take bill taylor. he was tapped by the administration, the trump administration to be the acting ambassador to ukraine after the president fired the previous ambassador for ostensibly standing in the way of trump's scheme to pressure the ukrainian government for political dirt. once bill taylor took up his post in ukraine and came to learn about the president's scheme, he famously texted his diplomatic colleagues, quote, i think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign. now, bill taylor joined the foreign service under president reagan. he has served every president since, republican and democrat. he came out of retirement to take this post in ukraine only -- only after the secretary of state mike pompeo assured him that america would not falter in its strong support for ukraine against russia. and, again, regardless of the details of bill taylor's testimony, which was damning for the president, if you're donald trump and you're trying not to get impeached bill tayl

take bill taylor. he was capped by the administration, the trump administration to be the acting ambassador to ukraine after the president fired the previous ambassador for ostensibly standing in the way of trump's scheme to pressure the ukrainian government for political dirt. once bill taylor took up his post in ukraine and came to learn about the president's scheme, he famously texted his diplomatic colleagues, quote, i think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign. now, bill taylor joined the foreign service under president reagan. he has served every president since, republican and democrat. he came out of retirement to take this post in ukraine only -- only after the secretary of state mike pompeo assured him that america would not falter in its strong support for ukraine against russia. and, again, regardless of the details of bill taylor's testimony, which was damning for the president, if you're donald trump and you're trying not to get impeached billtails

this was the story about acting ambassador to ukraine bill taylor stepping down from his post. follow-up reporting today, bill taylor was instructed by a top aide to secretary of state mike pompeo to hand over his post just days before he planned to visit the ukraine capitol according to a person familiar with the situation. the timing countered earlier statements that his precise date was predetermined and would allow him to avoid meeting or being photographed with an ambassador who has drawn president trump's ire for his testimony, according to this person "the wall street journal" talked to as well as a ukrainian official. mr. taylor planning to leave on the 2nd. visit planning to take place from january 3rd through 4th. we'll keep on top of all of the aspects of this story for you. >> anna, hoyt, what did you think of the debate and the votes? >> caller: yes, ma'am, i think that corporate america somebody in the white house. my grandmother was an enthusiastic member of the d.a.r., and i opted to serve this country in the army under an unqualified president. i'm starting to

beyond that the trump administration replaced ambassador evolve it with ambassador bill taylor who became one of the 1st. inquiry here actually besser taylor played a prominent role in some of the hearings last month president trump truly sought to remove ambassador evanovich as part of a nefarious plan he certainly would not have replaced her with someone of the likes of ambassador bill taylor 2nd the 3 u.s. officials who comprise the so-called shadow foreign policy apparatus ambassador volker stalin and secretary perry can hardly be called irregular certainly not outlandish all were senior u.s. officials with official interest in ukraine policy the 3 kept the state department and the n.s.c. informed of their activities finally there is evidence that marriage will ianni did not speak on behalf of the president according to a news story on november 22nd mr yarm act as the bastard volcker to connect him with mayor giuliani because the selenski team was surprised by the meg by the mayor's negative comments about ukraine they wanted to change his mind both embassador volcker in his depositio

you might remember impeachment witness bill taylor. he's the top u.s. diplomat in ukraine at the moment. he's been told to leave the country, headed by mike pompeo. he is set to visit kyiv in january. taylor, who already planned to leave his post in january, is being told not to be there when the secretary goes. you might recall he offered some quite damning testimony against the president, questioning rudy giuliani's role in ukraine and he thought it was crazy that u.s. military assistance was being withheld from ukraine. why? are we that thin-skinned as secretary of state that -- at a time, number one, mike pompeo is likely to leave in january to run for senate even though he says that is not the case. he is doing behind-the-scenes work to build a campaign. number two, there's been a morale problem. why not stand up with this guy? >> if the reporting is correct, it does suggest that there is a desire that these two kind of opposing 40s don't collide, the opposing 40s being what bill taylor represents to the president of the united states, which is par

bill taylor, so bill taylor is done on january 2nd. it is kind of remarkable because it is all happening in plain sight. >> it is happening in plain sight. as you remember from the hearings, he was one of the most credible witnesses that came forward, a distinguished veteran, a person of incredible character. and this person is unfortunately a victim of the shadow foreign policy that was commandeered by the three amigos to do not what's in the best of america with regard to ukraine but what's in the best interest of rudy giuliani's clients, and of course personal political agenda of donald trump. >> i want to ask you about something having to do with the intelligence committee. politico is reporting the prosecutor appointed by attorney general barr to examine the russia probe origins is focusing a lot on the cia and director gina haspel. saying the durham prone, that's the person put in charge by barr, the durham probe could force haspel to choose between protecting her agency from trump's wrath and bowing to barr's wishes. what do you

danyluk, who was then secretary of ukraine's defense council told ambassador bill taylor on the night of the call that the ukrainian government was not disturbed by anything on the call. president trump, t of course, h always said that he did not pressure president zelensky. on september 25th, president trump said there was no pressure. when asked if he wanted zelensky to do more to investigate the former vp president trump responded vno, i want him to d whatever he can, whatever he can do inve terms of corruption because corruption is massive, that's what he should do. several witnesses attested to the president's concerns about ukrainian corruption. the initial readouts of the july 25th call from both the ukrainian government and the state department raised no concerns. although lieutenant colonel vindman noted concerns, those concerns were not shared by national security council leadership. they were not shared by general kellogg who listened on the call. lieutenant general kellogg said in a statement i heard nothing wrong or eaimproper on the call. i t had and have no concerns. li

who was then secretary of ukraine national security and defense counsel told ambassador bill taylor on the night of the call that the ukrainian government was not disturbed by anything on the call. president trump of course has also said he did not pressure president zelensky. on september 25th, president trump said "there was no pressure. when i asked if he wanted president zelensky to do more to investigate the former vp, president trump responded no, i want him to do whatever he can. whatever he can do in terms of corruption because corruption is massive. that's what he should do. several witnesses attested to the president's concerns about ukrainian corruption. the initial readouts of the jule ukrainian government and the state department raised no concerns. although lieutenant colonel vindman noted concerns, those concerns were not shared by national security council leadership. they were not shared by general keith kellogg who listens on the call, lieutenant general kellogg said in the statement "i heard nothing wrong or improper on the call. i had and have no concerns. lieutenan

bill taylor has just been fired by the trump administration, recalled early from his post by secretary of state mike pompeo. i mean, it's still going on. there's also "the washington post" tonight with a jaw dropping front page story about where president trump got ahold of this story that he's been pushing throughout this scandal, this story it must have been ukraine that interfered in the 2016 u.s. election, not russia. where did he get that idea? where did he get that story he's been selling in the first place? whe where'd he come upon that? quote, after meeting privately in july 2017 with russian president vladimir putin at the group of 20 summit in hamburg, the president's intense resistance to the assessment of u.s. intelligence agencies that russia systematically interfered in the 2016 campaign and the blame he cast instead on a rival country led many of his advisers, trump's own advisers to think that putin himself help spur the idea of ukraine's culpability said these officials. quote, one former senior white house official said trump even stated so explicitly at one point, sa

taylor is exhibit number one. >> he is the one that asked bill taylor to come back too. thank you. >>> still ahead, how long can speaker pelosi hold the impeachment arm articles from t senate? jamie raskin joins me next. >>> what are red state democrats going to do? the possibility of defections among the democratic ranks. >>> and we'll go live to a scene of a stabbing that targeted a rabbi's home during a hanukkah celebration in new york. the latest in a string of anti-semitic attacks. stay with us. acks stay with us for better things than rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis. when considering another treatment, ask about xeljanz xr, a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. and significantly improve physical function. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections like tb; don't start xeljanz if you have an infection. taking a higher than recommended dose of xeljanz for ra can increase risk of death. serious, sometimes fatal infections, cancers inclu

maybe mick mulvaney can testify what he directed bill taylor and volker to do. they should invite republicans to join us in making sure this is a fair trial and doesn't turn into a media circus. >> opposing the republicans, democrats say, they had their chance and could have fought harder to get them to testify in the house of representatives and decided to pass. >> we have a separate responsibility. we have a responsibility to run a fair trial where we put all of the facts in front of the senators who will make a decision on removal. i think it stands to reason the president has stopped people like mick mulvaney from testifying, withheld these e-mails because he knows mulvaney will testify he directed this scheme to get a foreign country to interfere in an election. he knows there are e-mails between people in the white house talking about this corruption attempt. i think there's a reason they're trying to stop these documents from going before the senate and i want to make sure we have all the information. >> do you think house democrats should have pushed har

and how about bill taylor's testimony to the intel committee? adam schiff asks, so if they don't do this, they're not going to get that was your understanding? taylor, yes, sir. schiff, are you aware that quid pro quo literally means this for that? taylor, "i am." bill taylor says it was his clear understanding that aid with would not come until ukraine's president committed to an investigation. which is the definition, literally, a quid pro quo. tim morrison says the same thing. >> what can did ambassador sondland it tell you that he told mr. yermac? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make an investigation for the aid to be litted. >> was there any doubt at all that president was demanding ukraine announce investigations? lieutenant colonel vindman says, not at all. question. was there any doubt in your mind as to what the president or president was asking for, our president was asking for as deliverable? vinden, "there was no doubt." fiona hill, backs him up. >> when i came in, gordon sondland was basically saying

beyond that, the trump administration replaced ambassador yavonovitch with ambassador bill taylor who became one of the first state department officials to voice concerns discussed during the course of our inquiry here. in fact, ambassador taylor made a prominent role in some of the hearings last month. if president trump truly sought to remove ambassador yavonovitch as part of a nefarious plan, he certainly would not have replaced her of someone of the likes of ambassador bill taylor. second, the three u.s. officials who comprised ambassador volker, sondland and secretary perry could not be called outlandish. the three kept the state department and the nfc informed of their activities. finally there is evidence that mayor giuliani did not speak on behalf of the president. according to a new story, professor yermak asked volker to connect him with rudy giuliani because the team was surprised by the mayor's negative comments about ukraine. they wanted to change his mind. both ambassador volker in his deposition and yermak in an august "new york times" article denied that mayor giuliani

taylor, as elie just said on september 7th, there was a call with a different tone. explain why that call is so significant. >> well, just what elie had said, and also this is coming now in that time frame of just a few days after september 1st when gordon sondland had already corrected his testimony once and said that he wasn't in warsaw and did in fact deliver threatening message basically to the ukrainians that their $400 million in u.s. security aid would probably not come unless they made a statement on these investigations, announcing what basically what trump wanted. so the thrust that morrison, that taylor, everyone leaves this call that happened somewhere around, you know, 6th, 7th, 8th of september before this one that is the very clear message that trump has been talking about -- the thrust that taylor and all these folks are talking about at that point in time, what are the exact words we need the ukrainians to say to please the president? that's a far more muddled, murky message than just as you've had in the clips, the president simply saying no quid pr

just take bill taylor as an example. he testified in this impeachment probe and was put in his position by secretary of state mike pompeo. he's leaving the job in january. and trying to get out of there as quickly as possible. so pompeo doesn't have to be photographed with him. this is the kind of thing that, you know, if you were a diplomat why would you sign up to do this kind of job? these are people who were -- you know, bill taylor was begged to come back in to take over this position. so it's a long-term problem. there's a real morale issue that has really -- to restore morale in the agency. all of that has been -- >> let me stick with you for a second. the third in six months has no information on the subject. how is that possible? >> gone from someone like fiona hill who literally wrote the book on vladimir putin to people who have no tie to the subject matter in part because this is something that triggers president trump. that people who want to take a firmer stance on russia are sidelined, maligned on the outs

and how about bill taylor's testimony to the intel committee? adam schiff asks, so if they don't do this, they are not going to get that was your understanding? taylor: yes, sir. schiff: are you aware that quid pro quo literally means this for that? taylor: i am. bill taylor says it was his clear understanding that aid would not come until ukraine's president committed to an investigation, which is the definition literally of a quid pro quo. tim morrison says the same thing. >> what did ambassador sondland tell you that he told mr. yermak? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted. >> so was there any doubt? any doubt at all that the president was demanding ukraine announce investigations? lieutenant colonel alexander vindman says none at all. question: was there any doubt in your mind as to what the president or our president was asking for as a deliverable? vindman: there was no doubt. fiona hill backs him up. >> when i came in, g

bill taylor, west point said that it was crazy to with hold military aid for an investigation. all under oath, all with the penalty of perjury. who do they offer on the other side? president trump. 14,435 lies to date since he's been president. not under oath, but we should take his word for it. then it is so absurd because in a call we know the president's vocabulary. we know what he does and what he does not say. he may say bigly, great, he might say winning a lot. but in this ordinary conversation he does not use the words quid pro quo. so when he has the conversation after the whistle-blower is known to everybody, he gets a call. first thing out of his mouth, hey, i don't want a quid pro quo. where did that come from? it came from the fact that you are guilty of the crime that is charged. just like a kid who just got caught going into the cookie jar with crumbs on his mouth when his mother says what are you doing? i didn't eat that cookie. that's what we have. a call out of the blue the first thing he says is i don't want a quid pro quo, i want them to do the right thing. n

taylor, as elie just said on september 7th, there was a call with a different tone. explain why that call is so significant. >> well, just what elie had said, and also this is coming now in that time frame of just a few days after september 1st when gordon sondland had already corrected his testimony once and said that he wasn't in warsaw and did in fact deliver threatening message basically to the ukrainians that their $400 million in u.s. security aid would probably not come unless they made a statement on these investigations, announcing what basically what trump wanted. so the thrust that morrison, that taylor, everyone leaves this call that happened somewhere around, you know, 6th, 7th, 8th of september before this one that is the very clear message that trump has been talking about -- the thrust that tail lo taylor and all these folks are talking about at that point in time, what are the exact words we need the ukrainians to say to please the president? that's a far more muddled, murky message than just as you've had in the clips, the president simply saying no

people like ambassador bill taylor, a west point graduate, a vietnam veteran, people like dr. fiona hill, people like laura cooper. official after official after official from the trump administration. these individuals serve in the president's administration. ambassador taylor was not appointed by president obama. he was appointed by president trump. so, i would hope that my colleagues, as we proceed with the solemn duty that this committee is charged with, that we respect the people who came forward, who have served in a republican and democratic administrations, to tell the truth under oath and to help this committee as it seeks to hold this administration accountable. and with that i yield to ms. lofgren from california. >> i thank you, mr. neguse. i was just listening to this debate. and most of us here are lawyers. but the idea that the founding fathers in 1789 would be considering the u.s. code president in the mcconnell case precedent and the as precedent in 1789 is simply ridiculous. mr. neguse has pointed out what the founding fathers had in mind with the impeachment

and he talks about basically the kinds of messages that we heard from ambassador bill taylor that, you know, just in the last few days ukrainians have died, ukrainian soldiers have died at the hands of russians. i think 13,000 ukrainians have died in this conflict. is there anything that sobers this up? or is the whole thing sort of lost to the politics of it? >> you see not only president trump, but other republicans continuing to talk about the biden family, hunter biden, burisma, and not talking about the ongoing hot war in ukraine with russia about the issues, about crimea, and that is the real dividing line in this impeachment process is that most democrats see a ukrainian president, a 41-year-old volodymyr zelensky struggling to get military aid, securing it from the united states congress, yet finding it delayed month after month. and hearing this president talk about corruption and issues there amid this delay and aid and seeing a real abuse of power in that sort of conduct from president trump. but republicans keep trying to say president trump's intent was simply to look at c

bill taylor. will be leaving the country before this happens. he, of the distinguished diplomatic career we came to know from the testimony he delivered on capitol hill. that is something i gather from reading a summary of the conversation the state department had with reporters today is something they acknowledge as being a weird thing. that there will not be an ambassador to greet the secretary of state when he arrives there. >> right. our reporting indicates this transition is scheduled. it is planned. it was planned in advance of all of this. it's -- it's not necessarily related to his testimony. but, again, you have all of this turmoil in ukraine. and when you step back, there's actually a real war going on there. a hot war. and as bill taylor testified, i believe in one part of his testimony, he talked about visiting the front lines and people being killed while he was there. ukrainians. this is an actual hot war going on. while there are efforts being made actively by the ukrainians and u.s. and nato allies to resolve this, it is still a

there was thehock potential factor when you heard bill taylor laying out a cronology of all the things that trump is accused of doing-. you have to do all of those things, right? but the public has been watching so much of this. and it was so much more gripping before that it almost feels like it's slowing to a close at this point. the judiciary -- the democrats and judiciary had a hder time breaking through that wall of grabbing americans' attention did. the intelligenceommittee but that wasn't close to of the line wn they did that. robert: how will the housecr des make their case when they're the managers? >> you'll see variety of different democrats making that case they're going to choose they're most perasive argueers. robert: will we see adam schiff there? >> i don't t we would be surprised as they consider b themselves t the stars since they do know this case the best. but that has yet to be finalized. at that point, though, they will not be making the case in t vacuum. they've had the whole stage for thlast several weeks of this heprocess. andre not telling the story right now.

there was the shock potential factor when you heard bill taylor laying out af cronology o all the things that trump is accused of doing -- h. yoe to do all of those things, right? but the public has been watching so much of this. and it was so much morepp gg before that it almost feels like it's slowing to a close at ts point. the judiciary -- the democrats and judiciary had a t hardere breaking through that wall of grabbing ame acans'ention than the intelligence committee did. but that wasn't close to of the line wn they did that. robert: how will the hse democrats make their case when they're the managers? >> you'll see variety of different democrats making that case they're going to choose they're most persuasive argueers.l robert: we see adam schiff there? >> i don't think we would bed surpri as they consider themselves to be the stars since they do know this case the best. butohat has yet te finalized. at that point, though, they will not be makine the c in the vacuum. they've had the whole stage for last several weeks othis proces and they're not telling the story right now. they'r

i think about bill taylor having that video link conference call about the security aide and saying that there was something from omb in the room off camera who said we've been told by the chief of staff who was told by the president, to withhold the security aid. why would rudy giuliani, who's not a member of the government, is the president's personal attorney, is there any legitimate reason for him b to be on the phone with an omb official? >> you're asking exactly the right question. he doesn't have lines of authority. the omb deals with government matters of a highly sensitive nature. hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid and rudy giuliani making these calls and reading again here from this report, this is new breaking news that we have from the intelligence committee. they describe how mid afternoon, someone using a telephone number soes qulassociated with the omb mr. giuliani, a call lasting for nearly 13 minutes and also details again in this new material, each time texted or called people in the white house or omb. i'll put both these up for viewers. sometimes the news

taylor. here is what he said in his testimony. >> to withhold that assistance for in good reason other than help with the political campaign made no sense. it was -- it was counter productive to all of what we had been trying to do. it was illogical, it could not be explained. it was crazy. >> illogical, unexplainable, crazy. mr. goldman, according to the testimony from ambassador taylor, the only explanation for the withheld aid that made sense was the president was seeking help with a political campaign, correct? >> that is the only logical explanation as multiple witnesses said. >> ambassador sondland is a trump appointee who gave a million dollars to the president's inauguration. and he testified that he came to believe that the resumption of security aid would not occur until there was a public statement from ukraine committing to the investigations, correct? >> yes. and that was subsequently confirmed in a conversation with president trump himself. >> lieutenant colonel vindman is a dec

taylor on the night of the call that the ukrainian government was not the stirred by anything on the call. president trump of course has also said that he did not pressure president selenski on september 25th president trump said there was no pressure when asked if he wanted president selenski to do more to investigate the former v.p. president trump responded no i want him to do whatever he can what every you can do in terms of corruption because corruption is massive that's what he should do several witnesses attested to the president's concerns about ukrainian corruption the initial readouts of the july 25th call from both the ukrainian government and the state department raised no concerns although lieutenant colonel of inman noted concerns those concerns were not shared by national security council leadership it were not shared by general keith kellogg who listened on the call to tenet general kellogg said in a statement i heard nothing wrong or improper on the call i had and have no concerns. lieutenant colonel vin minh superior to morrison testified that he was concerned the c

taylor. >> bill taylor was coaxed out of retiernlt by the trump administration. now being called a deep traitor. he was hand picked by mike pompeo. i would say he's near the top of the list wo will leave this impeachment process with his dignity intact. privately in the text messages and publicly before the house committee. >> rudy giuliani negotiate will be allowed to remain out on bail while facing charges of violating campaign finance laws. a district judge ruled he could rem remain on house arrest despite prosecutors arguing that he concealed assets from the justice department including $1 million he received from a russian oligarch with ties -- >> you're making that up, right? >> with paul manafort. >> come on. you could never put this in a spy novel that this guy got a million dollars bail money. am i right here? with connections to paul manafort. >> this is right out of a spy novel. >> it's quite a story. >> so it's actually a ukrainian oligarch. >> an attorney told nbc news on monday that the money wired from russia was alone given to his wife. however, p

taylor to again ambassador oren stalin and current an ambassador kurt volker borden one thing current i talked about yesterday was sashi don that a senior aide of president zelinsky point that president alinsky is sensitive about ukraine being taken seriously not myriad merely an instrument in washington to mess to reelection politics they'd not only felt the pressure they got the message they were not going to get a white house meeting they were old enough to get military aid unless they furthered president trump's reelection efforts that is a corrupt abuse of power another argument that's made is that trump never said quid pro quo and what you're going to hear is on a call with ambassador solomon after a washington post article came out on september 5th which we will look at after that there was a washington post article that came out that again exposed the ukrainian scheme days after that president trump was on a phone call with ambassador song and without prompting said there was no quid pro quo if he got caught so he's offering his defense but even ambassador solomon in his sworn

taylor, the ambassador at the center of this inquiry" got into with one of the organized crime bosses. and the fact that you have rudy giuliani in business with someone who is taking a loan from one of the most powerful, best connected russian organized crime bosses. and that's not what we're talking about any depths tonight. >> i can't believe you remember remembered all those names, gared. >> he's russianing around and trying to spread conspiracy theories t was ukraine, not russia, that is a win for putten. >> well, that specific cheery came from him already. we know one theory rudy is spreading comes from the kremlin. we know donald trump gets his views from vladimir putin, victor orban. his friends in the autokrats club. garret is a brilliant journalist. but unfortunately i think a lot of people watch having lost track a long time ago and he gums up the works even more. he 3s in more names and parnas's and meanwhile, donald trump is throughout saying we betray a skriptd. whereas we, in the media, are like well, these were two lawyers who worked for this guy who was also connected

a source telling fox news ambassador bill taylor on january 1st believed key of the next day, taylor testified in front of the house intelligence committee in a democrat impeachment probe replacing marie yavanovitch. it is not clear who will replace bill gates. jillian: fighting fake news, facebook will test a new community fact checking system. rob: the company has come under fire for how it handles false content. jillian: how will the program work? >> reporter: a new pilot program will allow part-time contracted workers to be called community reviewers and hopefully the effort is to speed up the process of getting this information off of facebook which they have been criticized for not getting misinformation off of the platform fast enough. how it will work, third-party contractors will corroborate, and potential misinformation. third-party fact checkers would not have any bias. they hope there is no bias when they hire out third-party fact checkers. this is a pilot program and they will see if it works, they will tweak the program or expand it at a time when a lot of social media

beyond that, the trump administration replaced ambassador yovanovitch with ambassador bill taylor, who became one of the first state department officials to voice concerns discussed during the course of our inquiry here. in fact, ambassador taylor played a prominent role in some of the hearings last month. if president trump truly sought to remove ambassador yovanovitch as part of a nefarious plan, he certainly would not have replaced her with someone of the likes of ambassador bill taylor. second, the three u.s. officials who comprised the so-called shadow foreign policy apparatus, ambassador volker, sondland and secretary perry can hardly be called irregular, and certainly not outlandish. all were senior u.s. officials with interest in ukraine policy. the three kept the state department and the nsc informed of their activities. finally, there is evidence that mayor giuliani did not speak on behalf of the president. according to a news story on september 22 pd, mr. yermak asked ambassador volker to connect him with mayor giuliani because the zelensky team was surprised by the mayor's

bill taylor said he was concerned about this and talked to others about it. the witnesses who heard it contemporaneously said it had to deal with a quid pro quo, had to deal with investigations even though president trump said there was no quid pro quo, he said zelensky needed to go out and make a public statement about the investigations. >> what do you think of this? >> calls into the white house are actually logged. the other question is whether or not gordon sondland is actually confused about this call. if there is really only one call. i agree the additional quid pro quo call is not exactly exonerating the president, what happened to the extent the president did say the words, no quid pro quo, he then went on to describe and request a precise quid pro quo. that really does undercut any semblance of a defense here whatsoever. >> go ahead, jeffrey. >> what's wrong with these people? why don't they take notes when they talk to the president of the united states? is that a lot to ask? gordon sondland, this hotel guy is like wandering around the country -- a

at the center of that is the temporary ambassador, bill taylor, who is dealing with both times and himself trying to wonder what was going on. then: that what you said, difference between rudy giuliani and the state department is going to be fascinating to watch as that unfolds as the month and years ahead. switching to north korea, we were talking about this before we came on air. north korea in the news in the 48 hours. bill: they have promised a christmas gift to president trump or the american people. kevin: a good gift or a bad gift? you never know. bill: this is the year when no one wants a gift from north korea. pentagon officials are on high alert watching for any signs of intercontinental ballistic missile launch or any kind of a weapon test. the north koreans have top this up so much over the past month or so that it would almost be, it would be a surprise if they do not do something. kim jong-un gives a big speech every january 1. that will also be something we are analyzing to see whether he talks about recent events or whether he is promising a more pessimistic. carol: you hav

you had bill taylor, top u.s. diplomat in ukraine who testified that he was told ukraine wouldn't get that aid without the investigations. there's gordon sondland, ambassador to the european union, point man for ukraine said e in no uncertain terms yes, there was quid pro quo. and fiona hill, former top white house adviser on russia calling what she saw a domestic political errant. and the second charge, obstruction of congress. house judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler saying a president who declares himself above accountability, above the american people and above congress' power of impeachment, meant to protect against threats to our democratic institutions is the president who sees himself as above the law. democrats infusing president trump and the white house of what they called unprecedented obstruction of congress. democrats issued 71 subpoenas and got back zero documents. and all of these officials were blocked from testifying, including key witnesses. potential witnesses. like the acting white hous

bill taylor, west buoyant, he said it was crazy to withhold military aid for an investigation, all under oath, all with the penalty of perjury. who they offer on the other side? president trump. 14,435 lies to date, since he has been president. not under oath, but we should take his word for it. then it is so absurd because in a call, we know the presidents vocabulary. we know what he doesn't what he does not say. he might say winning a lot, he might say great. but in his ordinary conversation he does not use the words quid pro quo. when he has the conversation after the whistleblower is known to everybody, he gets a call, first thing out of his mouth is i don't want a quid pro quo. where did that come from? it came from the fact that you are guilty of the crime that is charged. just like a kid who just got caught going into the cookie jar, with crumbs on his mouth, when his mother says what are you doing. he says i did need that cookie. we have a call out of the blue in the first thing he says is i don't want a quid pro quo, i want them to do the right thing. no you would not have held

bill taylor told us president trump established an irregular channel process through rudy giuliani and other witnesses told us russia, not ukraine, russia interfered in the 2016 election. heard if from fiona hill and others. several told us this was a quid pro quo. volker, direct quid pro quo by text and the famous phone call july 256th holmes overheard when trump asked about the ukrainian investigations and finally we learned from fiona hill that what donald trump was having all of these people do was what she determined memorably a domestic political around. not in the best interests of the united states. article 2 tedeals with obstructn of justice and the president's view about responding from subpoenas from congress. >> we're fighting all the subpoenas. i have an article 2, where i have the right to do whatever i want as president. >> so there it is. donald trump gave us his strategy straight up. he's fighting all the subpoenas and indeed we learned yesterday during the hearing that the house democrats have served 71 subpoenas or information requests. they have received zero docume

arriving after the top diplomat there, bill taylor who testified in the impeachment inquiry was encouraged to leave his post. and as we learn new details about the white house efforts to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars of military aid to ukraine to at least in part push ukraine to commence an investigation that might help president trump political has admitted in emails obtained by the "new york times" mulvaney asked about with holding the aid nearly a month before that now infamous trump/ukraine conversation and only to be cautioned by one to say expect congress to become unhinged and a known meeting with top security officials trying to convince him to release the aid arguing it was in the best interest of the united states, ome -- only to be rebuffed by a defiant president trump. kaitlan collins looks at this failed pressure campaign and what this might mean for the impeachment trial in the senate. >> reporter: president trump is starting his second week in florida at his west palm beach golf course today but although he is miles away from washington, impeachment is still at th

ambassador to ukraine, bill taylor. his testimony in the impeachment inquiry led president trump to call taylor a never trumper. now a source telling cnn the timing of his departure in kiev may be more than a coincidence. taylor is set to leave ukraine just as secretary of state mike pompeo is heading over there for a visit. coincidence. >> we understand that taylor has been asked to hand offer his duties and is set to leave the embassy on january 2an. this request according to a source telling cnn come from a close aide to secretary of state mike pompeo. now the state department hasn't yet released or revealed when pompeo is going to be over there in kiev according to the "wall street journal" he is going to be there on the 3rd and 4th of january. taylor will be leaving the day before pompeo is expected to show up. this would have been put pompeo in a tough position politically. he doesn't want to be seen with a guy who testified against president trump saying there was quid pro quo. he wants to stay in trump's good gr

republican, democrat, sometimes over the course of 20 years, as bill taylor did, asthmary yovanovitch did. people who view them as very apolitical, to say that they're essentially hacks who have nothing but an interest in unseating this president, i found it striking, too, if i could merge our two themes. chris wray, the fbi director, said in defending the criticism that the ig leveled really came in with against them. it is an affront to these people who are professionals, who work with rigor and care and lots and lots of unpaid hours. it's an insult to call them that. the facts that come out don't match with what the administration wants to hear. >> mike, outline for our viewers what trump and bar are distorting about what the inspector general actually said. >> barr is taking on the issue of whether the fbi cleared the threshold to open up such an important investigation. and barr is saying the fbi, in his view, should have needed more to do this to go to this extreme level, to look at the connections between four campaign officials and russia. barr is putting a lot of weight and e

but we have testimony from both the nsc's tim morrison and also ambassador bill taylor, we're told about this call the day it happened. you have trump talking to sondland and then sondland calls morrison. the president said, he wants no quid pro quo, but he wants president zelensky to go to the microphone and announce investigations. and we have the same thing and he once again says, i talk to the president, the president wants zelensky to go in front of the microphone and say what's happening. then he tells taylor, i talked to zelensky, and zelensky told me he'll do it, he'll go in front of a cnn interview and announce what he said he would. >> you're really looking at it through the eyes of a lawyer and parsing all of this information. and so what you describe in your piece is a phone call -- even if the president says no quid pro quo, he's describing a quid pro quo. i'm not saying that, but what i'm saying is -- >> you can't commit a crime and say, by the way, it's not a crime. what he described was a quid pro quo. sondland is calling it preconditions. we have morrison saying it was r

. >>> in recent weeks career diplomats like ambassadors marie yovanovitch and bill taylor have testified about how a smear campaign with a financial and partisan motivation overtook american foreign policy in ukraine. our next guest reports it doesn't end there. quote, trump is waging war on america's diplomats as the title of the piece in the current gq magazine. it begins with the story of a foreign service officer in the london embassy claiming he was punished after praising president obama during a public event. back with us tonight, we are so pleased to have the aforementioned julia ioffe, correspondent for gq. julia, after the first three career public servants appeared at the hearing, donald trump jr. said this on twitter. america hired donald trump to fire people like the first three witnesses we've seen. career government bureaucrats and nothing more. and so i ask you, what must it be like for the folks doing their jobs to have their very job and their career choice under fire by the president and his henchmen and women? >> you know, to donald trump jr.'s point, at least the gov

and in the open hearings that the house intelligence committee had when asked george kent, to bill taylor, to marie ivan vich, are you aware of any crimes, bribery, extortion, none of them had anything. case-by-case, the depositions that were taking place or the open hearings, throughout, the entire case is actually in dispute, but they're so invested in this narrative to try to take down the president that they won't see the forest for the trees. i'll give you one example. the president zelinsky says no demand, no pressure, no quid pro quo. the first version that adam schiff uses that meeting that took place in warsaw is not accurate. that's from the ukrainian side. we heard it from the u.s. officials and the ukrainian officials but pelosi, schiff, nadler, they keep saying the facts are uncontested. they're wrong. >> i think the most revealing comment came from nancy pelosi i believe last week. she said we didn't rush it through, we've been working on this for 2 1/2 years. that's revealing in itself. i want to move on to other topics because i think the impeachment talk in some regards i

for example, you, jovanovich, bill taylor, alexander vindman, jennifer williams, vice presidents advisor, they conclude he engaged to intimidate these public servants to keep them from participating impeachment inquiries. i think you and other analysts on the day that jovanovich testified that he seized on this report. >> dana: let me ask you about that. be that as it may, if they felt intimidated and some of them said that they did it, is that impeachable? is that something that you should remove a president for? >> obstruction of justice is. if you are trying to reach a standard of much and it, is this a man that felt that he was under assault and was trying to do everything he could do. are you stretching or reaching for an obstruction charge? obstruction is literally one of the potential charges, dana. >> dana: let me ask you about zooming out to the bigger picture politics for nancy pelosi. that's a question i put to newt gingrich this hour. if she doesn't move forward with impeachment and the full force of all that they can bring, if she pushes too hard that she risks losing the ma

taylor, but i didn't know institutionally on how much they have been degraded. and here's this passage that i think is so interesting. the new russia adviser at the white house, the third in just six months has no meaningful background on the subject. i mean, what's the point of having a russia adviser with no meaningful background in russia? >> well, i mean, there's a couple levels to this. there's been a war on expertise by donald trump because expertise challenges him. he goes by his gut and what he thinks. and what people present real evidence to him, he wants them out of the room. so that's happened. and i also think -- i have this vision of the republican party as sort of donald trump and mike pence as thelma and louise driving the party off the cliff. they were a party that for so long was known for being tough on communism, tough on russia. free trade, anti-protectionism. and now you've got this swing back to social conservativism that is so much at odds with the demographic changes going on in this country. you know, with millennials, they can be person

taylor, is now being ordered to leave ukraine. in other words, this is far from over. there is still a lot we don't know, which highlights the need for new witnesses at trump's senate trial. there are 41 witnesses at andrew johnson's trial, three at bill clinton's. >> republican house managers told the senate they have a witness list, finally naming names. president clinton's friend vernon jordan, sidney blumenthal and monica lewinsky. >> the senate laid down the law today. house prosecutors can persuade the senate to call witness, but only a few, and only if they can add to the case to convict the president. >> in fact, republican senators back then felt they needed witness, including some who will be voting on trump's fate. now like susan collins. >> i need witnesses and further evidence to guide me to the right destination to get to the truth. >> with me now, former acting u.s. solicitor general neal katyal. his new book "impeach: the case against donald trump." and just minutes ago he published a new op-ed in "the washington p

. >>> in recent weeks career diplomats like ambassadors marie yovanovitch and bill taylor have testified about how a smear campaign with a financial and partisan motivation overtook american foreign policy in ukraine. our next guest reports it doesn't end there. quote, trump is waging war on america's diplomats as the title of the piece in the current gq magazine. it begins with the story of a foreign service officer in the london embassy claiming he was punished after praising president obama during a public event. back with us tonight, we are so pleased to have the aforementioned julia yaffe, correspondent for gq. jul julia, after the first three career public cervantes appeared at the hearing, crump donald trump jr. said this on twitter. america hired donald trump to fire people like the first three witnesses we've seen. career government bureaucrats and nothing more. and so i ask you, what must it be like for the folks doing their jobs to have their very job and their career choice under fire by the president and his henchmen and women? >> you know, to donald trump jr.'s point, at le

diplomat in ukraine is leaving his post, bill taylor who recently testified before the house in the impeachment inquiry plans to leave his post by the end of the year. the future plans with the state department not immediately clear, nor was a permanent replacement named. he was serving as the acting ambassador to ukraine after the last senate confirmed a ambassar marie yovanovitch was fired in may. harvey weinstein is asking a judge to put a hold on his civil case as he deals with deteriorating health and criminal charges. he has been you accused of inappropriate sexual behavior by more than 80 women. and that is what's happening now. lauren: thank you very much, tracee. let's take a look at your futures this morning. any gain today is obviously another record for the major averages this morning, up for day number six, small gains but dow still in the green, 24 points to the upside, nasdaq up by 9. still ahead, capitalism still winning with voters but socialism is also on the rise and it's not just because of millennials. we'll tell you why when "fbn: a.m." returns. ♪ put me on a highway. â™

republican, democrat, sometimes over the course of 20 years, as bill taylor did, as mashie yo n jovanovyovan 0 0ovich did. people who view them as very apolitical, to say that they're essentially hacks who have nothing but an interest in v unseating this president, i t found it striking, too, if i could merge our two themes. chris wray, the fbi director, said in defending the criticism that the ig leveled really came in with against them. it is an affront to these people who are professionals, who work with rigor and care and lots and lots of unpaid hours. it's an insult to call them that.un and yet, that's what we're seeing all the time, every time the facts that come out don't match withom what the administration wants to hear. >> hey, mike, outline for our viewerse what trump and barr a distorting about what the inspector general actually said. >> well, barr's taking on the issue of whether the fbi cleared the threshold to open up such an important investigation. and barr is saying the fbi, in his view, should have needed more to do this to go to this extreme level, to look at the connect

this was one from bill taylor to ambassador gordon sondland and ambassador kurt volker. one thing kurt and i talked about yesterday was the senior aide of president zelensky, the point that president zelensky is sensitive about ukraine being taken seriously, not merely an instrument in washington domestic re-election politics. they not only felt the pressure, they got the message. they were ultimately not going to get military aid unless they furthered president trump's re-election efforts. that is a corruptle abuse of power. another argument that's made is that trump never said quid pro quo. and what you're going to hear is on ad call with ambassador sondland after a "washington post" article came out a september 5th, which we will look at. after that there was a "washington post" article that came out that elks spoezed the ukrainian scheme. days after that president trump was on a phone call with ambassador sondland and without prompting said there was no quid pro quo. because he got caught, so he's offering his defense. but even ambassador sondland in his sworn testim