they are still trying to convince at least four republicans that the trial should include witnesses and documents. minority leader chuck schumer was sounding optimistic insisting after last night's session that democrats are, quote, making gains every day. well, how do republicans think today? >> the presentation from the house managers has earned praise even from republicans. i want to show you a picture from late last night that senator lindsey graham, one of the president's fearest defenders telling adam schiff he had done a good job. really well spoken he was heard to say. it is fire say, how would lindsey graham know because graham is one of the senators who our spies tell us was out of the room for chunks of the arguments. rand paul was doing a crossword. cory booker seen with his iphone in the cloak room. many senators from both parties were m.i.a. at times despite rules that require them to stay put. this is the senate.

they hold themselves in such high esteem. you barely have to ask and they'll blurt out they're the greatest deliberative body in the world. just don't ask them to sit and listen. if they did, they might learn something. louisiana republican senator john kennedy said, i think most, if not all senators, are hearing the case by the prosecution and the case by the defense for the first time. if you polled the united states senate, 9 out of 10 senators will tell you that they have not read a transcript of the proceeding in the house and the tenth senator who says he has is lying. >> all right. joining us now, we have cnn senior political commentator david axelrod and cnn contributor john dean, former nixon white house counsel. okay, david, give us your 30,000-foot view of yesterday. what struck you? >> well, what struck me was that the -- that schiff and the house managers presented a very tight, compelling case that is familiar to those of white house have

been paying attention. maybe not familiar to senator kennedy and some of the people in the room and certainly to some who are watching on tv. the question is, does it matter? and is the -- the notion that the president is going to be removed, i think, is very remote. and at the end of the day, the thing that worries me is the case was so compelling that the question becomes, if you don't convict, and there are good reasons why you'd be hesitant to remove a president in this way, what is the message you're sending to this president and to future presidents about what their behavior can be? and are there any consequences for doing the kinds of things the president did? >> i think there's also a message being sent by senator rand paul by doing a crossword during the argument. >> no question -- >> that sends a clear message. >> and lindsey graham leaving the chamber and so on. what's going to happen in the next few days is they'll finish their case, and then the lawyers for the president are not going to contest the facts. they're going to put the process

on trial. they're going to say it's unfair. they're going to call it highly political. they're going to try and turn it into a partisan scrum. and so you have entirely different strategies here. and part of it is the republican senators saying, you know what, this isn't worthy. this isn't really worthy of an impeachment proceeding and we're going to demonstrate our feelings about that by leaving the room. >> it's mocking the constitution. it's mocking their responsibilities as u.s. senators. not to sit and listen. and the democrats are doing the same thing. when you got to go, you got to go. if you have to go to the bathroom, do it. dianne feinstein left an hour early. if you have a doctor's note, i have no complaint. but if you can't sit there and listen in your chair without doing a crossword, you are not doing your job. the president is on trial. this is -- >> they will contend that the impeachment proceeding itself is mocking the constitution because it isn't worthy.

i don't accept that. i think the president's behavior is -- is really, deeply, deeply troubling, but that's what their argument will be. >> i appreciate we just had congressman jason crow on who said he saw engagement, he saw people locking eyes with him. his impression was different than ours where we look at the wide shot of the room and some empty seats. >> you know why he's being so careful there? >> why? >> because jerry nadler got rebuked for saying something mean about the senators, right? so jason crow -- he doesn't want to upset the jury in the court here by saying something offensive. you heard adam schiff be incredibly solicitous yesterday because of what happened before. lisa murkowski was offended by what jerry nadler said the other night. i took it as very offensive as one who was listening attentively and working hard to get a fair process, i was offended. now it may be bad lawyering by jerry nadler and, john dean, you can weigh in, to suggest the

senators who aren't listening are engaged in a cover-up. but jerry nadler being mean isn't a reason to vote against hearing witnesses. >> agree. i think one of the things for the republicans is this has got to be difficult to listen to. they didn't want to hear this story about their president. this is a very pivotal impeachment. if they give the president a pass, that makes, as david said, unacceptable behavior acceptable. we don't want presidents shaking down foreign countries to help their political campaign. and the other thing is the obstruction of congress. if he gets away with saying, listen, i am above and beyond your reach, we've changed the nature of our government. we don't have separation of powers with checks and balances. that's the big stakes in this impeachment. >> can i just say one thing about nadler. i know there's been a lot of back and forth about it. it may have been -- you say it was bad lawyering.

but in the larger context, the case that the president's lawyers are trying to make is this is a highly political process. and when you use loaded terms, you lend credence to that argument. in that way, i think it was foolish of him to say what he said. >> senator chuck schumer had a slightly different take than what you're saying. you make a good point it may be hard for them to listen to. if you have been somebody who has been completely on the president's side and you have dismissed all these facts or haven't wanted to read anything about it, then this will be eye-opening and hard for you to hear. chuck schumer had a mildly different take. here's what he said about it. when you think about it, it's the first time they've probably heard the whole narrative of what's happened. they get so their news from fox news which is, at best, totally incomplete and much more often just false. it may have had an effect on them. even if it doesn't, i bet tonight had an effect on the public. >> do you think he's being overly optimistic?

>> i think anybody who paid a lot of attention to these hearings had to be impacted by the coherence of the narrative and the weight of the evidence. but, you know, as we see in polling, it doesn't really affect the overall, and really the question is, what is the consequence of this? will the president feel at all chastened by this? will future presidents feel chastened by it, and will it affect the election in november, which is light years away in political terms. >> i think we know the answer. if he's acquitted, he'll feel vindicated. >> certainly claiming. >> yeah, and we know that the day after the mueller testified was when this ukraine call happened. so these are -- these are weighty concerns because, as i said, taking a president out of office by impeachment never done before, would be a cataclysmic decision in a very divided country. on the other hand, greenlighting

a president who has a penchant for abusing his authority in this way has consequences of its own. >> different gradations could happen. you could have some republicans say they want to hear witnesses and that in and of itself would be a rebuke of kinds against the president, even if he's not removed. you could have a republican cross lines s and actually voto remove him. i don't think that will happen. >> the worst outcome is he could walk away and say, as his lawyers have said, he did absolutely nothing wrong because patently, that's not true. >> you don't have many republicans coming forward and saying the behavior was wrong. i just don't think we should remove him at this point. that's not the argument you're hearing yet. although the national view sort of makes that case today. i'm curious what we see from the managers today and tomorrow especially given some of the reviews of how they've done so far. david axelrod, a scathing review to jerry nadler about what -- >> just on that language. >> but that was something that had an impact on some people. others noted that adam schiff is really the first among equals

here. he's done -- jeffrey toobin says a dazzling job. lindsey graham credited him last night. one thing he did last night that was interesting, in primetime, mind you, was not just make the case for removal of the president but also make the case for hearing witnesses. he regularly goes back to that one point. i want to play a clip where he's talking about ambassador bill taylor. not just witnesses, but evidence, and a note that bill taylor wrote to mike pompeo. listen here. >> tiller sent that cable august 29th. would you like me to read that to you right now? i would like to read it to you right now. except i don't have it because the state department wouldn't provide it. but if you'd like me to read it to you, we can do something about that. we can insist on getting that from the state department. >> why is he leaning into that, john, and also, should the senate hear much more from adam schiff? >> very effective. he did that about a half a dozen

times in his evening argument last night. the totality of his presentation, i had -- i thought it was about a 30, 40-minute talk and they said later it was 2 1/2 hours. i said this has really been gripping. i'm somebody who knows this whole story intimately and yet he told the story and put the facts together in a narrative that really had to capture everybody in that chamber. >> there are very few historic orations on the floor of congress. this will be remembered, i think, for generations to come. his opening statement was such a tour de force and you know, what impact it will have, we shall see. he is trying to get these witnesses. very effective in pursuing them. but in laying out the case, one of the really riveting pieces of oration that i've seen, you know in my lifetime on the floor of congress. >> i'd agree. >> david axelrod, john dean, thank you both very much.

always interesting to get your perspectives. democrats have been arguing president trump's dealing with ukraine, that they are, quote, the framers' worst nightmare. we'll discuss with a presidential historian, next. our comfort lasts all day. the bad news? so does his energy. depend® fit-flex underwear offers your best comfort and protection guaranteed. because, perfect or not, life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®. ♪ ♪ country roads, take me home there's a booking for every resolution. book yours at any price, at booking.com

book yours at any price, it's the sleep number 360 smart bed. can it help me fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you effortlessly comfortable. will it help me raise my game? yup! so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise, prove. so i can be my best for these guys? yes, and those guys. sleep number. this is not a bed it's proven quality sleep. from $999. fidelity has zero commissions for online u.s. equity trades and etfs,

plus zero minimums to open a brokerage account. with value like this, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelity.

donald j. trump, the 45th president of the united states, has acted precisely as hamilton and his contemporaries feared.

they feared a president would subvert our democracy by abusing the awesome power of his office for his own personal or political gain. and so they devised a remedy as powerful as the evil it was meant to combat -- impeachment. >> that's house impeachment manager adam schiff making the case to convict and remove the president from office. congressman invoked alexander hamilton many times to bolster his argument. joining me is cnn presidential historian jeffrey engel kork, co-author of "impeachment." he invoked hamilton so many times that he got nominated for five tonys. he was all over hamilton last night. but the reason is, it's because the idea of impeachment is foundational to the creation of the public. and the infractions which the house is, or did impeach the

president for, are also foundational to what the framers discussed. explain. >> well, first of all, i wish he had rapped some of his remarks by hamilton. that would have been wonderful. i'm glad you used the word foundational. we need to go back to the very foundation of what the founders were thinking at the constitutional convention. and first and foremost among all the political principles they brought to bear was the idea that human nature encouraged people to seek more power. that's just the nature of being human. therefore, they set up a government which had not a separation of powers. i wish we wouldn't teach our kids we have a separation of powers but a competition of powers. and so for each group in the government, including the president, we would expect to want to get more and more and more power so, therefore, each side must check the other. therefore, impeachment being the only federal office, the presidency the only federal office in the constitution that has no term limits back in the

original constitution, and, therefore, impeachment is the only way to remove a president who, as human nature would expect, wants to accumulate more and more power and perhaps use that power for his own good as opposed to for the good of the people. >> in termed of what the president is accused of and whether or not it's not the framers had in mind, they literally discussed how to deal with candidates or elected officials who achieve their office by corrupt means. in this case, i'll say the president, allegedly corrupt means. >> yeah, it's a little eerie how prescient the people at the constitutional convention were about the toipics we're discussing. let's put aside whether president trump is guilty of what he's being accused of. at the constitutional convention, i point people to july 20th, of 1787 in particular, they went through a series of exercises about -- hip theic

hypotheticals. what would make us want to impeach a president? what if he lies to win an election? he should be impeached. what if he lies to continue to win elections so that he can cover up for his lies because he's going to have -- obviously going to have great power to do so? then he should be impeached. what if he associates with people who we know have done criminal things for the sake of elections? well, then he should be impeached. how about, if a president works with a foreign power and actually winds up trying to be under the sway of a foreign power or use his office to influence a foreign power to do things in the united states? then he should be impeached. it's a remarkable list of prescient concerns the founders had exactly about what it would be that would require a president to be removed from office. >> they thought about all of this very clearly and in some ways very specifically. and they all thought about who should be hearinging and determining the case in trial. and they decided on the senate. why? george conway was on cnn

yesterday and laid out that reason. >> the framers thought the senate would be a cooler -- it was the -- they thought that senators would be more thoughtful and more contemplative and less moved by the passions of the day because they had six-year terms. and that gives you the opportunity to stand up and do what's right. and that's what should matter to them. what they are going to be remembered for. >> at a minimum doing what's right should require them listening to all of the arguments. and i was shocked yesterday to hear that many senators for periods of time were not in their seats. they were in the cloak room. is that doing their duty as laid out by the founders? >> you know, i was shocked as well. i didn't know they could leave because the constitution, i think, i would extend his points. if you think about who is

represented by each of the different bodies in the federal government, we have the house of representatives which is genuinely the people's house. popular representation. that's the passionate voice of the people. but then the senate is supposed to be, if you will, i wouldn't say so much the cooler chamber as i would say the chamber that's supposed to be more wise. more thoughtful. not only do they have the six-year terms but remember when the constitution was written, there was no popular election of senators. so senators were chosen by the legislatures of each state basically to be the best and wisest among them. that's why i think we have a situation where the founders thought let's have the popular people, if they're concerned about someone acting tiranically and needs to be removed they can say, hey, senate, take a look at this. and the senate should come in and ask themselves, what's best for the country? not what's best for their party or their own political careers but for their country. and the reason is, everybody who is in the senate, let's face facts, is employable after they leave the senate. there's no one that's going to

go on food stamps after they leave. therefore, the idea that senators need to concern themselves with their own safety, their own job more than the sake of the country would be distasteful to the founders. >> the least they can do is sit and listen. professor jeffrey engel, great to have you on to understand the history here. come back soon. >> good to talk to you. now to this alarming story. millions of people in china are now on lockdown because of the deadly coronavirus outbreak. we have new details just coming in. we'll bring them to you next. omr insurance so you only pay for what you need. what do you think? i don't see it. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

quitting smoking is freaking hard.st, like quitting every monday hard. quitting feels so big. so, try making it smaller. and you'll be surprised at how easily starting small...

...can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette i like working. what if my retirement plan is, i don't want to retire? then let's not create a retirement plan, let's create a plan for what's next. i like that. get a plan that's right for you. td ameritrade. get a plan tha(whistling) right for you. that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein,

and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. and one gram of sugar. and with the sxfinity stream app, screen is your big screen. which is free with your service, you can take a spin through on demand shows, or stream live tv. download your dvr'd shows and movies on the fly. even record from right where you are. whether you're travelling around the country or around the house, keep what you watch with you. download the xfinity stream app and watch all the shows you love.

this is cnn breaking news. >> we have some breaking news right now. more than 20 million people in three different cities are now on lockdown in china as officials try to contain the deadly coronavirus outbreak. beijing just made a major announcement suspending all chinese new year celebrations. joining us is david culver live in beijing along with dr. sanjay gupta. david, you recently left the

wuhan area. you were covering all of this. so tell us the breaking news. >> i'll bring you up to speed because it's a major development and we're just confirming this with chinese officials. so the current city of wuhan that is currently under this essentially a lockdown, if you will, it's now expanded. this is within the province of hubei. go outside of that, you have surrounding cities of ujo and wongon. we're talking about nearly 20 million people. these essentially lockdown restrictions, what do they look like? they're restricting airport and train travel, highways are going to be restricted. mostly for folks who are leaving. so they're trying to contain the people who are currently there. they're also going a step further. the public gatherings, going to movie theaters, a tourism center, any sort of entertainment venue, those will be prohibited for now.

and they're checking cars coming into those cities. they'll be stopping the cars, going inside, trying to determine whether or not those individuals are perhaps running a fever. they have these thermometers they're carrying with them to see who is coming in and what they're bringing with them. this is significant because this is expanding to a much broader area now. and it's involving people and, really, people who are uncertain about what this is going to mean going forward. we're reading on social media and there's a lot of concern and unease about if this is even going to be effective going forward. this containment effort. within beijing, we've also learned the celebrations for the lunar new year which is their huge holiday. this is when hundreds of millions are traveling to be home with their loved ones and to be together. those celebrations are going to be dampened because they'll not have the large gatherings. and officials in beijing are saying they want people to abide by that and to stay away from these public gatherings and to

avoid them altogether. they're having these temple gathering in particular. not going to happen. it's really making what is a very important type of year a little more difficult to get through for these folks. >> and we have all of this video that we're able to see thanks to you. you narrowly made it out moments before the lockdown so that you could bring us all of this reporting. so sanjay, i know you have been listening with rapt attention and very alarmed by all of the news over the past few days about this coronavirus. with this new information that it's three cities, 20 million people in chin and they're canceling all these big public celebrations. >> and even as david was speaking, another case now confirmed in singapore, alisyn. so another place to add to the list of places that have been affected by this particular virus. look, this is, obviously, very disruptive to these cities. it's socially disruptive.

it's politically disruptive. psychologically. there have been lessons learned since the sars outbreak 17 years ago and with mers. and these containment sort of policies, they can have some impact. i think that's the reason they're doing it. it's a balance. how much disruption versus the impact from a public health standpoint. the goal is to prevent, obviously, the number of countries around the world from being affected or even these places in china from being more impacted by this. it's not going to stop it. what we're learning just even this morning, alisyn, is that this virus seems to be spreading more robustly than we originally thought. originally it was thought animals to humans. then we confirmed it can spread humans to humans. now we're hearing second or third generation spread meaning someone who is impacted, infected by this virus seco secondarily, that person can go on to spread it. this is what health officials

are focused on. everything is about containment. yes, they're working on vaccines. that's going to take some time. but in order to really try and slow down, i should say, the spread as much as possible, i think you'll hear more and more about policies like the one described. >> i'm being told that saudi arabia has just confirmed a case. what does that tell you? >> this is a really rapidly changing story and growing story. we saw some of that again during the sars epidemic and mers with sars. ultimately it was nearly two dozen countries affected over several months. so my guess, alisyn, and this is obviously not the news that people want to hear, is that this is going to continue to spread. despite these containment policies, even as david was talking about being leaving wuhan, you know, over the last day or so, there could be people who are infected and yet not showing any symptoms.

and they're in that incubation period. they then arrive wherever they're going and they could potentially start to spread the virus at that point. what we don't know, and i hope this will be better news ultimately is that despite the fact there have been 17 people that have died from this, if there's many more that have been infected but have no symptoms or mild symptoms which is quite possible, then what we call the fatality ratio or mortality ratio. the number of people who die versus the number of people who are infected hopefully is much smaller. we don't know those numbers yet. we're starting to learn about who was most affected by this virus. we know the average age of the people who have died from this, around 73 years old. people getting very sick, average age around 40 years old. that's pretty young. many of them having pre-existing illnesses. the ones that got very sick or died. so those numbers are going to change. we're going to learn more about who is most affected by this in the hours possibly to come. not even days.

hours to come. we'll be getting more information about this. >> so david, last, because we said you were just in wuhan, can you give us some color of what it was like on the streets there? how alarmed are people there? and do they trust the chinese government to be forthcoming about the information. >> i can tell you as a team, it's just now starting to subside after what was an unnerving night. to get that phone call to say, things are locking down. there's only going to be a few options to get out. you have to mobilize now. as we went, even to the train station, as i reflect this morning, the lines were so long, they were stretching out the doors and it was 4:00 in the morning and you had young children clearly sleepy-eyed trying to get into position there and figure out what exactly was going on. you saw families juggling a bunch of luggage and trying to get a ticket and trying to get out ultimately. but i'm also reflecting on a lot of the folks we connected with

in the 24 hours we were on the ground there. we went to an open market, the one that wasn't impacted, and i think about the sugarcane vendor who is trying to get out of there, telling her family, i would love to go, but i can't. her daughter was pleading with her on the phone saying, mom, come home. leave it all behind. she goes, financially, i cannot do it. there were a lot of stories like that. it's very difficult to think about the folks who genuinely wanted to get out but couldn't. >> yeah, it's really scary. it's scary to think about all this and how fast there are developments. obviously, we'll keep everybody posted. david, we're pleased that you've brought us all this reporting. thank you very much. sanjay, obviously, we'll talk to you soon. thank you both. how closely did the democrats stick to the facts during their opening arguments yesterday? our fact-checker reports what he found, next. ers like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out

before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa and let me tell you something, rodeo... i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. it's just a loan designed for older homeowners, and, it's helped over a million americans. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide.

eliminate monthly mortgage payments, pay bills, medical costs, and more. call now and get your free info kit. other mortgages are paid each month, but with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more in aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage loan guide. access tax-free cash and stay in the home you love. you've probably been investing in your home for years... making monthly mortgage payments... doing the right thing... and it's become your family's heart and soul... well, that investment can give you tax-free cash just when you need it. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio, and so much more. look, reverse mortgages aren't for everyone but i think

i've been 'round long enough to know what's what. i'm proud to be a part of aag, i trust 'em, i think you can too. trust aag for the best reverse mortgage solutions. so you can... retire better.

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. all right. the stage is set for day two of arguments in the senate impeachment trial of president trump. but let's examine just how truthful day one was. joining us is daniel dale, cnn

reporter and fact-checker extraordinaire. the man who doesn't sleep. great to have you with us. so, daniel, first just give us an overview. you're fact-checking this whole senate impeachment trial. how have the democratic house managers done in sticking to the facts. >> in my view, they've done better than trump's legal team did on the first day before the opening arguments. it was easy to find false claims from trump's lawyers. they were saying transparently inaccurate things. the democrats are obviously subjective claims, debatable claims they're making but in terms of out and out falsehoods, i think there were certainly fewer than we heard from trump's team the day before. >> here's one the white house took issue with. they didn't like how adam schiff talked about mick mulvaney's now-infamous press conference. let's listen to how schiff categorized it. >> mulvaney didn't just admit that the president withheld the

crucial aid proesappropriated b congress to apply pressure to do the president's dirty work. he also said we should just get over it. i have news for everybody. get over it. there's going to be political influence in foreign policy. >> okay. so were they accurate or not accurate? >> so, i think this is a debatable one. i'm not inclined to say that what schiff said was a lie. the question is, what did mulvaney mean when he said get over it? was he just talking about politics broadly and saying that there's going to be a change in the foreign policy of the trump administration compared to the obama administration? or was he specifically referring to this alleged quid pro quo? going back to the transcript, right before he said get over it, he was talking about how trump wanted ukraine to investigate this debunked conspiracy theory about servers to get that aid released by trump. soon after that he said this is normal and then said, look, political influence is normal and it's going to happen in foreign policy. so i very much understand what

schiff is saying. i also understand how the white house could say, well, he didn't really mean that. this is at least an open question but it's not a schiff lie. >> you're not only looking at the senate impeachment trial. you're also fact-checking things the president said. the president said something in davos that was interesting. he said that ukraine not only received their military aid. he said they received it on schedule. listen to the president. >> they got their money long before scheduled. they got all their money. they got the money. in fact, they got it very early. >> how is getting it three months late early? >> yeah, so what trump is referring to is a legal deadline of the end of september for the funds to be what they call obligated by the u.s. administration. and what we heard was testimony from an office of management and budget official who said, no, although trump released the aid before the deadline, on september 11th, the delay meant

that $35 million of that amount could not get out the door in time. in fact, that delay meant that in order to get that $35 million out the door, congress had to go ahead and pass a deadline extension so they didn't have to meet the september 30th deadline anymore. some did get there on time, even though it was delayed. if you consider on time by the deadline. but there was a big chunk, $35 million, that was not on time by any standard. >> that's the whole heart of the matter. that they were expecting it in may and june and july and august and whatever. whenever they first learned about it. but tell us this, daniel. did the president break a record yesterday with tweets? >> he did break a record. at least for his presidency. according to the website fact based, this was the second most frequent tweeting day for trump in his entire twitter career, if you can call it a career. his number one day as president. now most of these tweets were retweets so it's not exactly clear if this was trump himself

or, for example, social media chief clicking that retweet button. in terms of total tweets, this was the most vigorous he's been during his entire administration. >> daniel dale, thank you for crunching all those tweet numbers and for always checking the facts. so the comics having a field day with the impeachment trial. here are your late night laughs. >> republicans started the trial by refusing to introduce evidence or hear from witnesses, which is like me throwing a super bowl party and then going, just a few quick rules. no food. no drinks. and no watching football. >> schiff spoke for 2 1/2 hours. made a persuasive case. he had visual aids and everything. a real abuse of power point presentation. he laid out a case against the president. most of it sound bites of trump himself and invoked the founding

fathers and their words a lot. schiff quoted hamilton so many times today, he was nominated for five tony awards. >> the sketch artist took some liberties like this picture of marco rubio writing with a quill pen. he actually drew that. it seems weird, which is why rubio's office told reporters that he does not use quill pens. so that means the sketch artist can just make things up? well, that explains this rendering of senator dianne feinstein. >> that is a quill pen controversy. does he use one or not? why did the artist capture that? >> daniel dale tomorrow on our show will reveal the truth about quill pen. a top democrat says the push for witnesses gains every day. a democratic senator joins us next. our comfort lasts all day. the bad news? so does his energy. depend® fit-flex underwear offers your best comfort and protection guaranteed.

because, perfect or not, life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®.

and mine super soft? yes. with the sleep number 360 smart bed, on sale now, you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. so, can it help us fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise... prove. don't miss the final days to save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, now only $1,799. plus, 0% interest for 36-months. ends saturday.

most people think as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready. little things can be a big deal. psoriasis, that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently.

with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with... ...an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. ♪ ♪ well i'm standing here, looking at you, what do i see? ♪ there's a booking for every resolution . book yours at booking.com house impeachment managers resume their arguments just a

few hours from now. they'll focus on the first article today, abuse of power. one of the senators who will be listening carefully, senator sheldon whitehouse of rhode island. he joins us this morning. i want to talk about the substance of the arguments in just a moment. but first, i want to talk about a picture which you're in first that comes from late last night that shows senator lindsey graham shaking the hand of lead house manager adam schiff and we understand saying, good job, really well spoken. you are standing there to your left. you're the tom steyer of this picture. >> yeah. >> can you tell us what transpired in that conversation? >> sure. lindsey and i were walkin out after the proceedings were over. and by coincidence, we ran into adam schiff. all three of us are lawyers and former prosecutors. and we stopped and congratulated adam on what was a very well done day by him and his team.

you can agree or disagree on the conclusions to draw, but i don't think anybody can argue that adam schiff did a very good job as an advocate in a very long day on the senate floor yesterday. so it was sort of a nice human moment in which senator graham, who i think are adversaries on this subject but friends, both stopped to congratulate a man who had a hard day, but a good day. >> senator graham, i don't think he agrees with adam schiff, but he thought that schiff made a compelling presentation? >> a professional compliment, i would call it by another prosecutor. >> one of the things adam schiff is trying to do, not just convince the senate to convict the president, but there's a separate argument as well, which is to convince enough senators to call witnesses and ask for new evidence. the minority leader chuck schumer thinks gains are being made trying to convince republicans because that's what it will take. do you see gains being made here

in convincing those republicans? >> well, the american public clearly understands that a trial is evidence and witnesses and that a trial without evidence and witnesses is something other than a trial. certainly not a fair trial. and the numbers from public polling seem to show that very strongly. so the republicans are dealing with that headwind. and i think that's affecting a number of them, particularly those who will face the voters in november. and i think there's also kind of a bit of a resurgent caucus in the republican party that want to try to get the bidens in and try to turn this to their advantage and want a witness deal. so i think mitch is seeing two groups. one, a more cautious and responsible groups that thinks, wait a minute, a, this probably should be a fair trial or at least look a little more like it, if we're going to face the voters in november. and the second group that is more boisterous and looking for an opportunity to try to

embarrass the bidens. >> do you think there will be witnesses? >> mitch is a master at managing and venting that internal caucus pressure of his. i think he has determined there will not be witnesses. that this episode needs to be brought to a close, and he has zero interest in it either being or resembling a fair trial. >> the president yesterday said something while he was still overseas, which caught a lot of people's attention. and it had to do, we think, with the evidence that is not being presented here. i want you to listen to this. >> we're doing very well. i got to watch enough. i thought our team did a very good job, but honestly, we have all the material. they don't have the material. >> we have all the material. they don't have all the material. what are you thinking he meant by that? >> i think it's pretty self-explanatory, particularly when the biggest issue and the biggest thing happening in washington is whether the evidentiary material that the

white house is sitting on has blockaded, much of which is waiting in boxes to be delivered if the president would only say so, is at issue. so i think he clearly is in his own peculiar way crowing about his success at having interfered with and obstructed this investigation. >> we had spies, reporters inside the senate chamber watching very closely yesterday. and there were times when they report that there were many senators, handfuls of senators, not at their desks listening. now you did not appear in our report in the hall of shame. i did not read your name mentioned as someone in the cloak room, but did you stay at your desk for the whole time? >> no, i stood from time to time behind my desk to just stretch. the breaks were sometimes three hours apart. and i don't see it as any dereliction of duty to stand

instead of sit in the chamber as long as you're standing quietly at the back and not interfering with anybody's view or anybody's ability to hear or take in what's going on. and people do go in and out to the cloak room, through the cloak room from time to time for a variety of reasons. sometimes nature even calls senators. >> right. but at one point we counted 25 senators not at their desk. some in the cloak room, supposed to be in the chamber listening. >> i suspect the majority were standing in the backs of the chamber just for reasons of physical comfort, to stretch a bit. you can still hear very well. >> you have to stretch your legs. >> if you are standing instead of sitting. >> doesn't explain crossword puzzles which we understand senator rand paul was working on. >> should the kentucky senator have been working on a crossword? >> i'll leave that between him and the kentucky constituents. >> senator sheldon whitehouse from rhode island, we appreciate you being with us. good luck staying as close to your desk as you can manage

today. >> thanks. >> that got a chuckle. crossword puzzle chuckle. >> look, i'm glad he thinks it's funny. the president of the united states is on trial today. and as i said before, i don't think one of the clues for 45 across is, is the president guilty of abuse of power? >> remember when they read the rules at first and they said under penalty of prison time, if you weren't quiet? we'll see who goes to prison at the end of this. time for the good stuff. a former fire chief's daughter is being called a hero for making sure her family evacuated when their smoke alarm went off in the middle of the night. this is according to a facebook post by the fire department. 6-year-old madeleine carlband woke up her dad who helped get the family out of their burning house. >> i heard my daughter screaming that there's a fire. there's a fire. so i jumped out of bed. when i realized it, the house was full of smoke. used to always going in and not running out. >> their house was deemed

uninhabitable. look at the screen there. so they're staying at a hotel as they start to rebuild. meanwhile, toys, clothing and other donations have flooded in we are happy to report. she did the right thing. >> we hope they get all the help that they need. the trial of the president of the united states picks up again in a few hours. something to watch for today, can the senators muster the courage to sit and listen to all the arguments? how will the house managers make their case perhaps differently today? will we see more of adam schiff? and the president of the united states who is back on u.s. soil, how much will he be weighing in? >> we'll be watching all of that. cnn's coverage continues coming up. when crabe stronger...strong, with new nicorette coated ice mint. layered with flavor... it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge.

for an amazing taste... ...that outlasts your craving. new nicorette ice mint. eh, not enough fiber- chocolate would be good- snacking should be sweet and simple. the delicious taste of glucerna gives you the sweetness you crave while helping you manage your blood sugar. glucerna. everyday progress

this round's on me.eat. while helping you manage your blood sugar.

hey, can you spot me? come on in. find your place today, with silversneakers. included in most medicare advantage plans. enroll today by calling the number on your screen or visit getsilversneakers.com

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.

good thursday morning. i'm jim sciutto. >> it's another big day. good morning. i'm pop pea hpy harlow. democratic house managers today will continue to make their case to try to remove the president. hours from now they're set to focus on abuse of power and push for more witnesses, for any witnesses and more documents. >> so who exactly is their target audience? not just the american public and not just the entire senate but particularly those four republicans that it would take to cross the aisle and vote to allow those witnesses, allow new evidence. on that point, minority leader chuck schumer says that democrats are making, in his words, gains every day. are they? >> yeah, that's the key question. are they really? so let's go to capitol hill. let's begin with our congressional reporter lauren fox. lauren, let's begin with what people should expect