tv The Last Word With Lawrence O Donnell MSNBC November 11, 2019 7:00pm-8:00pm PST
rolling back established policy thing, whatever that thing is, of all kinds. and they don't care whether it's if this was done in an arbitrary true or not, and they don't care whether it's just been refuted and capricious manner and the by a witness, they just need to court is going to block him from say it. so that's the piece of video doing so, that might mean a lot that fox news can use. in terms of other policies that >> lawrence, neither the facts nor the founders are on the were treated in the same way. but in human terms, in terms of republican side in this what happens now for literally hundreds of thousands of people impeachment inquiry. in this country, the supreme we know that we will hear on court case on daca and the wednesday there was a quid pro quo, that rudy giuliani was a d.r.e.a.m.ers tomorrow, it's as big as it gets. personal representative of the that hearing is scheduled to start at 10:00 a.m. eastern president, not a dimplomatic tomorrow. we're all over it. representative of the state department, and we will learn watch this space. that does it for us tonight. we'll see you tomorrow. that tlfhere was a direct line now it's time for "the last word the west wing from mick mulvaney with lawrence o'donnell." good evening, lawrence. >> i have a bit of a cold that you might be able to hear. to donald trump. >> you seem to have a little frog in your throat. >> instead of our usual evening gordon sondland worried there chat, i'm not sure how many would be deceit. words i'm actually going to be able to speak tonight, so i'm going to have to save it for the they were worried there would be interference with the election. what we will hear from tv show, the actual story stuff republicans is not an argument we have to do. we'll chat tomorrow night if i about the facts or the founders'
have any voice. view of impeachment, it will >> i'll drop off some hot cider. >> thank you, rachel, thank you. appear in the reelection strategy of 2020, this grievance despite the cold, i am very that republicans are victims. excited about tonight's show, this will be about keeping their base and ensuring there is no not just because of the erosion of republican voters in 2020. >> and, david, i suspect we're impeachment ground we have to cover tonight, because at the end of this hour, i am going to going to see all kinds of be in superfan mode because we parliament disruption, mr. are going to be joined by this chairman interruptions, objecting to questions, every year's co-winner of the nobel little thing they can think of. prize in economics whose work is they're going to turn this into as much of a circus as they can. already in the center of the democratic presidential campaign, even if many of the daif candidates don't realize that. david jolly, thank you so much for joining us. we'll have you back as soon as the nobel prize in economics was we do see how they handle themselves in that hearing room. not established until 1969, and when we come back, it's bill when i became an economics major in college in the 1970s, gates versus elizabeth warren, professors in the economics but don't mistake bill gates as department at my college won the one of the billionaires afraid nobel prize three years in a of elizabeth warren's policy decisions. row, and they were the biggest that's next. elizabeth warren'sy decisions. that's next. stars in the world to me. i saw you eating poop earlier. and they still are. and tonight you will meet the hey! second woman in history to win my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. the nobel prize in economics, who's the dummy now?
and she will tell you what you whoof! whoof! need to know about the most important issues in the so get allstate where good drivers save 40% presidential campaign that you for avoiding mayhem, like me. discuss every day already and that the candidates discuss every day. and you will be surprised which sorry! he's a baby! mornings were made for better things billionaire agrees with her, at least on some of her research. than rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis. that is at the end of this hour and you don't want to miss that. when considering another treatment, but we begin tonight, of ask about xeljanz xr, course, with impeachment. a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe the ukranians knew. rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis the ukranians knew that donald trump was withholding military for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. aid authorized by congress. and the ukrainians knew long it can reduce pain, swelling, before the first public report and significantly improve physical function. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections like tb; in "politico" in late august that that aid was being don't start xeljanz if you have an infection. withheld. that was the single most important point in the transcript released today of taking a higher than recommended dose of xeljanz for ra can increase risk of death. laura cooper's deposition testimony to the impeachment serious, sometimes fatal infections, investigation of donald j. cancers including lymphoma, and blood clots have happened. trump. because that destroys the as have tears in the stomach or intestines, republican defense that donald serious allergic reactions, and changes in lab results. trump couldn't possibly have committed extortion if ukraine tell your doctor if you've been somewhere did not know that donald trump
fungal infections are common, was withholding the aid to or if you've had tb, hepatitis b or c, ukraine. that is one of the republican or are prone to infections. don't let another morning go by talking points that they're planning to use in the public without asking your doctor about xeljanz xr. hearings, talking points that were obtained by "axios." ♪ we'll have more on that later. like very high triglycerides, without asking your doctor about xeljanz xr. that particular defense is now gone because ukraine knew. can be tough. you diet. exercise. but if you're also taking fish oil supplements, laura katherine cooper is the you should know, they are not fda-approved, they may have saturated fat and deputy assistant secretary of may even raise bad cholesterol. defense to ukraine. military aid to ukraine was the to treat very high triglycerides, most urgent issue to her, not discover the science of prescription vascepa. proven in multiple clinical trials, the defense department. she knew the president was vascepa, along with diet, is the only prescription epa treatment, withholding military aid and began asking questions about it approved by the fda to lower well before "politico" first reported it in late august. very high triglycerides by 33%, according to what she had been without raising bad cholesterol. told by kurt volker, the trump look. it's clear. there's only one prescription special envoy to ukraine, and epa vascepa. the acting ambassador to vascepa is not right for everyone. do not take vascepa if you are ukraine, william taylor. quote, i knew from my kurt allergic to icosapent ethyl or volker conversation and also any inactive ingredient in vascepa. from sort of the alarm bells tell your doctor if you are that were coming from ambassador allergic to fish or shellfish, taylor and his team that there have liver problems or other medical conditions and about
were ukranians who knew about any medications you take, especially those that may affect blood clotting. this. on july 26th, laura cooper found 2.3% of patients reported joint pain. out that both military and ask your doctor about vascepa. humanitarian aid were being prescription power. withheld from ukraine, and at proven to work. her level, all of the governing professionals like herself were worried that it was illegal. hey. ♪hey. quote, immediately deputies began to raise concerns about you must be steven's phone. how this could be done in a legal fashion, cooper said. the comments in the room at the deputy's level reflected a sense now you can take control of your home wifi that there was not an understanding of how this could and get a notification the instant legally play out. someone new joins your network... laura cooper testified that ukraine had met all of the only with xfinity xfi. requirements for u.s. aid before download the xfi app today. president trump put a hold on that aid in addition to her worries about the legality of the hold, laura cooper was worried about what it meant for ukraine's very survival. quote, if they are seen as weak and if they are seen as lacking the backing of the united states for their armed forces, it makes it much more difficult for them
to negotiate a peace on terms that are good for ukraine. mick mulvaney was drawn deeper into the trump appeasement of russia in another deposition transcript released today of the testimony of katherine kroft, a special adviser to ukraine. we have now reached the she was advised that a piece of billionaires versus elizabeth warren stage of the presidential a hold was placed on ukraine. campaign where it seems every other day another billionaire is given a public microphone to katherine kroft was told in a express outrage at elizabeth warren's proposed wealth tax and special budget by mick mulvaney was put on hold to ukraine just generally express billionaire terror about a because mick mulvaney expressed possible elizabeth warren presidency. last week bill gates said concerns that, quote, russia something that in the fractured quote world of twitter made him would react negatively. that is exactly why those missiles were authorized to be appear to be just another transferred to ukraine, so that billionaire afraid of elizabeth the missiles would have a warren. negative impact on russia's >> you know, i've paid over 10 policy in the region. billion in taxes, i paid more than anyone in taxes, but -- you catherine croft testified that know, i'm glad -- if i had to
the office of the budget was to transfer aid to ukraine and that pay 20 billion, it's fine. all the departments, including but, you know, when you say i the security council, supported should pay 100 billion, then i'm the transfer. starting to do a little math mick mulvaney surrendered to all that pressure and ukraine about what i have left over. finally received the missiles. sorry, i'm just kidding. >> he said he was kidding, but christopher anderson's deposition was released today. many people believe that he was christopher anderson, a service really worried about having to pay 100 billion in wealth taxes. officer who had been involved in so elizabeth warren took that opportunity to send him a tweet saying, i'd love to explain ukraine, said john bolton made a exactly how much you would pay under my wealth tax. i promise it's not 100 billion. joke about every time ukraine is mentioned, giuliani pops up and to which bill gates said, i greatly respect your commitment to finding ways to address that the president is listening wealth and equality and poverty at home. to giuliani about ukraine. while we may disagree about some turns out that wasn't a joke. of the ways to get there, we william taylor, quote, certainly agree we need a lot of repeatedly expressed his concern smart people committed to that giuliani would make his job finding the path forward. difficult. christopher anderson testified i'm always willing to talk about that he agreed, quote, that if creative solutions to these giuliani's narrative took hold problems. bill gates and elizabeth warren that the ukranian government was agree much more than they an enemy of the president, then disagree. you just heard bill gates say it would be very hard to have high-level engagement, it would that if you want to double his be harder for us to pressure
russia to come back to the taxes, he's cool with that. negotiating table in that case. as usual, the democrats issued and that makes bill gates more highlights today of the hundreds progressive on income taxation of pages of transcripts that than most of the democrats they released. those highlights identified by running for president. the democrats are all harmful to bill gates stays out of politics as much as humanly possible. president trump. the republicans did not release he doesn't endorse candidates, a single page of highlights in any of today's depositions or he hasn't created some giant any of the previous depositions superpac with all his wealth, but he did make it very clear in because there are no highlights that interview last week, in these depositions that are helpful to donald trump's brilliantly conducted by andrew defense. republicans were in every one of these depositions. russ sorkin, that he would vote for elizabeth warren against republicans in jordan were in donald trump if that's who is on the ballot next year. each of the depositions he he made that clear when he was released today and he did not asked that specific question. make one helpful point for bill gates didn't name names, but he said the thing that he donald trump in these depositions. there is no evidence in these would value most in a candidate depositions of why republicans is what he called a professional decided to remove one of their members from the intelligence approach to the presidency. committee so they could give the audience started to laugh, that seat to jim jordan so he because obviously donald trump has the least professional would be the star inkwquisitor r approach to the presidency in history, and everyone in the room knew that bill gates was the republicans this week. jim jordan was able to be in the saying, in effect, that he would
depositions because those vote for the democrat no matter depositions allowed three who it is. committees to be present, bill gates is one of the few including the oversight and billionaires who agrees with our reform committee, and jim jordan next guest that billionaires are is already a member of that committee. but the public hearings will be for the house intelligence undertaxed. committee only and the esther duflow is this year's republicans' big move, their big move for the defense of the president in the public hearings, was to bring in jim co-winner of the nobel prize in jordan on the same week that jim economics, and she did that by jordan was once again credibly studying the way people make real economic decisions in real accused of being aware of a team life. people like bill gates and people living in poverty around doctor sexually assaulting members of the ohio state the world. and what she found contradicts wrestling team when jim jordan was a coach on that team. most of what you have heard from politicians about real world economics and her findings should be heard in the nbc reported last week that ia presidential campaign. lawsuit filed on thursday said esther duflow is the second woman in history to win the jim jordan saw the coach nobel prize in economics, and she joins us next. masturbate in front of him at a s us next. wrestling match, he reported oh no,... ...a cougher. that to jim jordan, who was the welcome to flu season, karen. is a regular flu shot strong enough... wrestling coach. ...to help prevent flu in someone your age? yeah, that's strauss, jordan and there are standard-dose flu shots.
and then there's the superior flu protection... th ...of fluzone high-dose. it's the only 65 plus flu shot... ...with 4 times the standard dose. and it's free with medicare part b. then-head coach russ hellickson fluzone high-dose is not for those who've had a severe allergic reaction... replied, according to the ...to any vaccine component, including... affidavit. leading off our discussion ...eggs, egg products,... or after a previous dose of flu vaccine. tonight, john sarbanes of tell your healthcare professional if you've ever experienced severe muscle weakness... maryland who has attended many of these impeachment ...after receiving a flu shot. if you notice ...other problems or symptoms following vaccination,... ...contact your healthcare professional immediately. depositions. side effects include pain, swelling... and ellen farkas, a former staff ...and redness where the shot was given. member of the foreign affairs other side effects may occur. vaccination may not protect everyone. committee. if you're 65 plus, she is an nbc national security don't settle for a standard-dose flu shot. influenza...going down. move up to fluzone high-dose. analyst. john sarbanes, i wanted to get see your doctor or pharmacist and ask for it by name. your reaction to the depositions today, especially to the point that the ukranians knew this aid was being withheld and they knew it long before it became public. >> well, lawrence, thanks for having me on today.
i think we were pretty confident just based on the overall testimony that was coming forward over the last few weeks that it would become clear that the ukranians were aware of this hold having been placed. now you have a direct corroborating testimony to that, and it puts a lie to the republican defense that somehow the quid pro quo wasn't there because there wasn't ukranian knowledge that there was a quid pro quo. they knew exactly what was being done to them. it was a breathtaking abuse of power on the part of the administration to tie this security assistance to a promise that they would investigate, the ukranians would investigate a political rival of the president. that's all becoming clear. it will be much more clear this week, i think, to the broad public when we get the testimony from these three diplomats. these are very professional
people. the testimony they delivered in closed session was very compelling, and i think you'll see that will have a real impact in terms of the public to get an opportunity now to hear directly from these witnesses. >> john heilemann, we're going to discuss later this hour what (honk!) i hear you sister. the republicans have planned for that's why i'm partnering with cigna the public hearings. to remind you to go in for your annual check-up, >> it's compelling. and be open with your doctor about anything you feel >> the big public move is jim jordan moves up to the center - physically and emotionally. spot here in the intelligence committee hearings. but now cigna has a plan >> yes. that can help everyone see stress differently. and, you know, look, it signals just find a period of time to unwind. as clearly as could be that republicans will not fight this a location to de-stress. fight on the facts. an activity to enjoy. they will not fight this fight or the name of someone to talk to. any other way than rhetorically to create a plan that works for you, and through demonization of visit cigna.com/mystressplan. these witnesses and trying to cigna. together, all the way. impune their characters and impune their motives. they think this is a political firefight and they're bringing in one of their political firefighters with a big rhetorical flamethrower to fight the first nobel prizes were fight. all weav've seen, lawrence, ove
these past weeks is a clear established in 1895, economics picture of what actually happened here. and i think republicans, as pernicious as they are in many prize was added to the mibs in cases, as pathological in their lies as they are, they're not stupid, and i think they recognize at this point there is 1969. only one woman had won a nobel no argument to be made on the merits. the only argument now to be made prize in economics and now there is going to be, yes, tlfrshere a are two. this year esther duflow is the quid pro quo, but it wasn't maybe a totally bad quid pro co-winner of the nobel prize in quo. it was a small quid pro quo, not economics for her real world a big one, and these guys are study of how economics really all terrible people who are testifying against donald trump, works in real people's lives and and we have an election in 2020, how that knowledge can be used to improve the economic lives of so this isn't enough of a big deal to throw him out of office. more people. in an echo of esther duflo with that's going to be the argument in the house and senate, i w last week, bill gates gave think, which is much more voice to one of her important findings that contradicts much vociferous and pernicious on the political talk about taxation. part of the house. >> ellen, there were more >> we can raise taxes in a lot depositions released today, and of ways, including in making tha that is the specifics of what the trump administration was up to. another track that's very clear some gifts to foundations more in these depositions is why this
is important, why this is not a taxed. we have a lot of room. minor offense that president trump is accused of here, and the current thing is not either there is a lot of talk by these in terms of incringing witnesses about just how important this aid was to ukraine, how important it was on philanthropy or new business. we're in the close to the limit. there was a time we had 70% a daily basis. >> right. i mean, because this aid was so taxation rates. >> joining us now is m.i.t. critical to defending ukraine's economics professor esther sovereignty, they're essentially holding the russians back from duflow, this year's co-winner of launching a bigger offensive. the nobel prize in economics. yes, there is ongoing sighting, her new book "good economics for as laura cooper herself points hard times" co-authored with her out in the testimony, but there is always a few that the russians arussia -- a husba husband, who is also the view that the separatists and co-winner of this year's nobel russians will do more. they'll put pressure on the new prize in economics. thank you for joining us. ukranian president in >> thank you so much. particular. i think it's really unsettling >> it must have been so exciting because it shows you, then, that for you and your husband, first the president, president trump husband/wife team in history putting pressure on the ukranians, trying to get a bribe getting the nobel prize in from them, basically, he's trying to get this bribe, this economics. dirt on biden, and this dirt very exciting phone number? >> it was very incredible way to relating to the 2016 elections be woken up at 5:00 a.m. in order to then release the
aid. it's actually a dirty game that >> people don't realize how the the president is playing with them, and it's, again, putting nobel work. >> no hint whatsoever. >> no nominees. so let's go to what bill gates just said. lives at risk. it's one of the central elements >> there is a really startling of your book. and the republican argument is, revelation in christian anderson's deposition released of course, you must not tax today showing donald trump's anyone more than we're taxing just constant posture of appeasement -- i'm not sure what else to call it -- towards them and if you tax these rich executives more, they'll just russia. it comes this way in work less. it will be a disincentive to work if we tax them at the highest level. there's bill gates, no one who "politico's" highlights of this has worked harder than him who antidote. it says in one highlight related is saying no, no, no, there's by anderson, he relayed a 2019 much more room to tax us at the highest end. >> there certainly is. and if we taxed the rich more, conversation in which the then-national security adviser they would work just as hard. john bolton revealed trump had think about football players. called him as his home to in many cases there are caps on their salaries and that doesn't complain about a cnn story that stop them from trying to win. made it appear the navy was >> yeah. you compare -- that's what's so pushing back against russian aggression in the black sea. fascinating about this. this is not just your opinion we met with ambassador bolton from observing the world. and discussed this, and he made it clear that the president had you've actually looked at salary called him to complain about caps on professional athletic
that news report. teams in the united states versus europe, where there are no salary caps. and that may have been just been and you don't see any effort that he was surprised. how does it affect you when you difference in the salary capped hear testimony like this? players versus the players who >> this is astounding if you think about it. don't have any salary caps at the president is protecting all? >> of course not because winning russia, it appears to be the is everything. case, at the expense of an ally, and it's the same thing among ceos. all they want is to be richer ukraine. and he's prepared to hold back than their friend ceos. the money doesn't really matter $400 million of security what does is the rank. assistance that that country >> this incentive issue is what needs to defend itself against you're finding, that incentives russian aggression because he's in the real world don't work the more interested in defending way we might think they do? russia than defending an ally for example, the argument about that the united states congress welfare disincentivizing people. decided should receive foreign they won't try to work if you assistance to the tune of $400 give them welfare. million. and if you think about it in what did you find about that? >> similarly, the poor also terms of these diplomats that are going to be testifying this don't stop working if there are no incentives for them to work. week, if you look at the record that's also an illusion. of william taylor, of marie yavonovitch, of george kent, it's now been demonstrated in these are diplomats who have country after country. poor country, rich country, spent their whole careers
middle-income country. the poor are not discouraged fighting corruption, and their own president is trying to pull from working. we've known that since the late them into a corrupt scheme. '60s and '70s in the u.s. where and to their credit, i have to the so-called negative income say they're raising a red flag, tax experiment that actually they're pushing back, and gave money to the poor people they're saying, this is not and taxed it away at a rate of right. and they're doing everything they can -- you can see that 50%. and it had no discouraging from the testimony -- to make effect on their work. sure that that kind of a trade it's actually a little secret will not happen on their watch. that we sort of have kept but they're under tremendous hidden. >> there's also -- and let's -- pressure. i think when the public sees and again, what's so important about this work is that you go into the field. you do real experiments to find hears the testimony from these professionals, they will see that these are folks that are out really how things work. playing it straight, that wanted and you've looked at to represent the interests of immigration. and you tell us in this book a the united states, not the very different story about what interests of russia or anybody else, the interests of the united states, and that's why we immigration in the united states is doing economically. can have such confidence in the testimony they're going to be >> there are two big delivering. misconceptions about >> and ever ly, evelyn, that's immigration. the first is that the flood be one of the challenges in the gates are waiting to be open and committee's reputation to get if immigration was more liberal, the balance of the specifics of everybody would want to come to
what the president is being this country because they live accused of here and the reason in a poorer country than we do. why it's important, which is and the second misconception, if that happened then the poor what carson sarbanes was talking workers in the u.s. would be poorer. but, in fact, there's huge about and what the witness was literature that shows that talking about, and that may be neither of these are true. more of a challenge to make first of all, the migration clear to the public. >> lawrence, i think the way to flows are quite low, even when do it is to focus on russian there's no value to migration. policy. the opposite of pushing back on russia in the black sea is when there was a big crisis in surrendering to russia in the greece, people mostly stayed in black sea, right? greece. it's not that people are waiting that's not in u.s. national security interests, it's not in for an opportunity to jump and the security interests of our come. people only come if they are neighbors -- sorry, of the desperate or super enterprising neighbors there, so turkey, for and really want to make a better example, a native ally. life for themselves in which a problematic one, but still. case we should want to have them it's not in the interest of here because they contribute to freedom of navigation. the economy, the entrepreneurs, if you surrender to russia in et cetera. any of these items, you will see the second misconception is that russia pushing further. if a lot of blue skilled workers and that's not in the u.s. national security interest, because russia has violated come, they will take away the wages from the people here in international law. they have broken the taboo on this country and that also happens to be not true. people have looked at the influx changing borders using military force. there are other leaders in other
countries who would like to do the same starting in europe. of cuban refugees in miami. again, it is in the national when they kicked out many security interests of the united states to stop russia so that we don't have other wars breaking migrant worker from california out. in the '60s and there are dozens >> john? >> i tell you, with due respect of people like that that shows to congressman sarbanes and to migrant do not take away wages from native worker. this is something that people do "politico," "politico" says it's not know. >> you also mention in here a new fact that i wasn't aware of, a wild antidote. it's astounding and it's not odd that our internal migration because there was not any time in donald trump's administration where he's ever not acted in the rates have dropped dramatically that, we had people moving from interests of russia. place to place in the country generally to where the jobs are. he he often defends russia. this is the pattern. now when jobs get wiped out in a of course he was upset about particular location, people are pushing russia against the black not moving the way they used to. sea. donald trump has been acting in which, by the way, is what russia's interest in every classical economic theory said crucial respect. they always would do, that they'll move to find a job. mehta, macro, micro. what if they don't? across the three years, it's the that's what you're finding. least surprising thing in the >> very important presumption, both of economists and perhaps world. it's disgusting but it's not more importantly of politicians, that people would move. astounding. if i lose my job making >> quick word, congressman.
furniture in north carolina, i can move to new york to sell i think we maiy have a semantic furniture. but, in fact, that's not true. disagreement on that. >> i certainly agree with john that it's disgusting, but he's not always acting in russia's mobility is half what they were in 1958. interests, he's always acting in >> esther duflo, congratulations on the nobel. president trump's interest. it's a real honor to have you that's why it's an abuse of here. appreciate it. "good economics for hard times." power, it's an abuse of his oath of office. he gets up every morning and this book belongs at the center he's not thinking about the 50 of the presidential campaign. that is tonight's last word. million americans whose the 11th hour with brian interests he should represent, he's thinking about his own williams starts right now. personal political gain. this is just another example of that. the witnesses this week are tonight, what promises to be going to show that's what's a colossal week in the going on. impeachment effort begins with congressman sarbanes, john more transcripts being released, more testimony from the inside. heilemann and evelyn farkas, thank you for starting us off further confirmation that military aid was held up for tonight. up next, what is rick perry political dirt on the bidens. as another storyline emerges, trump's chief of staff, mick and john bolton up to? and the list of the impeachment
inquiry witnesses was submitted over the weekend. it's not going to fly. and there are planned tactics in the public hearings this week. dn the public hearings this week. ? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot. almost 98% of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling numbness or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily. and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planed medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be your moment.
ask your doctor about eliquis. t-mobile's newest most powerful signal is here. experience it with the amazing, new iphone 11. and right now, t-mobile has the best deal on iphone. get 4 lines of unlimited with 4 iphone 11 included for only $35 a line. that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected.
to ask the judge whether john bolton should answer to a subpoena or should he take donald trump's advice not to testify. he is beyond the control of the president of the united states and there is no legal reason for him to evade that subpoena. mick mulvaney dropped his legal attempt today to join the bolton lawsuit after bolton objected to mick mulvaney joining his lawsuit. mick mulvaney will now have his own lawsuit asking the same question of the judge. these are delay tactics designed to slow down the impeachment investigation, but adam schiff says the committee will not engage in a months-long legal pursuit to enforce the congressional subpoenas of these witnesses. but the investigation will take a negative inference from mick mulvaney's refusal to testify on the assumption that if mick mulvaney had something helpful to say about donald trump, anything helpful to say about donald trump, he would testify. and, therefore, his refusal to
testify can be taken as a negative inference against president trump. the first news reports of john bolton's memorable -- john bolton's inevitable book appeared this weekend. viewers of this program knew that john bolton was working on a book deal the day he left the trump white house since i announced it here on this program that night because it was wicked obvious. reports indicate that john bolton is getting a $2 million advance for his book from simon & shuster. in order to get a book advance like that, the author has to tell the publisher what the publisher is paying for, what the publisher is getting. therefore, there are people at simon & shuster tonight in midtown manhattan who already know what john bolton is refusing to tell the impeachment investigation. joining us for a discussion now is chris liu who served as a
senior aid to president obama. before that he was chief counsel over the oversight committee. john heilemann is back with us. i have a congressional subpoena. i'm going to go bring a lawsuit to ask a judge what i do with it. >> i think it's fair to say none of this is on the level, lawrence. this is a case of mick mulvaney wanting to avoid being held in contempt of congress, wanting to delay the proceedings but only willing to abide by the court's ruling if it goes in his favor. what he's doing, really, is trying to e vroviscerate the administration. when i managed president obama's candidate, hillary clinton testified about "fast & furious." preside
secretary clinton testified about the obvious. it simply wipes out congress' ability to do any kind of oversight. and let's not forget the most important point, if there is any kind of privilege here, mick mulvaney already waived it. you'll recall he stood up in that press briefing room and he admitted there was quid pro quo. you pointed out if he had something good to say, he would be out there saying it right now. >> john heilemann, as we know, $2 million book advance for john bolton means he's telling people, book agent, book editors, pitch ing pitching the that he's refusing to tell the congress. >> i think it is likely that you and i know some of these people. if we went out with the proper implements we could probably extract this information from them if we were hard-hitting enough. i think the question from bolton is a tricky one. what if we assume, if all the following is true, based on some of the testimony today it does seem bolton was with these
people, these professionals, who looked at this and said this is likely illegal. it looks like bolton weighed in on those points to get that aid released. we all have views about john bolton, but it seems in this case he recognized the illegal peril in place here and tried to get out of testifying if only to save his own skin. now the question is, what is his economic interest, and being a hero in this case is probably in his economic interest in terms of selling books. a public thought john bolton did the right thing telling that story to sell a lot of books. however, becoming a hero in the story requires him to testify. he's got some things to figure out here. >> the book, chris, quite predictably, the first night when he left the white house, is scheduled for publication before the presidential election. because, of course, if donald trump were to lose, the book
value collapses right away. but -- and so does a book like this have to get cleared the way james comey's book had to get cleared because he worked with the fbi? since bolton works on national security issues, is there a clearance process for that and can the trump administration simply refuse to clear him? >> there's two issues, one is the clearance issue if there's classified information that might implicate classified information that's in there. the other important thing is you'll recall all trump administration officials apparently signed a nondisclosure confidentiality agreement which trump has selectively enforced or tried to enforce against foreign aides, including this anonymous book that just came out. it will be interesting to see how this all plays out. i'm sure john bolton probably recognizes on the nondisclosure agreement, that's not enforceable. it's never been enforceable on anybody, and he's probably a smart enough guy to understand what is classified and not classified and will probably
state broad outlines. >> when the book deal is introduced in court in the bolton lawsuit, i'm sure the judge is going to have even more reluctance to take the bolton case seriously. >> that's probably right, and one of the things chris said, wire all under the impression that people sign these ndas, certainly at the beginning of the administration it's true trump tried to get everyone to sign. i'm not sure everyone did sign and bolton came relatively late to the administration, so it's not clear if they were as rigorous about trying to get everyone to sign those ndas and i'm sure john bolton knows they are meaningless in the history of the world. the other one is a question for him in terms of the white house screening issue on classified information. we're going to have to break it there. chris lu and john heilemann, thank you both for joining us. when we come back, republican chaos. that is what is planned for the public impeachment hearings, outright jim jordan-led chaos.
and later it's been the billionaires versus elizabeth warren, and those billionaires are worried about what she wants to do with taxation and other issues. but the current, this year's co-winner of the nobel prize in economics has much to say about that policy debate. she will join us at the end of this hour. this hour. lower my blood sugar and a1c. lower because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction,
a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. 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 so that early retirement we planned. it's going ok? great. now i'm spending more time with the kids. i'm introducing them to crab. crab!? they love it. so, you mentioned that that money we set aside. yeah. the kids and i want to build our own crab shack. ♪ ♪ ahhh, you're finally building that outdoor kitchen. yup - with room for the whole gang. ♪ ♪ see how investing with a j.p. morgan advisor can help you. visit your local chase branch.
accusations against president trump. almost all of the witnesses that they want which include hunter biden and the whistleblower are not relevant to the impeachment inquiry, and so they will not be allowed to testify by chairman schiff, which will be supported by a majority vote of the committee. three of the witnesses requested by the republicans already testified in depositions, so there is a chance those witnesses will be allowed to testify publicly. chairman schiff responded to the republicans' request saying they will consider republicans' requests, but added, the committee will not serve as vehicles for any member to carry out the same sham investigations into the bidens or debunked conspiracies about the 2016 u.s. election interference that president trump pressed ukraine to conduct for his personal political benefit. he threatened to retaliate against the whistleblower. he also made clear that the
impeachment investigation yielded growing evidence that renders the whistleblower's testimony, quote, redundant and unnecessary and would only place their personal safety at grave risk. "axios" is reporting tonight that house republicans on the impeachment committee have settled on four talking points that they will use to undermine the democrats' arguments that the president should be impeached according to a staff memo circulated to committee members monday night. we'll discuss those republican talking points in the secret staff memo that's not so secret anymore with david jolley after this break. jolley after this break about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome.
we're gonna need a bigger room. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? well i didn't choose metastatic breast cancer. not the exact type. not this specific mutation. but i did pick hope... ...and also clarity... ...by knowing i have a treatment that goes right at it.
discover piqray, the first and only treatment that specifically targets pik3ca mutations in hr+, her2- mbc, which are common and linked to cancer growth. piqray is taken with fulvestrant after progression on hormone therapy and has been proven to help people with a pik3ca mutation live longer without disease progression. do not take piqray if you've had a severe allergic reaction to it or to any of its ingredients. piqray can cause serious side effects including severe allergic and skin reactions, high blood sugar levels and diarrhea that are common and can be severe, and lung problems known as pneumonitis. tell your doctor right away if you have symptoms of severe allergic reactions or high blood sugar while taking piqray. your doctor will monitor your blood sugar before you start and during treatment and may monitor more often if you have a history of type 2 diabetes. before starting, tell your doctor if you have a history of diabetes, skin reactions... ...are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include rash, nausea, tiredness and weakness, decreased appetite, mouth sores, vomiting, weight loss, hair loss, and changes in certain blood tests. if you've progressed on hormone therapy,
and have a pik3ca mutation... ...ask your doctor about piqray. hour 36 in the stakeout. 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. ♪ tonight a memo obtained by "axios" shows the four talking points the republicans say they're going to use in their defense of donald trump in the public hearings. the july 25th call summary, the best evidence of the conversation, shows no condit n conditionality or evidence of
pressure. president zelensky and president trump have both said there was no pressure on the call. the ukranian government was not aware of a hold on u.s. security assistance at the time of the july 25th call. too bad that's already been proven untrue. and president trump met with president zelensky and u.s.secu ukraine in september 2019, both of which occurred without ukraine investigating president trump's political rivals. joining us, david jolly, a former republican member of congress from florida. he's an msnbc political analyst. daifr david, are you surprised by your former colleague's approach to the public hearing according to the memo tonight? >> i'm not, and in fact, all the corroborating witnesses suggest there was this scheme and ukraine was aware of it, even to the extent of diplomatic personnel drafting statements for zelensky to read.
what is interesting in this, though, is each of their four arguments seems to play into a broader theme that they're going to argue there was no quid pro quo. and that's an inflection point for democrats to have to make a strategic decision, because i would make the case no quid pro quo was required. it certainly didn't need to be felt by ukraine, but the act to ask ukraine to investigate the bidens in and of itself even without active quid pro quo was an impeachable behavior by the president of the united states. the republicans' four arguments are all trying to undermine a quid pro quo argument. corroborating evidence will overcome it, but democrats have to make a decision. do they require quid pro quo to move an impeachment article or not? >> it's so clear that it's the solicitation that is the violation, and that's all you need, is the solicitation, and the solicitation doesn't have to be rewarded with action by the other side that you've solicited from. it's all right there in solicitation. but this is o going to keep say