ferent kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. call, click, or visit a store today. an announcement before we go. nbc news will co-host the fifth democratic presidential debate alongside "the washington post," november 20th in georgia. the specific location will be announced at a later date. meanwhile, "the beat with ari melber" starts now. >> thanks, chuck. the administration blocked a key witness from testifying at the last minute, a huge story. we have it for you. house democrats clearly have trump on the defense. that may explain why republicans are trying to get in on the action. in the senate, they're now pressing, of all people, rudy giuliani to testify to a republican committee. but why?

we'll get into that later as well. we have of course a whistle-blower scandal unfolding in america. and tonight we have something special for you later this hour. i'm going to tell you this. we'll be joined by someone you have almost certainly heard of, one of the most famous pioneeripioneer ing leakers in history, daniel ellsberg. but our top story begin with the new battle lines in this impeachment probe. late today the white house uncorked its lengthiest and most legal response to the probe. they're sending an eight-page letter to speaker nancy pelosi, detailing a first draft of the strategy. it's an explanation with some legalese of why the white house says they're in the right to defy most of this probe and are accusing the democrats of, get this, using impeachment oversight for 2020. meanwhile, the democrat who has

been the face of this whole fight, house intelligence chair adam schiff, is calling a new move by the trump administration, quote, strong evidence of obstruction. that would be another article of impeachment. trump's state department ordering a key witness in the inquiry not to testify at all to face democrats in the house. this is someone you've probably heard about, ambassador to the eu gordon sondland. when you get a sense of how much of this is being made up on the fly, mr. sondland was flying to washington from brussels. he was ready to testify. this was clearly last minute. and it was going to be behind closed doors, kind of a substantive thing. then he was blocked by the trump state department. house democrats say they'll subpoena sondland, so this fight only increases. meanwhile, secretary of state mike pompeo refusing to answer questions, on a day like today, with impeachment hitting a 10,

why wouldn't you let mr. sondland testify? >> reporter: will you allow him to testify? >> thanks a lot, good morning. >> that is what it looks like when you just walk away to duck questions. congressman schiff is saying the state department is also withholding key information that sondland has. >> we're also aware that the ambassador has text messages or mal emails on a personal device which were provided to the state department. we have requested those from the ambassador and the state department is withholding those messages as well. >> "the new york times" also out with a story about a white house official saying, remember, this is someone who works for donald trump, this thing was, quote, crazy and frightening. having witnessed the president of the united states, according to "the times," engage in

criminal activity. there are text messages between these people that have not been fully released to the public yet. another thing about the texts that have been released, sondland was at the center of that exchange with ambassador bill taylor. he was the one who famously put in writing something to protect himself perhaps but also to call out what we now know is a potential road to impeachment kind of act, that it was, quote, crazy to link the ukraine assistance to what donald trump wanted, investigating the bidens. sondland spoke to trump on the phone during that crucial five-hour gap between those texts, because he was then the one who after speaking to donald trump, sent the very defensive text claiming that trump was crystal clear, there was no quid pro quo. i want to get right to our panel now. john flannery, who worked with the democrats during impeachment. david priest, an intelligence briefer at state who was privy to some of these readouts and

call evidence. he is the author of "how to get rid of a president." and katrina mulligan who represented the doj in the national security council process and now works at the center for american progress. david, what do you see as significant and what unfolded today? >> what we see is the president's team trying to throw everything at the wall to see what sticks. that's not new. what's new is that it's escalated. now it's an official white house letter saying all of impeachment is invalid, you can't do this. but they have a fundamental problem, which is it's in the constitution. this is a legitimate function of congress. and trying to say that the entire inquiry is invalid doesn't really hold water, at best it's a stalling tactic. the other thing is politically how the white house is leaving republicans out to dry, because guess what, you're trying to say at the heart of this is something that's not a pamela, there was no quid pro quo, this was okay to do.

on the other hand you're not allowing to anybody to testify about it. if nothing is wrong with it, you should want them to testify and explain why it's okay. you're undermining the arguments republicans are going to have to make when they vote against impeachment when it come up. >> you're laying it out, and john flannery, this is the letter from the white house that just came into the newsroom. to david's point, this letter doesn't come on a great day for them, doesn't come on a calm day or a day when they look organized. it comes on the day when they yanked the guy who, to be clear, was defending the president in those texts. >> their policy is to lie and delay. they've done it in various ways, entirely inconsistent, and none of it has worked. unlike the barr situation where he characterized falsely what was the mueller report, we have the documents this time. we have the conversation that the president had with zelensky. we have rudy giuliani's own

statements on the air. we have these messages going back and forth including the one of the charge daffaires and taylor. so i think that what we have is -- and this document they have doesn't have any legal arguments. in the case of impeachment, you are entitled to have a good faith objection. >> i have to push back, john, it had some legal arguments in it. it's from the white house counsel and it's making an array of arguments, some of them are legal, in trying to argue that they haven't formally procedurally begun the impeachment probe. that might be news to americans who feel like they have, which makes it a legal argument, that it's in the weeds. >> to say it's legal when the congress can start an impeachment just based on a hearing by a committee and doesn't have to have any formal

proceeding, and indeed the constitution requires none, makes that sounding like a legal argument but not one at all. it's kind of ironic for the white house to be talking to due process when they're ignoring due process all the time in the interrelationship between the executive branch and the house of representatives, just as was the case in richard nixon's administration, and it became one of the articles of impeachment. and we're told today we're on the way to doing that in this case. >> let read to katrina for your national security expertise, there was a conversation under way with white house lawyers about how to handle the discussion, because they viewed this, the president had clearly committed a criminal act by urging a foreign power to investigate a u.s. person to advance his reelection bid. what's your interpretation of what we're learning there from the national security experience you have, katrina? >> well, i think the important

thing to remember here is that all of these people work for the american people and for america. they don't work for donald trump. and despite that, what it seems like has happened to me and time again at each step of the way, we learn that people are acting in the interests of the president, even going so far as to violate the interests of the american people and our national security in the process. >> so what do you think about this reporting? does that sound to you like something they're qualified to say? have you ever seen a situation like that where the staff in the white house think that contact with a foreign official was a criminal act? >> i've certainly never seen that. and i think like many things that we're starting to see, this is a bit unprecedented. but to be sure, everybody involved had a duty to report, to potentially, you know, seek a criminal referral, to investigate, and disclose. and what we've seen everybody do is exactly the opposite that

have. >> which is interesting, given what you've done. david, listen to secretary of state mike pompeo's claims this weekend about what is appropriate here. >> i feel pressure, when i talk to your foreign minister, he pressures me all the time. it's totally appropriate. right? isn't that right? yeah, it's totally right. go ahead and say it, you can admit it, it's okay. it's completely right. nations do this. nations work together and they say, boy, goodness gracious, if you can help me with "x," we'll help you achieve "w." this is what partnerships do. it's win/win. >> david, as a nonpartisan matter, given your cia experience, is that right? >> pompeo is not wrong. he's not wrong about the fact that diplomacy is about give and take, it's about quid pro quo, you do this for my country, we'll do this for your country, or if you do this, we won't do this. that's good government. that's diplomacy.

there's a fundamental difference between that and what we're talking about here. usually that is done in service of national service. usually things are worked out through a national security appro process. it need not be, it can be done through the whim of a president, if it's for a national security interest. but this is done for a personal interest, not the national interest of the united states. that's the difference between diplomacy and an impeachable act. >> did we get to yes or no, is pompeo right or wrong? >> pompeo's right that that is what diplomacy is. pompeo's wrong that in this case that is what is applying, because it's not traditional diplomacy. >> john? >> we're overlooking the facts of the case, which is that we had decided as a matter of our policy to give enormous amounts of funds to ukraine to protect itself from russia. and the president, on july the

18th, put a freeze on those funds just before his july 25th call, and he made it very clear that those funds weren't coming until he got what he wanted. it required the senate to cut off the budget for the pentagon in order to release those funds to protect ukraine from putin who is the puppeteer, if you will, for our tragic president, mr. trump. >> i've got breaking news right now. i've just been handed the official subpoena. this is from the democrats acting in very quick manner from what they threatened earlier today. they have subpoenaed ambassador sondland. this was the person we mentioned at the very top of the broadcast who was yanked at the last minute from providing testimony. i want to bring back in our panel. john, as an adviser to congressional investigations, i know you would agree this is even faster than unusual. high read briefly from it for your analysis. it says, pursuant to the

impeachment inquiry we're transmitting this subpoena. you must appear october 16th and produce the accompanying documents. what does that mean? >> they regret sending a simple request. i bet you they decided, we treat you well and you do this. i have reservations about sondland's statement, oh, i wanted to appear. he had several conversations with the president. neither one of of them wanted them to appear and talk about those things. i don't know what he's going to do or what's going to try to assert. i hope the committee, if he doesn't appear, that they use their inherent powers to force him to testify or sit in custody somewhere. i worry sometimes that we democrats may be too easy on these things. this is a time for warriors. i don't mean this in a terrible way. we have to look at how they're treating us. we have data points that show us they're not dealing straight. they don't want to cooperate.

they think the president is a king, a monarchical individual who can do what he wants. that is not our inheritance from the founding fathers. we're on notice that they don't care for our constitution or our laws and they'll do anything to keep him in office. >> a strong rebuke there on a day when, again, for folks just joining us, the democrats have made good on their threat in saying they are subpoenaing mr. sondland. katrina, we put together the available public evidence. it's rare that we would all agree to have a secret foreign policy type phone call between heads of state spill out into the public in a matter of months, have the call notes, have the president making admissions. it's striking to have them pulling back mr. sondland because a lot of this is already known, and maybe that's why the white house is in free fall or is struggling. you have the assertion that the version was about biden and his

son. and the white house notes say trump himself says, a lot to talk about biden's son, whatever you can do with ag barr would be great. then in the whistle-blower complaint, they say the request was to speak with giuliani and attorney general barr about this plot. nun in t then in the white house's own notes, katrina, he says, if you could speak to attorney general barr, that would be great. what is the significance to you about the credibility of the whistle-blower and really the limited ability of mr. sondland when and if he does testify to rebut some of this if it's that consistent? >> i mean, you've hit it on the head. the whistle-blower's credibility is well-established at this point. virtually every fact detailed in the whistle-blower complaint has proven to be truer corroborated by information that was released by the white house, corroborated

by statements by the president's personal attorney, by the president himself. at this point it's really -- there's almost nothing there to impugn the integrity or credibility of the whistle-blow whistle-blow whistle-blow whistle-blower whatsoever. >> we started with this white house letter and it got hit back by the united states house democrats with this subpoena for this key witness, all unfolding in the last hour. john, david, katrina, thank you so much. coming up, republicans now, in a whole different story we haven't gotten to yet, say they want giuliani to testify under oath. reports of a paranoid president trump talking about polygraphs for his staff. and daniel ellsberg of the pentagon papers is on "the beat" tonight. stay tuned. i'm ari melber and we'll be right back. and we'll be right back dinner's almost ready.

but one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with our renters insurance. yeah, switching and saving was really easy! drink it all up. good! could have used a little salt. visit geico.com and see how easy saving on renters insurance can be. plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants. ♪ this seat? this seat is reserved for the restless. those who need to move.

and roar. and ride. up, down, over. powering through. this seat is for those that get down in it. into the fray. the arena. this seat is not for spectators. ♪ gladiator ( ♪ ) ♪ gladiator you should be mad that this is your daily commute. you should be mad at people who forget they're in public. and you should be mad at simple things that are unnecessarily complicated. but you're not mad, because you're trading with e*trade, which isn't complicated. their app makes trading quick and simple so you can strike when the time is right. don't get mad, get e*trade and start trading today. it's just the way things are.

when you're under pressure to get the job done, it seems you have to accept the fact that some equipment will sit idle, or underutilized. but it doesn't have to be that way. that's why united rentals is combining equipment, data, safety and expertise to help your worksite perform better. united rentals. a better worksite is here. 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. call, click, or visit a store today. welcome back on a busy news night. we now turn to the material that could determine whether president trump is impeached. documents, evidence, receipts. i'm talking about the things that establish what donald trump did and whether congress determines what he did is a high crime, an impeachable offense. the battle over this evidence would normally be high stakes. but trump admitted to the core

of the plot against biden and released the call notes about it. so it's striking to see the white house today blocking a key witness from testifying even though he already turned over private messages to the state department. "the new york times" reporting that move signals a white house plan to stonewall the impeachment inquiry. meanwhile moments ago democrats have a new subpoena for that very witness's testimony. this is all about facts. trump admitted some damning facts but it appears his team is more worried that there could be more witness testimony that makes it even worse, as one of the democratic leaders of the impeachment inquiry, adam schiff, said today. >> by preventing us from hearing from this witness and obtaining these documents, the president and secretary of state are taking actions that prevent us from getting the facts needed to protect the nation's security. >> today's battle over testimony follows a string of officials that the white house is preventing from cooperating with these lawful subpoenas. you see them here.

this goes beyond ukraine. did you know that just today trump's doj lawyers were in court trying to hold back key information from mueller's russia probe? there are some valid reasons and privileges for holding back information, to be sure. but as we've been reporting, the white house is now trying to hold back what you see on your screen, all this information across basically every major department. and whether or not congress is right to warn that that could technically be obstruction, that's a debate, think about, before you even get to obstruction, the most obvious problem for donald trump here. all of this suggests that the facts don't help him when it comes to this alleged abuse of power. it suggests the evidence will hurt him. it suggests he fears the receipts will bury him. we're not just reporting on that as an inference. i pressed this very point to the president's lawyer himself, jay sekulow, in our interview last night. you think the facts are ultimately on your side. >> i do. >> if that's true, if the facts and evidence are on your side,

let me put up on the screen all of the different individuals who have been stonewalling the congress in this investigation. why withhold the evidence? forget "stonewall." >> because it doesn't affect this case. it affects the office of the presidency of the united states. >> okay. that's an answer. that is the privilege argument. and that does not explain hiding this evidence from so many different people, let alone ambassador sondland today, who, and you don't need me to tell you this but to be as logical as possible, who is obviously not the president. so you don't have that presidential privilege argument. and his texts were trying to defend trump. if you're afraid of the guy who is defending you, if you're afraid of what the guy defending you is going to say, that means you're more afraid of something beyond just encroachments on presidential legal privileges. you may be afraid of the

receipts. or as andre graham says, what's that, facts. leah, david, nice to see both of you. i'll ask you what comes next when we're back in 30 seconds. i'll ask you what comes next when we're back in 30 seconds. new pasta and grill combos starting at $9.99. only at applebee's. pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. as promised, we're back with former editor of "foreign policy" mack david rothkopff. lindsey graham has invited rudy giuliani to testify before the

senate judiciary committee. professor, i go to you first. what does it tell you that there is such resistance to having certain people testify and what do you see in the rudy gambit? >> well, ari, you started us off with a drake quote. it's only fair that i respond with one, that this is go from zero to one real quick. the administration has made it very clear they have no intention of cooperating, they have no interest in cooperating, and, you know, their plan is essentially to stonewall, moving forward. >> i feel like what you're getting at has started from ukraine and now we're here. >> all the way, all the way. >> wait until david gets involved. but go on. you're saying this really does reveal bigger problems to come? >> it does. it also indicates, in some senses, it's essentially pressing the democrats' position. it's suggesting and saying, you

know what, you wanted to do an inquiry, you wanted to do an investigation, i'm saying we're not cooperating with the investigation, which leaves them with very few options. they can press this and say we're going to wring our hands and pull our hair out, or they can actually move ahead, so they can do things like hold republicans and contempt or witnesses in contempt. also they can move ahead with this impeachment inquiry. so it feels like we're moving very rapidly into not just a stalemate but a face-off of sorts. >> david, as someone who knows foreign policy well, it can be complicated. there can be more than one nuance and shading. this doesn't look that complicated anymore. >> this case doesn't look complicated. the president's evidence, the evidence he's put in, has already said that he asked for a favor, that he withheld something until that favor was provided. and in fact even before that, there was a quid pro quo before the quid pro quo, because they said he couldn't have a phone

conversation with the president of ukraine until he would agree to deal with this stuff. so the case is very clear on the basis of the evidence that's there. the problem is, as was just described, we're heading rapidly towards a constitutional crisis. we're heading rapidly towards the point where the president says i don't believe in the legitimacy of the congress to do this, i don't believe in past precedent, leave me alone. and somewhere this is going to have to be tested. in a court, by the congress taking an action and putting somebody, you know, in jail as a consequence of it, or not. i think that's the game the trump administration is playing. >> you say that, and since we're here, we just got this, as i've been emphasizing, within the last hour or so, this is the new white house letter. i'm reading from it. it says there's no legitimate basis for your, quote, impeachment inquiry. the white house is putting impeachment inquiry in scare

quotes like it's not a thing. then they say, actually it's the committee's actions that raise serious questions, which is an old trick we've heard, david, investigate the investigators. you're saying you see a crisis afoot because of the way they're handling this. >> of course, because the constitution doesn't give the executive branch the right to make the decision on impeachment. the constitution gives that solely to the congress. and history gives the right of congress to pursue this thing. and what the executive branch is doing is essentially throwing up everything they can but it's all lies, it's all fabrications. what they believe is that they can stall, and that maybe some court, perhaps the supreme court, at some point might rule in their favor. they also know that this congress thus far has taken it a little easy on them. it hasn't pushed them hard, it hasn't given consequences for not cooperating. and i think that's where we've got to go very quickly. and the speed with which this subpoena was issued today is a sign that maybe they're turning

up the gas a little. >> i definitely notice that as well, which goes to how this one is different, which has been a theme in some of the facts we've been assembling. leah, when we spoke to the president's lawyer jay sekulow last night, people say, why interview these people? well, you can learn new things that they would not necessarily give out in other venues, so it's not in the press release, it's not in the tweet. andives ab ive was able to pres sekulow, when did you learn about this, the ukraine plot? he didn't want to go there and said, i only learned about it when it came public. i think that's part of why we're seeing this make up strategies on the fly. take a look. >> it was out of my jurisdiction, not anything i was engaged in. >> when did you learn rudy giuliani was asking foreign governments to investigate joe biden? >> you know, i learned i guess when you did. that was not in my jurisdiction. >> i'm asking you when you did.

you don't know when i learned it. >> i didn't know anything about it until it became public. >> when it spilled into the public reporting? >> yeah. >> leah, you have one lawyer in giuliani who is an actually agent of the plot, whether it's an impeachable offense is yet to be seen. but as you can see in these letters, it's a little late to learn about all this when you're dealing with an existential threat to the presidency. >> right. i think part of it goes to two different things. the first is that the president is an agent of chaos and has been an agent of chaos since the second he set foot in the white house, probably even before that, meaning that he does as he sees fit without regard for rule, without regard for law, without regard for precedent and history. so there's constantly a game of catch-up and plotting around him. we've heard stories of people

intervening to ensure that these things the president wants to do on a whim aren't criminal, that they are legal. so we're seeing the consequences that have kind of environment. number two, this speaks to a little bit of the chaos on the side of the cleanup team, that the strategy right now is, let's throw everything against the wall, see what sticks, and hopefully something will come out that will allow to us persist and/or the democrats actually don't have the backbone to act on this. you're seeing these two things intersect. but this has been the case from the beginning, how do you deal with the consequences of a president, an executive branch, that does as it ceasees fit and congress that hasn't held that president accountable until right now. >> and you said, quote, cleanup team, which raises the question whether the thing that i'm about to play that you're going to see

from a member of that team can be described, in the case of mr. giuliani, as cleaning up anything. >> did you ask the ukraine to investigate joe biden? >> no. >> so you did ask ukraine to look into joe biden? >> of course i did. >> all right, rudy, hold that thought. >> 20 years of a washington press corps that was -- i say, brother, cut it out, damn it, as opposed to, i don't know about it, i didn't hear it, and you all buy that. bull. >> we have the transcript of the call. >> shh. >> i mean, what can you say? >> you know what you can say, today lindsey graham did something that the democrats were happy with. lindsey graham said, i want to get rudy up here on the hill, i want to have rudy testify in

front of the senate judiciary committee. >> to do more of that? >> that's the thing, the democrats must be going, okay, get this guy up here, he is a hot mess. if he comes out and he starts to talk like he does there, and then you combine that with some tough questioning from some of the people on the senate judiciary committee, this is going to be a disaster for the president. >> i wonder what you think, leah, in closing, of david ace point. as frustrating as many people find the farce, if he does some of that same farce under oath, if the cuomo interview were under oath, it would likely be perjury because of the false statements in it. >> so it remains to be seen how far rudy giuliani is willing to go to protect the president. it's quite clear that he's not, you know, willing to protect other people in the fold. but his bread and butter right now is the president. one of the things i will say that is becoming quite apparent

is that in addition to kind of going out there and being mr. destructive, mr. chaos agent, rudy giuliani trying to save his own skin, there is also an element of giuliani that is dedicated to trying to change the narrative around what we're talking about. >> sure. >> so all of this focus on biden, biden, biden, and emphasizing that the scandal is really about biden, to the point that the public is hearing this over and over again, one wonders what he would do if he is in front of congress and is testifying and perhaps testifying in televised hearings, and it's an opportunity for him to, you know, use this kind of platform for misinformation, for disinformation, and to try and change the narrative again back to biden as opposed to president trump which is where it should be. >> i have to compliment you both, at your incredible judgment in your silence, because i'm sure you could have said things that were harsher than your silence in reaction to some of the giuliani hits.

david and leah, thanks to both of you. >> thank you. up ahead, donald trump has this obsession with polygraphs. he wants to plug the leaks. all of this part of the freakout over impeachment pressure. and tonight, the whistle-blower who divulged vietnam secrets in the pentagon papers, daniel ellsberg is here on "the beat." ...is more horsepower. (engines rev) if we were for everyone, we'd be for no one. with dodge power dollars, more power means more cash allowance. purchase now and get $10 per horsepower. that's $7,970 on the srt challenger hellcat redeye. tthe bad news? ouyour patience might not.ay. new depend® fit-flex underwear offers your best comfort and protection guaranteed. because, perfect or not, life's better when you're in it.

be there with depend®. tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management. to help you grow and protect your wealth. steven could only imaginem 24hr to trenjoying a spicy taco.burn, now, his world explodes with flavor. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day all-night protection. can you imagine 24-hours without heartburn? pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. you get more than yourfree shipping.ir, you get everything you need for your home at a great price, the way it works best for you, i'll take that. wait honey, no. when you want it.

you get a delivery experience you can always count on. you get your perfect find at a price to match, on your own schedule. you get fast and free shipping on the things that make your home feel like you. that's what you get when you've got wayfair. so shop now!

let's take a step back and actually consider one thing most people in washington agree on right now. donald trump's closer to impeachment tonight than he was last month or last year or really any other time. we know that from the whip count. here's another thing that most people agree on. it's not because of bob mueller or nancy pelosi, who long resisted this trump. donald trump is closer to impeachment right now because of this anonymous whistle-blower who took a major risk working within the system and the law to

warn his or her bosses in the intelligence department and ultimately congress about this now-exposed ukraine plot. these leakers take major risks to their career or even more. now when you have a formal whistle-blower like this, it's not a conventional leak. remember, he or she didn't leak to the press. he or she followed the rules and federal law. other misconduct has been exposed by leaks. there's great debate over when it is acceptable to blow the when i felt or leak. one of america's most famous leak certificates of course daniel ellsberg. he upended the vietnam war with the pentagon papers leak when lend to a landmark supreme court case which protected the right to publish certain leaks. ellsberg is a fitting person to talk to tonight. i just spoke to him and he spoke about how risky it is to challenge a president. >> i nevertheless congratulate

this whistle-blower on the success that they've had so far in getting that information out, and on the courage that she showed or he showed in taking this on. even following the rules, to challenge a president for wrongdoing is not safe, either physically or legally, and i hope that the democrats in congress in the house will take every precaution to keep her identity or his identity secret from the president. >> we asked mr. ellsberg about donald trump's action and public threats against this whistle-blower, including compared with other presidents. >> i don't think any of the previous presidents put a target on the back of the whistle-blower calling to armed and violent constituents in some cases to say that that person should be treated before trial, before due process, anything else, as a spy or a traitor.

he is calling for physical attack, i would say i think that's an impeachable offense or criminal offense in itself. >> an impeachable or criminal offense, very interesting from someone who has been through these issues to the point of creating precedents that remain to this day. as part of our reporting, we want to point out that of course many leakers pay huge penalties. consider a formal cia employee named john kieriakou. he publicly discussed tactics like torture and waterboarding, then was convicted later of providing the identity of an undercover officer to a journalist who ultimately, we should note, didn't publish the name. mr. kieriakou spend two years in prison. i spoke to him, and he spoke about donald trump calling the whistle-blower a spy and how dangerous it is. >> this is a very, very

dangerous thing that he's doing. when i blew the when i felt on the cia's torture program, i got what the fbi called three credible death threats. i actually had to take my family and leave town where to week. when you have the president of the united states joking, maybe, maybe not joking, about death penalty offenses for someone reporting waste, fraud, abuse, or illegality, i think that's very tadangerous tack to take. >> that comes from somebody who paid a price for leaking to be sure. house democrats are trying to protect the whistle-blower's identity from what they call trump's allies who may try to expose the whistle-blowers. i asked keiriakou if whistle-blowers need to worry about retaliation. do you think they have to worry about being improperly charged? >> i do think they have to

worry. it's improper and inappropriate that they have to worry. if you see any of that, any of that fraud or illegality, you are compelled by law and by your oath to go to the authorities. any whistle-blower or potential whistle-blower really does have to take into account that this whole thing may fall apart and you may find yourself behind bars even if you believe you did the right thing. >> you could find yourself behind bars. whatever you think of why people do these things, that may be chilling for people in government. but that's not really the dark note we end on, having consulted these famous people who made these hard calls and didn't know how it was going to turn out. i want to leave you with something daniel ellsberg also told me tonight. it's his advice for people in government right now who might be concerned about president trump's ongoing conduct. what do you, daniel ellsberg, say to these now two whistle-blowers out there tonight? >> i congratulate them. what i would like to speak to is

the people who, like me, kept their mouths shut when they knew the president was doing wrong. i learned better oncive ive was vietnam and learned what the stakes are. >> do you think there are others in the trump administration? >> i'm absolutely sure. for one thing, the whistle-blower revealed there were more than a dozen people on that program, on that call. this president is turning out to be a domestic enemy of the constitution. every one of them should be a whistle-blower right now. and it's not too late. ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪

walkabout wednesdays are back! get a sirloin or chicken on the barbie, fries, and a draft beer or coca-cola - all for just $10.99. hurry in! wednesdays are for outback. outback steakhouse. aussie rules.

tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management. to help you grow and protect your wealth. dealing with psoriatic arthritis pain was so frustrating. ♪ my skin... it was embarrassing. my joints... they hurt. the pain and swelling. the tenderness. the psoriasis. i had to find something that worked on all of this. i found cosentyx. now, watch me. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are getting real relief with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. cosentyx treats more than just the joint pain

of psoriatic arthritis. it even helps stop further joint damage. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms. if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. i got real relief. i got clearer skin and feel better. now, watch me. get real relief with cosentyx. great weather, great friends. you just saved a bunch of money by switching your boat insurance to geico. it was easy. folks, can it get any better than this? is that what i think it is? that is an armada of tiny sushi boats. awesome! i forgot to pack lunch. you had one job... chopsticks wasabi and soy! comin' in a little hot. it only gets better when you switch and save with geico.

aaddiction. how juuline hooked kids and ignited an it only gets better public health crisis." other news outlets report- juul took $12.8 billion from big tobacco. markets e-cigarettes with kid friendly flavors and uses nicotine to addict them. 5 million kids use e-cigarettes. juul is "following big tobacco's playbook." and now, juul is pushing prop c to overturn e-cigarette protections. vote no on juul. no on big tobacco. no on prop c. 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. call, click, or visit a store today.

how does it feel in the white house now? there's new reports president trump is rattled and, quote, paranoid as he faces leaks, whistle-blowers, and these new subpoenas that came out tonight. that's not all. a shift in public support for impeachment. first, democrats say the trump administration has been blocking a key witness. second, politico reports trump is paranoid and obsessed, and wants to give polygraph tests to his own staff. here is what's spilling out in public. >> these are bad people. these are dishonest people. the conversation, by the way, was absolutely perfect. it was a beautiful, warm, nice conversation. nancy pelosi and shifty schiff, who should resign in disgrace. and that's why they do the impeachment crap, because they

know we can't beat us fairly. >> this this is a hoax. >> that's how it's playing out for the white house. we don't do a ton of polling on the show, and i've explained previously realtime polling not oh, who's going to be your favorite candidate a year from now, but do you support donald trump today, you actually get reliable metrics. take a look at "the washington post." 58% now of americans back an impeachment inquiry. a lot more than the people who just opposed trump. take a look at the context. in the last three months the overall support has shifted. when you actually dig into these numbers along party lines it's even more striking. take a look at this graph where you see summer, july, you see where the democrats and the republicans and the independents are with no surprise more democrats backing impeachment. now, boom, look at right now.

democrats up 25 points to 86% backing it. so whoever was holding back, that shifted. then look at republicans where a 21-point shift now has one out of four republicans backing an impeachment probe and independents, boom, up 20 points all the way to 57%. it's an shift in what we're often told is a polarized country when it comes to views of trump. you are clear that some people they don't know what to say what it is. when you look at those numbers, what everyone thinks of donald trump, if you're disappointed people weren't for impeachment three months ago, what does it tell you to see that movement across all categories of ideology? >> well, it shows that people are waking up. but if we dig a little deeper in those polls there was also a question about removal. so we saw the number of those

who support impeachment. "the washington post" 49% support removal. nbc poll today 43% support removal. quinnipiac poll 45% support removal. this is at the beginning of the inquiry, ari. when nixon's inquiry began in may of '74 he was like in the 20s in terms of percentages of people supporting removal. he didn't reach the 40 percentile until he released the edited transcripts of him plotting against his enemies. then over 40% of the public was for nixon's removal. trump is already at 40% in terms of his removal and he's already plotting with his enemies so he's right where nixon was. >> you lay it out and one of the things you hear when you look in the middle we hear over and over nothing moves republicans.

that's not my experience with the facts. i always say profiling is bad because it doesn't deal with individuals, all profiling. when you look at 21 point surge among republicans what does that tell you about republican doubts about what the president may or may not have done on ukraine? >> actually, what it tells me if i've touched on this last week. the fact of the matter is and we have to be very honest about this, in 2016 he was not a favored candidate at first for most republicans. and many republicans saw him as hijacking their party. so to me that always leaves an opening for republicans to say, you know, i'm done with this guy, this is embarrassing. also it's very similar with nixon. nixon had a scandal before kwaurtigate now it's itt, a technology scandal. that kind of softened the ground for people to move towards impeachment. so mueller in 2016 and russia

has probably softened the ground for some republicans to come onboard right now. >> when you look at the examples from the nixon era it can get worse because they're not even into the deep fact gathering. take about someone talking about that. tony schwartz. >> and it doesn't take a psychiatrist to recognize as you just saw in that piece that this is a man who is way, way out there. he's way off in the blue yonder. and to watch this is frightening particularly because, ari, it's going to get way worse. >> you think donald trump knows what i just showed the polling and that this is going downhill? >> yeah, but he's not learning anything from it because two very important nixonian things happened today. you broke the news about the subpoena. the subpoena comes because they announced they're not going to participate in the impeachment proceedings. well, what did nixon do? he withheld the tapes.

it had to go to court. also in court today barr's doj made an argument that suricka was wrong, and george howell was like are you sure you want to make that argument? and once again some people are still fighting a civil war. obviously there are some folks still fighting to acquit nixon for watergate. >> you mentioned that sirica, the supreme court backed a lot of that and you're talking nixon. and it all comes up when you get to these constitutional clashes. always appreciate your wisdom. we'll be back with one more thing. wisdom. we'll be back with one more thing. saturdays happen.

pain happens. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, every day can begin with flakes. it's a reminder of your struggles with psoriasis. but what if your psoriasis symptoms didn't follow you around? that's why there's ilumya. with just 2 doses, a majority of people were clear or almost clear. and over time, even more people were clear or almost clear. all with dosing 4 times a year... after 2 initial doses. plus, ilumya was shown to have similar risks of infections compared to placebo. don't use if you are allergic to ilumya or any of its ingredients. before starting treatment,

your doctor should check for tuberculosis and infections. after checking there is no need for routine lab monitoring unless your doctor advises it. ilumya may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms, or if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. this could be your chance to leave your psoriasis symptoms behind. ask your doctor for ilumya today, for a clearer tomorrow. you get more than yourfree shipping.ir, you get everything you need for your home at a great price, the way it works best for you, i'll take that. wait honey, no. when you want it. you get a delivery experience you can always count on. you get your perfect find at a price to match, on your own schedule. you get fast and free shipping on the things that make your home feel like you. that's what you get when you've got wayfair. so shop now!

whareally matters.mily so do i want to give them ordinary eggs... or the best? there's one egg that gives them more of the fresh-from-the-farm flavor they love. only eggland's best. one egg with more vitamins d and e and 25% less saturated fat. only eggland's best. one egg that makes choosing the best easy. only eggland's best. better taste, better nutrition, better eggs. the way you triumph over adversity. and live your lives. that's why we redesigned humira. we wanted to make the experience better for you. now there's less pain immediately following injection. we've reduced the size of the needle and removed the citrate buffers.

and it has the same effectiveness you know and trust. humira citrate-free is here. a little change can make a big difference. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask your doctor about humira citrate-free. here's to you.

and that does it for me. but don't go anywhere. "hardball" with chris matthews is up next. impeachment showdown. let's play hardball. good evening, i'm steve kornacki in for chris matthews. president trump and his administration have launched a new bid to slow the unfolding impeachment inquiry, but it has prompted one top democrat to accuse the white house of trying to obstruct justice. in a letter tonight the white house counsel calls the impeachment inquiry, quote, illegitimate and says the white house will refuse to cooperate with it. this comes aft