We will begin with the times investigative report how donald trump blocked aid to ukraine until he got publicly caught blocking aid to ukraine. And later in this hour we will hear from times reporter Jesse Drucker, who has coauthored the most valuable reporting yet on the trump tax cuts and how they kept pushing even after the law was passed to get the Trump Treasury Department to accept interpretations on the law that reduced corporate taxes even more than was intended to get those reduced. This is so lost in the trump era because there is so much novel corruption in the Trump Administration for journalists to pursue. But this story about the trumps tax cuts and how theyre working is an important story about how it has always worked in government, how this sort of stuff has always worked, how rich corporations never stop trying to turn tax law, especially in their favor. This is the dirtiest version of that story that i have ever seen, and i used to work in the United States senate on tax policy. And i can tell you this is not a story of business as usual, this is a story of business out of control in what is a virtual corporate takeover of the Trump Treasury Department. We are very fortunate tonight to have New York Times reporter Jesse Drucker bring us that story. Later in this hour. We begin with the headline that appeared it on the fold of the New York Times today. Inside the ukraine freeze, the 84day clash of wills. Chronicling the 84day drama in meticulous and incriminating detail. Haberman and yozetti, the article read, quote, interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials, congressional aides and others, previously undisclosed emails and documents, and a close reading of thousands of pages of impeachment testimony. The story unfolds with the suspenseful rhythm of seven days in may, the 1960s drama written by rod serling as it released new scenes of the drama when donald trump first asked ukraine, and he was asked to release his hold on that aid to ukraine because as the very last line of the New York Times article says, quote, he got caught. People throughout the Trump Administration worry that it was illegal to hold up the aid. Some of the permanent staff in the office of management and budget and the Defense Department were almost certain it was illegal, and they did everything they possibly could to force the release of the aid. The people who were holding it back were all political appointees aligned with the president. They were all political and governmental incompetents who no other president would put in their positions, including white house chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, who sent this email to a trump appointee at the office of management and budget, saying, im just trying to tie up some loose ends. Did we ever find out about the money for ukraine, whether we can hold it back . That was on june 27th. The person receiving that email was robert blair, who said that it would be possible to hold back the aid, but he added, expect congress to become unhinged. Of course, congress did not have to become unhinged to break up that scheme that the thentrump National Security adviser john bolton was privately calling a drug deal. All congress had to do to unravel the whole thing was to announce in a relatively low volume at the time that it was going to investigate the situation after politico reported at the end of august that the assistance to ukraine had been frozen. That is when donald trump got caught publicly, and not long after that, the aid was released. But donald trump had actually been caught a month before that, on august 12th. And the president and all the president s men knew that. Because it was august 12th when a whistleblower in the Intelligence Community filed a report describing in general terms what was going on. The president was holding up aid to ukraine while asking ukraine to conduct an investigation of joe biden. It took 30 days but that whistleblower debate forced the president to release the aid. In the meantime, a scene occurred in the white house that will be central to the impeachment trial of the president of the United States. The scene is described in this way. On a sunny, late august day, National Security adviser john bolton, secretary of defense mark esper, and secretary of state mike pompeo arrayed themselves around the resolute desk in the oval office to present a united front. The leaders of the president s National Security team seeking to convince him face to face that freeing up the money or ukraine was the right thing to do. One by one they made their case. This is in americas interest, mr. Bolton argued. Weve gotten some really good benefit from it, mr. Esper added. Ukraine is a corrupt country, the president said. We are pissing our money away. And the aid remained blocked. Tonight, its obviously become impossible to have anything resembling a fair trial in the Senate Without the testimony of the president s men who were standing around the desk in the oval office pleading with the president to release military aid to an ally in the middle of combat, and the president refused. Refused once again to deliver that aid. We all know that donald trump is a very talkative man. In a meeting like that, he wasnt going to limit himself to just the two short sentences that New York Times reporters have managed to extract from their sources about that scene. What else did donald trump say in that room that day, and what else was said to him . The United States senate has a sworn duty to find the answers to both of those questions. Leading off our discussion tonight, democratic congressman Lloyd Doggett of texas. Hes a member of the ways and means committee. Also former u. S. Attorney chuck rosenberg. He was the former counsel to robert mueller. He now hosts the msnbc podcast the oath. And Senior Adviser to president obama and hillary clinton, neera tanden. She was working in the white house during the clinton impeachment trial in the United States senate. Shes the president and ceo of the center for american progress. Congressman doggett, i want to get your opinion on the information in the New York Times report tonight that included emails, for example, that you did not get access to in the house of representatives during the impeachment investigation. Very powerful, lawrence. You really get a better understanding of why donald trump continually uses that old stalinist term about the press being the meaning of the people. What is really his enemy is truth. He cant stand the facts. The reason he has followed this mafialike stonewall defense, no witnesses, no people, no documents, is because the truth is powerful here and it shows what a lie he has pursued and the abuse hes provided of his office to have a senate trial without hearing the truth, without hearing the witnesses, it would be the first impeachment proceeding in American History with no witnesses. We do need to get to the bottom of this. If his associates, his chief of staff, his National Security adviser at the time, if they had any evidence to show his innocence, he would have been pushing them out long ago. Its clear that he has a blockade on the truth. He does not want any of these people to speak out because they can only further incriminate and elaborate on the wrongdoing that has occurred here. Our tax money being used to help donald trump win a political campaign, apparently looking back on 2016, he realized how vital foreign interference was to his success then, and he wasnt confident he could win again without more foreign interference. Chuck rosenberg, please take a look at that scene around the resolute desk in the oval office where you have the three cabinet level officials making their case to the president about releasing this aid to ukraine. And clearly we can tell the New York Times did a great job of delivering that scene, of reporting that scene. But its really, for example, one line, half a line from john bolton, half a line from the secretary of defense. It doesnt have a single word from the secretary of state who was in that room, in that conversation, and it has just those two lines from donald trump. We know a lot more was said by everyone in that room, and if this was a trial and you got to have those people on the stand as witnesses, i think we would learn a lot more about what was said in that room. Oh, absolutely, lawrence. In real trials, and i was a federal prosecutor for a long time, the prosecutors call the witnesses. And then when the prosecution case is done, the Defense Attorneys call witnesses if they so choose. Of course, they dont have to. There is a weird thing here. In a senate trial on impeachment, the jurors decide who gets called. The senators decide who gets called. And if you were to break that down further, its really those senators who control the chamber. So the republicans will decide whether or not anybody gets called. What kind of trial we see, how long it lasts, what sort of evidence is introduced. It is a trial, but its not anything like the types of trials that you see in federal courts around the country every single day. Or even the trials that you see on television. This is a political trial, and the jurors run it. Chuck, another point here. The evidence is moving underneath us as this trial approaches. That in itself is unusual. I mean, you as a prosecutor and defense lawyers, as you know, youre heading toward a trial date. The evidence is pretty much locked in, has normally in most cases been locked in for a number of months before you ever walk into a courtroom and start a trial. Here we are crawling up toward a trial, and there is evidence, like todays New York Times, that just keeps popping up. Yeah. Another excellent point. I mean, trials are locked down in the grand jury in the federal system. Occasionally you get a new document or new evidence, or maybe someone changes their story, and as prosecutors you deal with it. But the cases are, as you say, largely locked down. Not only do we see new evidence in the New York Times article, i can assure you there is a host of evidence were never going to see. Theres so much of it. You know, the federal government can be large and unwieldy. Sometimes it moves at the speed of a credenza. But when Something Big happens, when the president tries to influence his own election by getting dirt on a political opponent from a foreign country, lots and lots of parts of the government touched that. Defense department, state department, justice department, omb, National Security council. So we know that there has to be lots of people out there who have bits and pieces of the story. I presume were not going to hear from many of them, and perhaps, lawrence, not from any of them. Neera, in the clinton trial, mcconnell said hes willing to adopt the rules of the clinton trial, but as the case developed in the senate, the senate decided, yes, they would hear from some witnesses. They didnt hear from them actually in the senate but they kind of did it through the deposition method and that was added to the senate trial. Whats wrong with that approach here . The very, very large difference is that there was this special prosecutor who would form the basis of the case against bill clinton and he put an entire report together. And so there was a yearslong investigation that formed the basis of the inquiry in the house. Many, many depositions were taken. In fact, as you know, bill clinton himself testified via video link, which all of america ended up seeing. So thats very different from what we see here. In fact, when chuck talks about how we may never see these witnesses, whats really happening here is the president s the members of the president s Political Party are essentially obstructing this investigation themselves by trying to shape a trial thats not a trial at all. And i actually think the American People have seen many law order episodes, have seen many trials on television and recognize what is a trial and what is a farce. The facts of the New York Times story, and obviously, we will likely have more and more facts point to a situation in ledge, basically trying to cover up the president s misdeeds by adding to the obstruction, by forming a trial that is not a trial at all. And the challenge they have is that more facts will come out. The evidence is coming out as they try to obstruct, and their political coverup will be more and more clear to the public. Its a big difference. There was no evidence added to the case, in the clinton case, after the house impeachment. This was not new evidence that was added when they took that testimony. It was from people who had already testified in other venues along the way to that spot. Congressman doggett, was it part of Nancy Pelosis strategy in holding back the articles of impeachment knowing, for example, that there was a private organization out there with a civil freedom of information act lawsuit out there that was going to force out some of this information that the New York Times was using today, like the emails from Mick Mulvaney and others, and that the body of evidence, did nancy pelosi know that publicly the body of evidence would expand over time basically every day that shes holding on to the articles of impeachment . Well, i cant say precisely what she knew or didnt know about this, but i believe her thoughtful approach to not rushing these articles over there, knowing that the house has the sole responsibility here for impeachment under the constitution, that there is no need to rush it over there if there is only going to be the kind of sham proceeding that neera just described. I think in looking at that proceeding, chucks point is really important because it is each member of the senate who will be held accountable for whether there are any witnesses or not, whether it is a totally sham proceeding. Mitch mcconnell dominates, but he cannot block a senator voicing his or her views on a witness being called the way he has obstructed the many bills that weve approved in the house that have ended up in his graveyard, from gun safety to Election Security to Prescription Drug coverage. All those things hes blocked here, his power is more limited. And each senator, whether its mitt romney responding to those editorials you referred to, or Susan Collins, or any other members of the senate, they have to decide, are they going to be part of a sham trial or will they let the truth come through, whatever its source . Yeah, and chuck rosenberg, this is much more difficult tonight than it was even last week for those republican senators who could be under that kind of pressure, were going to see this editorial later in this hour from a salt lake newspaper urging mitt romney to demand witnesses. When you have that scene described by the New York Times, a scene that we did not know 48 hours ago had happened of pompeo, secretary of defense, john bolton standing around the desk in the oval office, pleading with the president to release that aid to ukraine, this is the heart of the case. This is the direct heart of the impeachment case right here, every word of that dialogue. The pressure on a mitt romney to come up with an answer as to why he supports or does not support hearing that testimony is only going to get greater with every day. I think thats right, lawrence. Were at an odd place right now where we are celebrating, where we revel in the fact that one republican senator, Lisa Murkowski of alaska, is going to abide by her oath. Thats the state of play right now. When someone says theyll abide by their oath, we celebrate that and we talk about it. Every republican and democrat should abide by that oath and we should hear the evidence. By the way, that scene around the resolute desk that you described so well in your introduction, those people spoke directly to the president. And so to the extent we keep hearing about witnesses who are one or two levels removed, to the extent we keep hearing about hearsay, thats no longer hearsay. Those are people who spoke directly to the president on the central issue in the case, and we ought to hear from them in the senate. Chuck rosenberg, congressman Lloyd Doggett, neera tanden, thank you all for starting us off tonight. Really appreciate it. When we come back, mike pompeo is going to ukraine this week, but first they had to make sure the acting ambassador to ukraine was fired and out of there, yet another ambassador of ukraine in the way and had to be pushed out. Thats coming up. Or make me feel like im not really there. Talk to your doctor, and call 8442342424. Where we can find common ground. Big enough to dance on. For a better us, donate to your local y today. You have power over pain, so the whole world looks different. The unbeatable strength of advil. What pain . What are you doing back there, junior . Since were obviously lost, im rescheduling my Xfinity Customer Service appointment. Ah, relax. I got this. Which gps are you using anyway . A Little Something called instinct. Been using it for years. Yeah, thats what im afraid of. He knows exactly where were going. My whole body is a compass. Oh boy. The my account app makes todays Xfinity Customer Service simple, easy, awesome. Not my thing. Secretary mike pompeo is going to ukraine on friday. In order for mike pompeo to make that trip, yet another u. S. Ambassador to ukraine had to be fired. William taylor, who testified to the impeachment inquiry in defiance of Donald Trumps and mike pompeos order not to. He had to be removed because mike pompeo reportedly did not want to be photographed with ambassador taylor, who is a Vietnam Combat veteran, a west point graduate and a distinguished diplomat. Today a u. S. Department spokesman refused to answer the question whether mike pompeo will be pressuring the president of ukraine to investigate joe biden just like his boss did. Thanks to the russian government, we now know that donald trump and Vladimir Putin had a telephone call this weekend, and as usual, the russian government was the first one to reveal that phone call, saying they talked about terrorism, and, quote, a range of issues of mutual interest. When they were eventually forced to issue their own readout of the phone call because russia already did, it was essentially the same summary as russia in the phone call, which means, as usual, we have no idea what donald trump and Vladimir Putin really talked about. The report earlier this month gave a possible clue into what Vladimir Putin and trump talk about. Quote, one former senior white house official said trump even stated so explicitly at one point, saying he knew ukraine was the real culprit in the 2016 election because putin told me. Wendy sherman, she is an msnbc Global Affairs contributor. Ambassador sherman, your reaction, first of all, to the way we get the news yet again of a trump putin conversation. It is the russian government, not the most open government in the world. Its the russian government that lets us know that happened. True. As you opened the show tonight and talked about really a movie script sort of like the twilight zone, all i could keep thinking about was all the president s men. In this case, the president is Vladimir Putin, not donald trump. It appears that putin is really in control of all that is going on here. Whether thats the president holding up money to ukraine because he wants to selfdeal for his political future, whether it is whats happening with russia and the United States, whether theyre going to control our next election. But the echoes of all the president s men really was in my head the entire time i was listening to your first segment this evening. And heres the secretary of state on his way to ukraine, state Department Officials speaking to reporters today. When asked specifically, is mike pompeo going to get involved in this demand for an investigation of joe biden, the state Department Spokesperson does not say, oh, of course not, absolutely not, the state Department Spokesperson says, i cant tell you every topic thats going to come up. Thats the answer. Extraordinary answer. The answer to that question, when the secretary of state of the United States is going ought to be, well, of course not. Hes not involved in the reelection campaign. I hope your viewers understand that traditionally and historically the secretary of state, the secretary of the treasury do not Campaign Secretary of defense do not campaign for the president of the United States. Other cabinet officers might, but the secretary of state in particular does not, because hes supposed to be concerned about the u. S. National security and be above politics. Instead we have a secretary of state who is deep, deep over his head in politics. Not only the president s but perhaps his own run for the u. S. Senate in kentucky. So he doesnt put National Security interests first, hes putting his own interests first. This isnt the way its supposed to be. Mike pompeo asked William Taylor to go into that job in ukraine as the acting ambassador after they got rid of the ambassador that Rudy Giuliani wanted them to get rid of, and then mike pompeo apparently has just abandoned what was his own choice for that job. He has indeed abandoned. He had his counselor let ambassador taylor know he should be gone by the 3rd when secretary pompeo is there. I find it very interesting that it also appears that the president may be holding evangelicals for trump rally on the 3rd, and the 3rd is the first day the senate is back in session. This is going to be quite a consequential day in the lives of where were going with our future. Not only that, it will be very curious, lawrence. David holmes, who is the counselor for Political Affairs at the embassy in ukraine who testified about overhearing the conversation that sondland had, where there was a direct conversation about going after biden in ukraine for the president s own purposes, still remains a counselor. And he would be very much a part of the country briefing, bringing the secretary of state up to date, getting him ready for his meeting with president zelensky. It will be very curious to see whether david holmes is sent to siberia, no pun intended, as well. Wendy sherman, thank you very much. I really appreciate it. Thank you. When we come back, there is more important reporting from the New York Times, this time ability about what the democrat president ial candidates should be campaigning against every day. The trump tax cuts. We could do the entire hour on this next story when well be joined by New York Times reporter Jesse Drucker who will reveal the lobbyists who have made the trump tax cuts work even better for the corporations than the trump people designed them to do. Thats next. Thats next. Od. Discuss coolsculpting with your doctor. Some common sideeffects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. Dont imagine results, see them. Coolsculpting, take yourself further. Save 100 on your coolsculpting treatment. Text resolution to 65190 to learn more. Save 100 on your coolsculpting treatment. Actions speak louder than words. She was a school teacher. My dad joined the navy and helped prosecute the nazis in nuremberg. Their values are why i walked away from my business, took the giving pledge to give my money to good causes, and why i spent the last ten years fighting corporate insiders who put profits over people. Im tom steyer, and i approve this message. Because, right now, America Needs more than words. We need action. And mine super soft . Yes. With the sleep number 360 smart bed, on sale now, you can both. Adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. So, can it help us fall asleep faster . Yes, by gently warming your feet. But can it help keep me asleep . Absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. So, you can really promise better sleep . Not promise. Prove. And now, during our new years special, queen sleep number c4 smart bed is only 1299, save 400, plus 0 interest for 24 months on all beds. Ends new years day. In high school most of us are taught how a bill becomes a law, but most of us arent taught what happens to the law after that and who decides how the law will be enforced. As this year comes to a close, the New York Times has delivered the most important lesson in the year of what happens after a bill is signed into law by the president , in this case tax law. The giant trump tax cuts for corporations have become even more giant after the relentless corporate lobbying about how to enforce that law. The enforcement of tax law is decided by the United States treasury and written into the rules of enforcement that all of us taxpayers have to live by, but its a lot easier to live by those rules and regulations if you had a hand in writing them. As todays report by Jesse Drucker reveals, how Big Companies won new tax breaks from the Trump Administration. This is the real story of government in action, and as with all important decisions made in government in washington, cspan cameras are not allowed in the room where that happens. Joining our discussion now is the coauthor of that New York Times piece, New York Times reporter Jesse Drucker. I for one cannot thank you enough for this reporting, because as someone who worked in the Senate Finance committee where we would write these tax laws, we knew we were sending them over to another world that we couldnt control, which was that rules and regulations world and it seems more out of control than ever. Right. I mean, what we had here in 2017 was we had a very significant tax cuts package that came out of congress and signed into law by President Trump, but the law was written incredibly quickly and incredibly poorly, and so from there it has to go to the treasury to write a series of regulations to help administer the new law. And what happened as part of this law is it was a combination of more than 5 trillion in tax cuts and 4 trillion in new taxes. And the most significant new taxes on companies was about a quarter of a trillion dollars on multinationals that were supposed to help dissuade them pushing profits into tax havens overseas. What happened was as soon as that bill was signed into law, several dozen of these companies realized this was not something they were eager to do. A lot of them were not expecting it, in part because the law was done so quickly, there were no hearings on this, it all took place over seven weeks, so we basically had over the last two years is treasury kind of pretty much i wouldnt say under cover of darkness, but in a process that the public has very little visibility into has written a series of regulations that had the effect of basically rolling back the quarter of a trillion dollars in new taxes on multinationals to the tune of tens of billions and possibly hundreds of billions of dollars in tax reductions, if that all makes sense. Yeah, and this regulation process is i guess what we could call a semipublic process in the sense that there are public notifications that this process is under way, were writing the regulation for x law. You are theoretically invited to comment on this, but its only people with highpriced lobbyists who even know thats happening and know how to comment on it. Theres kind of a couple stages in this process. For the first year, there isnt really even anything in the public. For the first year of the regulatory process, this is basically all private Communications Going on between lobbyists and staffers of the Treasury Department, officials there, and theres really no Public Disclosure of any of that, of who is having the meetings and what theyre seeking. Then kind of a year into the process, the Treasury Department issues a series of proposed regulations, and at that point it becomes public. Then there are dozens, if not hundreds of comment letters that become public about this. But, you know, those are things that are really understood. If you look at some of the letters, theyre literally written almost in esperanto. These are things only understood literally by a few hundred tax attorneys in america. So now weve got, after a very, very complicated twoyear process, we are now seeing how these new taxes are shaking out. And part of the issue here is that because the law was so poorly written, the Treasury Department had an incredible amount of latitude or decided that it should exercise a lot of latitude to try to cover a law that in some places made some sense. In doing so, theyre really hearing from one side. There is no one out there lobbying the Treasury Department to make the taxes more stringent. 99. 99 of their meetings are with representatives for companies that are seeking the taxes to be cut. And they all, each company, makes the case that, oh, you dont understand how my company works. That might be okay for some other kind of company, but this particular company, if you tax us this way, it will crush us this way. Each of them are making that argument all the time. Yeah, or the intention of congress was not to tax these types of transactions. These types of transactions arent meant to avoid or dodge taxes, these are transactions we have to do in the course of our regular business day, they have nothing to do with dodging taxes and there may be some legitimacy to those arguments, that maybe they were unfair, maybe poorly conceived, but it isnt in the authority of the Treasury Department to decide that congress has written a law that maybe is unfair or maybe doesnt make a lot of sense. In the case of some of the things we wrote about, for instance, an exemption that secretary mnuchin signed off on that essentially exempted giant foreign banks like Credit Suisse and barclays from taxes, there is question about whether they had the authority to do that. And staffers at treasury did raise these objections to officials at treasury that were in charge of this and ultimately they did not win the day. The bottom line, as it were, is that as much as we thought the trump tax cuts cost the treasury, it cost much more. The deficit is much higher and now cbo is projecting new numbers for where the deficit is going, and the deficit and the debt are going way up higher than they projected even when they saw what the congress intended the tax cuts to be. Yeah. Theres two things to say about that. For one thing the deficit doesnt have to go higher. The alternative is the government can cut spending. They can cut spending at the epa, at osha, department of education, and nasa. They can cut spending and you dont have to worry about the deficit going higher. Remember, the reason they were able to get this passed so quickly was because of a process called reckonciliation. They promised the deficit would only be over a certain amount, then theyll ram the law through and the democrats dont have the ability to filibuster or stop the bill from becoming law. But what has happened is that number, the number they essentially promised, is really no longer a real number. Because the treasury has effectively added hundreds of trillions of dollars to it. As your article so masterfully pointed out, the bill would have required 60 votes. Jesse druker, thank you for joining us. Really appreciate it. When we come back, the pelosi strategy of holding back the articles of impeachment. Is it working . Thats next. Youd have a lot of dollars. Which makes it hard to believe, especially coming from a talking lizard. Pip, pip, cheerio look, all i, dennis quaid, know is that esurance is built to save you dollars without skimping on service. And when they save, you save. The only way to know how much is to get a quote. Chances are youll save time, paperwork, and yes, dollars. When insurance is affordable, its surprisingly painless. It was just 12 days ago that the house of representatives impeached President Trump. And minutes after that historic vote, nancy pelosi shocked the system, which in this case includes me, when she said this. We had legislation approved by the rules committee that will enable us to decide how we will send over the articles of impeachment. We cannot name managers until we see what the process is on the senate side. So far we havent seen anything that looks fair to us, so hopefully it will be fair. And so she did not send the articles of impeachment to the United States senate as expected. And because nancy pelosi said that, the news has been focused on what the rules should be for the Senate Impeachment trial. And Mitch Mcconnell made the mistake of saying this. Everything i do during this, im coordinating with white house counsel. There will be no difference between the president s position and our position as to how to handle this. And so now republican senators like Lisa Murkowski and others are trying to distance themselves from mcconnells position so they can try to claim to be fair jurors in the impeachment trial. I think senator mcconnell is entitled to his opinion and his approach. I can only speak for me. Im going to keep an open mind. I want to be fair to both sides. Nancy pelosis decision to hold the articles of impeachment appears to be holding the focus now on how to achieve a fair trial in the United States senate. After this break, well be joined by david frum and david korn to see how people are responding both ways of nancy pelosi holding onto those articles of impeachment while demanding a fair trial in the senate. Thats next. 12. 99 all you can eat now with boneless wings. Only at applebees. I am totally blind. And non24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. Talk to your doctor, and call 8442142424. Instead of using aloe, or baby wipes, or powders, try the cooling, soothing relief or preparation h, because your derriere deserves expert care. Preparation h. Get comfortable with it. Our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition. For strength and energy whoohoo greattasting ensure. With nine grams of protein and twentyseven vitamins and minerals. Ensure, for strength and energy. Our founders, when they wrote the constitution, they suspected that there could be a rogue president. I dont think they suspected that we could have a rogue president and rogue leader in the senate at the same time. Joining our discussion now is david frum, and msnbc political analyst, david corn. David frum, is it working . Holding the articles of impeachment, it seems the speakers intent was to focus on the fairness of the rules of the Senate Impeachment trial. I want to throw an idea about whats happened here. Its not mine. It belongs to Paul Rosenzweig of a conservative leaning think tank in town. February 4th is the state of the union. If theres been a trial and theres been a sham here and the senate has slapped together acquittal, imagine the tone of President Trump on the 4th of february. Triumphal, obnoxious, overbearing, i win, i win, you lose, you lose. If the impeachment is still pending on the 4th of february, can you imagine how insane that state of the union is going to be . Its going to be like the twitter feed. Its going to be like the christmas twitter feed when the family is all gone. Its going to be an hour of paranoia and grievance and narcissism that paul suggests will terrify even many of his supporters. So if its not wrapped up by the 4th of february, that could have dramatic consequences. That sounds like one vote for, its working. David corn, i was shocked because it was an idea that was floated a few nights before, but not by people with real experience in the congress. But it took hold, very much to my surprise. From where im sitting, it seems to be working. The focus seems to be on the question of fairness in the senate trial. Well, my concern a few weeks ago, before they voted for impeachment, was that once the democrats wrapped up the hearings about the ukranian extortion, you know, play, and voted for impeachment and kicked it over to the senate, the narrative would be lost. It would be lost to Mitch Mcconnell who would have all these openings to create a new narrative whether its the focus on the bidens or ukrainian servers, whatever you wanted to do, or to wrap it up within two days. Basically the story that the public still, as you noted earlier on this show, has not gotten the full account of, would be sucked up into whatever narrative mcconnell and his republican comrades would cook up. So i think pelosi, whether this was what was the intent or whether it was what david suggested, it was just to figure out how to drive donald trump even crazier, in any event its preventing that from happening, at least at this point. David, a piece you wrote, you talk about donald trump, his gangster mode. Yeah. And this holding of the articles seems to have actually brought out even more of that in a kind of wilder range of trump tweeting. Well, this is something that got lost over christmas when many people who have families and love them were not on twitter, but the president was. Donald trump has been tiptoeing and his supporters have been tiptoeing to naming the whistleblower. And in his christmas tweeting, the president retweeted two things, one of which had the whistleblowers name in the headline, a newspaper story. And the other of which had the presumed whistleblowers name in the body of the tweet. Now, the whistleblower or the presumed whistleblowers name has been circulating in conservative media for a while. And if this is accurate, its not exactly a secret. But for the president to do it is unprecedented. The reason this is so important is its not actually probably illegal for the president to disclose the whistleblowers name. The law forbids the Inspector General to whom the complaint to do it, but its not clear anyone else has the obligation. What is forbidden is retaliation. What donald trump is doing by attaching the name to the twitter feed is hes inciting a retaliation on a continental scale. That is clearly lawless. The president has taken a long time to make up his mind to do it and he deliberately decided to do it not once but twice over christmas. We have proven once again the only thing better than one david is two davids. Theyre going to stay with us. When we come back were going to discuss mitt romneys newspaper wanting him to demand witnesses in the trial. Thats next. Verizons important to us because we facetime with her grandparents all the time. vo when you have the best network, you want to give the best network. Feliz navidad laughs vo this holiday, you can gift americas most Reliable Network and the latest iphone. I would probably give it to her grandparents, so they can take tons of photos. My mom is amazing. If i got her one of these for christmas, shed be freakin out. vo now, buy the latest iphone and get iphone 11 on us. And apple music is included. With plans starting at just 35. shrieks yeah, exciting. vo happy holidays from the network that gives you more. 12. 99 all you can eat now with boneless wings. Only at applebees. Of course id love to take an informal poll. I used to be a little cranky. Dealing with our finances really haunted me. Thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeepers helping customize it for our business. live bookkeeper youre all set up janine great hey you got the burnt marshmallow out delivery man he slimed me. janine tissue . vo get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. The easy way to a happier business. I need all the breaks, that i can get. At liberty butchumal cut. Liberty biberty cut. Well dub it. Liberty mutual customizes your Car Insurance so you only pay for what you need. Only pay for what you need. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Senator mitt romney is facing new pressure to do the right thing in the Senate Impeachment trial of President Trump. Mitt romneys local state newspaper the Salt Lake Tribune published this editorial. Trial first, verdict afterwards. Mitt romney has at least tried to hold himself out as an impartial juror attempting to not prejudge the matter before the evidence is heard. It would be at least helpful to his own cause to make sure the senate does indeed hear the evidence. Were back with david frum and david corn. David corn, pressure like that on mitt romney and as nancy pelosi continues to withhold the articles of impeachment, thats the kind of pressure that could build. It could build. And i you know, always believe that if you bet on the republican handwringers to not really come through, that youll make money, whether its Susan Collins or mitt romney, theyre always concerned, Lisa Murkowski. Weve got to get beyond expressions of concern. And i dont think Mitch Mcconnell has a pretty strong control of the senate. Youre a veteran of the senate. You know how that works. I think the most effective thing mitt romney could be doing in that situation would be speaking out publicly. The more public attention brought to bear on this, thats the only thing that may put an iota of pressure on mcconnell to pull back from his ridiculous position of working in lockstep with the white house. Until mitt romney says something publicly, until Lisa Murkowski gets beyond being concerned i think were not going to see a lot of action within the republican caucus. David frum, i missed this, on christmas eve, thats when senator murkowski said in alaska to the nbc affiliate that she wants to be able to look at both sides of this case and that it has to be taken seriously by the senate, really distancing herself at least rhetorically from the Mitch Mcconnell position. How much does Lisa Murkowski owe Mitch Mcconnell . She had to run to return to the senate as an independent. Her own party turned against her. All of this is happening out of doors. This conversation were having tonight is part of whats going on. During the clinton impeachment which we all remember well and maybe were on different sides of it, but the public became an increasingly important factor. There is no point in the year of the clinton impeachment where president clintons support dipped below 53 . It reached 73 on the day. This is different and that will matter. Thank you both very much for joining us tonight. And thank you very much for your contributions to this Program Throughout this year. Really appreciate it. Same to you. Happy new year. Happy new year. Happy new year to you both. A last word about the crush of impeachment news this christmas season, we werent able to share as many of the stories of what were doing with the kind fund as we would have liked. Were providing desks in schools to african schools. Were providing scholarships for girls to attend high school in malawi, where the Graduation Rate is half for girls than boys. We do that with your help and only your help and only with the contributions you are inspired to give by seeing their stories at this hour, on this program. Over the course of the holiday i decided to double my own personal contribution to the kind fund this year because we havent been able to spend as much time with it during the program as i would like. I hope some of you would consider the k. I. N. D. Fund before the year ends. Go to lastworddesks. Msnbc. Com at any time of the year to help fighting the freeze, lets play hardball. Good evening. Im jeff bennett in for chris matthews. New evidence continues to bolster the case against the president as he awaits his trial in the u. S. Senate. The New York Times is revealing stunning details tabt tug of war inside the administration after the president ordered a freeze on