted to look into it. that wasn't about removing the president last week, it was about, are we going to have an investigation. they don't even want to look into it. they don't think that that's necessarily. >> you know, alisyn, it's pretty clear, we keep waiting for that moment, that event, that -- trump told us from the very beginning. his political instincts are very sharp. i can shoot someone out there on fifth avenue and my followers will not desert me. and so this has always been about at the margin. what did we see in the 2018

midterm election? we did see independents, moderate republicans and suburban women who had voted for the president. they chose between him and hillary and said, let's give this guy a try. and to me 2020 election is all about, can you hold those people in a national election, in the swing districts? because the republican party is not going to abandon this guy. they've made it very clear, this is a cultive personality now. and they are not going to abandon dear leader, no matter what he does or says. >> if you have these impeachment calls coming up from some swing states over the last week suggesting that the battlegrounds, people are against impeaching and removing the president, if you have not a single republican coming forward in the house and, look, it seems unlikely you'll get the 20 republicans you'll need in the senate, why, then, is it worth it in your mind for democrats to go forward with this inquiry and ultimately impeachment, which is what it seems to be headed. >> i don't think they have a choice. if you are loyal to the constitution, the president is clearly violated his oath of

office by trying to, in effect, extort the ukrainian prime minister with our money, with our -- with money we appropriated to ukraine, for his own political benefit. we have no choice. we have no choice but to take this to its constitutional end. at the same time, what we do have a choice, what democrats have a choice, when the country has a choice is to fire donald trump. we still have that choice. i think there are about 60% of the country today, i'm just guessing, that does not feel they have a candidate for president yet to replace donald trump. that's about a quarter of the republican party. and i think a lot of democrats are not comfortable with their choices. and i think that's the biggest problem going forward. that, can you basically get a candidate who can bring those swing republican voters, who are there in 2018, into the 2020 election. >> there are 17 democrats, i think, at last count, maybe more, that are still running. how can they not have a candidate of choice? >> you know, you just have to

look at the polls. you know, it's clear, alisyn, that biden, obviously, is barely leading the race, but the fact that biden's up there, he's actually run a terrible campaign so far. he hasn't had one good debate. the fact that 30-plus, sort of democrats are with him shows you how starved they are for an alternative in the center. and we know that there are republicans who will fire, trump, too, but you've got to have a candidate who can harvest those feelings right now, no one is there. >> one of the interesting discussions that hasn't happened yet with some of the republicans who seem to be willing to say, bad, but not impeachable, i don't think they've been challenged a as to why it's bad. if you think it's bad, explain to me why it's bad. and then tell me why that's not impeachable. so let me put that to you. why is it bad? tell people who might be watching this in your mind, why what the president did is something they should be concerned about. >> the president of the united states used money that was appropriated for the defense --

bip congre by congress, for the defense of ukraine against russia, he held up that money in order -- until and unless the president of ukraine agreed to investigate his most likely competitor in the next election. if that had happened in some latin american country, some middle eastern country, some european country, we at "the new york times" would be all over that story. wow, did you see what happened in country "x"? what that president did. that just happened in our country, okay? and if we don't take that seriously, imagine, john, what happens if donald trump gets elected for four more years and he is not restrained by the need to get elected again. he sent 11,000 toxic tweets when he had to be re-elected. he abused his power vis-a-vis ukraine when he had to be re-elected. can you imagine what kind of autocracy we will live in? how many subpoenas will he

respond to, if he's not doing it now, if he doesn't have to worry about being re-elected. i think that's the most frightening thing going forward. if he behaves with this regard towards the constitution and his oath of office now, what would he be like if he didn't have to worry about getting re-elected? and i think the most important witnesses -- and this is, i think, critical -- he wants to make this adam schiff versus me. democrats versus me. the real story here, it started with a whistle-blower. it started with the independent civil servants. people who take their oath of office to be diplomats, to be senior government officials, to be military officers. the real story here is a guy with a purple heart against a guy with a dark heart. and to the extent that the democrats frame it that way, that will resonate with the american people. and you know how much republicans are worried about it, because that's exactly what they're trying to obscure and deny. the whistle-blower was a never -- they're trying to turn everyone into political

material, basically. when in fact, these are the people -- i've lived abroad a lot, worked abroad a lot as a foreign correspondent. what people envy most about america are our civil servants. the fact that you don't have to bribe someone when you want to get government permission for this or that. the fact that we have military officers that go abroad, sacrifice their lives. we have people who every day make the ultimate sacrifice. we have republicans who every day in congress applaud these people who make the ultimate sacrifice to protect our constitution and these people will not make the smallest sacrifice to do the same thing. they don't want to give up their 174,000 incomes and free parking at national airport. it is shameful. >> one year away from the election and this morning there were these really fascinating polls about the battleground states and that basically, they're within the margin of error. and joe biden is the only candidate who consistently beats president trump. and so, obviously, you could say that, wow, well, there's a lot

of runway left. we're a year away. or you can say iowa is, what, 90 days away, 90 days away. and does it feel to you that people are locked in? you know, it does. this is really a -- this election. we've become, i came home and i discovered the middle east followed me here. we are now sunnis and shiites. we call each other republicans and democrats, but we are really sunnis and shiites. and there's this small floating group in the middle. they're the people that tipped the house in 2018 in the midterm, and you've got to be able to appeal to them. and i think the way you appeal to them is not with medicare for all, it's all for one and one for all. i think those people in the center are terrified that our country is being pulled apart. and i think they want someone who will pull us together. that is priority number one. if you want a revolution, a social revolution, a medicare revolution, i'll give you a revolution. four more years of donald trump. that will be a revolution.

>> thomas friedman, great to have you here in studio. >> always. >> always great to talk to you. mcdonald's ceo abruptly fired over the weekend. details of the allegations that led to his sudden dismissal, next. that life of the party look walk it off look one more mile look reply all look own your look... ...with fewer lines. there's only one botox® cosmetic. it's the only one... ...fda approved... ...to temporarily make frown lines... ...crow's feet... ...and forehead lines... ...look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic, may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects.

so, give that just saw a puppy look. and whatever that look is. look like you... with fewer lines. see results at botoxcosmetic.com

if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make or break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months.

do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it or take xgeva® serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip, or tongue swelling rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium; serious infections which could need hospitalization; skin problems; and severe bone joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones.

it also has the highest growth in manufacturing jobs in the us. it's a competition for the talent. employees need more than just a paycheck. you definitely want to take advantage of all the benefits you can get. 2/3 of employees said that the workplace is an important source for personal savings and protection solutions. the workplace should be a source of financial security. keeping your people happy is what keeps your people. that's financial wellness. put your employees on a path to financial wellness with prudential. . cnn business now is brought to you by prudential. time for cnn business now. mcdonald's fires its ceo over a

relationship with an employee. it violates company policy. chief business correspondent christine romans joins us now with details. what is that policy? >> consensual relationship, but this is company policy, managers can't have romantic relationships with direct or indirect subordinates. steve easterbrook is out and expressed regret over this relationship telling employees this was a mistake, given the values of the company, i agree with the board that it is time for me to move on. easterbrook has been replaced by chris kempczinski, most recently president of mcdonald's usa. mcdonald's stock has doubled under easterbrook but investors were disappointed after sales grew down from the second quarter. the chain is feeling the heat from rivals more aggressive on breakfast and plant based menu items. easterbrook was paid almost $16 million last year. details of the separation agreement will be released in a filing by tomorrow. we don't know who this employee was or what the position was, but it is an example, you guys,

of new scrutiny and awareness in the metoo era of the power dynamic of bosses and their employees, john. >> indeed. it seemed to happen pretty quickly without much of a fight according to his tweet. thank you very much. ukraine's war against russia is a battle made even harder by a political fight 5,000 miles away in washington. cnn chief international correspondent clarissa ward traveled to the front lines in ukraine after nearly $400 in u.s. military aid was frozen for months and joins us now live from kiev with a look at what's going on there. clarissa? >> that's right, john. we have literally traveled the length and breadth of this country trying to get a sense how far washington's political crisis is impacting this ongoing conflict. we also wanted to see for ourselves how important u.s. military aid is and what the impact was of nearly $400 million being withheld for months. take a look.

on the front line of ukraine's war with russia, conditions are basic and the enemy is near. this position, just 600 yards from russian-backed separatists. soldiers stand guard in dirt trench, reminiscent of the first world war. commander pavel tells us one of his men was shot dead by a sniper ten days ago. he says ukraine needs all the help it can get. he's saying when he heard the news that president trump had frozen the military aid, he was unhappy because he says america is our most important, our strongest ally. >> reporter: that aid was released in september, but the temporary freeze left a chill. the nearest village used to be a popular seasided resort. now there are no people left.

just devastation. even the church was hit. in war, nothing is sacred. after five long years, the world's attention has basically moved on from ukraine, but the war here is not over yet and crane is still very much dependent on the support of the u.s. ukrainian marine alexander shows us what is left of the local school. it was destroyed by russian artillery at the start of the war. it will be ten years before people can come back, he says. all this territory needs to be demined. but that process can't even begin until the fighting stops. our guide has asked us now to put on our helmets because apparently the separatists have been using drones to drop or nands on some of the soldiers here. alexander says it's time to move

on. concerned we may have been spotted. we push further north to the mining town. once under the control of russian-backed separatists, it was taken back by the ukrainian army in a bitter battle in july 2014. you can now see the flames shooting out of the top of the building. >> reporter: teresa watched it all from her home. the florida native runs a christian charity called his kids too and has lived here for many years. >> i mean we were shelled for days on end, and, you know, i would go to sleep and i would literally just lay there and say, god protect me. >> reporter: during the worst of the fighting she would bring home cooked meals to ukrainian troops on the front lines. >> so when you start knowing those people and putting a face, a name and face together, i mean i have friends that were killed. it's not -- i'm not going to mine mize this. >> were you aware of the fact that the white house had temporarily frozen military aid

to ukraine? what was your reaction? >> probably frustration because as far as i'm concerned, we're in a david and goliath situation. we are out manned and out gunned. >> reporter: that hasn't slowed her down. her days are a blur of activity, distributing food to the needy and displaced. across this country, more than a million people have been forced from their homes. like this pensioner. she was hit by shrapnel while picking tomatoes in her garden. she fled and has been living in this care home, ever since. what can i do, i can never go back, she says. it's five years since we left. like so many here, jelena no longer cares who wins this war. [ speaking foreign language ] you just want peace, you just

want an end to the war. >> reporter: ukraine's president is trying to make that happen but peace is best negotiated from a position of strength and having the u.s. as an ally is key. in the west of the country, far from the front lines, ukrainian forces carry out military exercises under the watchful eye of their american trainer. >> engaging targtz and shooting. >> reporter: captain matthew chapman has been working with this unit for two months. >> can i ask what your reaction was when you heard that military aid had been frozen to ukraine? >> personally, i don't pay attention to u.s. domestic foreign policy or politics while i'm here. we are solely focused on the mission at hand. >> and it didn't create an awkward atmosphere at all with your ukrainian fellow soldiers? >> it has not even come up in conversation. >> reporter: his ukrainian counterpart agrees.

>> you know, i don't like to speak about politics. my mission and my main role is to protect my land, my country. that's all i want and it's all i know for myself. >> do you believe that america is an ally ukraine can rely on? >> completely is. >> reporter: privately some ukrainian soldiers admit to feeling uneasy. they fear that white house's fickle behavior may strengthen russia's position. but all agree that with or without america's help, they have no choice but to continue this fight. >> it's interesting how uncomfortable the ukrainians are to talk about the u.s. aid publicly. is there a sense that ukraine could actually win the war against russia withouts u.s. support? >> i think most ukrainian soldiers will concede privately they don't even know if they can win this war with the support of the u.s. this is, as you heard that charity worker put it, a david

and goliath battle, and they need all the allies that they can get. one of the concerns they expressed privately, john, was the idea that when you see the u.s. about its commitment to ukraine freezing that aid for months on end, that it sends a bad signal to other allies of ukraine. they're worried it could spook those allies. what they want to see is a strong and robust show of support from the u.s., not just to negotiate a -- not to just win this war, but also to win the peace because importantly, john, of course they will need the support of the u.s. to give them more leverage at the negotiating table when it comes to trying to negotiate with someone like president vladimir putin, john. >> i'll take it. that is such an excellent view for the rest of us into what's going on there on the battlefield. thank you very much for your reporting. and thanks to our international viewers for

watching. "cnn newsroom with max foster is next." for u.s. viewers, brand new polls show a tight race in the all-important battleground states. "new day" continues right now. we need big ideas. we need to fight for them. >> i am insisting that we deliver medicare for all who want it and let you decide when and whether you want it. >> new polls in key battleground states, what they mean for the president's re-election chances. >> the entire country just gets engrossed in this impeachment process and then we're going to look up and we will not have made a real case. several officials are effectively planning to set up a firewall between house investigators and the president. >> i think that individual should come before the committee. >> he needs to answer the question. >> you wouldn't call the whistleblower, what you call is the people who are actually there. >> this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john berman. >> welcome to your "new day." it is monday, november 4th, 8:00

in the east and we have breaking news in the race for president. the series of brand new polls from the six battleground states that determine the outcome of the election in 2016 and could decide it in 2020. pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin, florida, arizona and north carolina. we have these new match-ups between the leading democrats and the president and there are two big headlines here. first, it is tight. the president is outperforming his national poll numbers by a lot, and second, joe biden fares better against the president than his democratic rivals pretty much in these states across the board. harry will dig into this. >> several big developments in the impeachment inquiry to tell you about. the witness list for today appears to have gone from four people to zero. cnn has learned all four white house officials who were scheduled to testify today will not be showing up. in fact, most of the witnesses scheduled to testify this week plan to