Succeed in their goal, which is to delay, deny, obstruct. Also on the programme. John bercow has vacated the seat, so who will replace him as the next house of common speaker . The voting continues we may well have a result for you in the next hour. And the World Series Champions the Washington Nationalsfl are welcomed to the white house. Maybe a tad more formal this afternoon, than the parade at the ice hockey last night . Hello and welcome im Michelle Fleury in washington, Christian Fraser is in london. Democrats moved their impeachment inquiry into the next phase today, with the release of the first transcripts from interviews they held behind closed doors. The testimony comes from the former u. S. Ambassador to ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and state Department OfficialMichael Mckinley. Ms yovanovich who was fired at Donald Trumps instruction told congress she felt threatened by comments the president had made about her during a july phone call with the ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky. She also relayed a conversation she had with Gordon Sondland the Us Ambassador to the eu. Who told her to flatter the president via twitter to keep herjob you need to you know tweet out there that you support the president , and that all these are lies and everything else. It was advice that i did not see how i could implement mckinley, a former top adviser to secretary of state mike pompeo, said in his 37 years in the foreign service, working on many controversial issues, he had never seen anything like this. He said he quit, in part, because he thought Foreign Policy was being politicised and that us missions were being used to procure negative political information for domestic purposes. Meanwhile four further witnesses were called to testify today in private but all of them refused to appear. Seperately we are told the anonymous whistle blower whose complaint kick started this whole impeachment inquiry will answer written questions under oath from house republicans. Lets get the thoughts of kim wehle former us assistant attoney who worked on the whitewater investigation. Author of how to read the constitution and why. I was reading to the deposition and stuff about Rudy Giuliani, we keep on going back to him, what do you make of it . I think what is important to note here is that Rudy Giuliani is not a Government Employee he did not take an oath of office, he is not bound by the ethics and norms and conflict of interest rules that apply to Government Employees. Theres a whole legal apparatus in place of people who work for the federal government to ensure that when they do theirjob, they do it on behalf of the american populace and here we have a private attorney for the president of the United States, essentially dictating a different Foreign Policy relating to the and career Public Servants have been following doctors for this president , but with the prior president s and that is deeply troubling, not just as president s and that is deeply troubling, notjust as a matter of Foreign Policy but also as a matter of the rule of law and ensuring that people go to government and do what is best for the american people. It is best for the american people. It is hard to imagine Rudy Giuliani had that at all in his mind when he was essentially telling them directly and indirectly that the efforts to support the ukraine democracy was not what the American Government under donald trump is going to push any further. I am reading these transcripts, yet the commander in chief bad mouthing his own staff oversees to the ukrainian president , so within the transcript they are asked about what he said to they are asked about what he said to the president saying that she is going to go through some things, said donald trump. What did you understand that to mean. She said i did not know what that meant, did you feel threatened she was asked. Yes i did. So here you have her who was threatened by her own president. And also the ukrainian diplomat said she should be concerned and this woman was really caught, just stunned by this process, she was scapegoated, ta ken and stunned by this process, she was scapegoated, taken and basically fired because she was following the policy that had been carefully developed by career Public Servants with deep expertise in this area over many years and other president s. And that is a problem in addition to as you mentioned, this idea that she continues to have fear for her own safety and that is not surprising given that the president of the United States is at the apex, not only of the entire federal criminal Justice System not only of the entire federal criminalJustice System but also the military. This is at the heart of the ukrainian inquiry is to use that military funding to the ukraine and exchange with hoarding it and asking the ukrainians to start a investigation into a political opponent. There is no other person that has that level of power they can use it and ways to benefit himself. So can use it and ways to benefit himself. 50 career diplomats can use it and ways to benefit himself. So career diplomats who we re himself. So career diplomats who were listening in or part of this discussion on the ukraine felt uncomfortable and there were others on the 25th ofjuly phone call. The security council, he was supposed to testify today, one of the four no shows and he is important because its i understand it, he wouldve shifted the conversation from this from the white house to the secret server. From the white house to the secret server. Yes, though his his decision. That was his decision. Working inside Thejustice Department and also the federal trade commission and has a fair amount of experience, the number of people who were complicit in what i think most would agree is very unusual, if not malfeasance. People with long history of good experience and reputations inside the various administrations and this is one example that is absolutely stunning that a government lawyer would sanction that because of the end of the day, even if it is technically legal, youre hiding information that doesnt Bear National security. It bears on embarrassing this president and it is something that the American Voters should know about. Thank you for being with us this evening. In light of the information coming out of the closed hearings the Washington Post has reported that some republican senators are considering acknowleding there was a quid pro quo but will argue it doesnt rise to an impeachable offense. For more on that and the white house blocking witnesses to testify were joined by former advisor to george w bush, ron christie. Youre looking at this testimony in looking at some of the testimony that has leaked so far the facts really that people are working in the state department that there was a back channel into the ukraine, they thought there was a quid pro quo. Is that why some senators say, thatis quo. Is that why some senators say, that is undeniable now, which is of the gourd that but sort of argue that it doesnt, in our view region in reach an impeachable offence . Yes, i think that is the gist of it. People on capitol hill that ive spoken with who feel that their support of the president continues to erode. Why is it eroding . Because the president takes to twitter, television and says very inflammatory things that they feel is very difficult for them, the senators and the staffers to continue to defend the president. But my question with all of this has a high crime, misdemeanortaken place that you remove the president from office before the next november election and at this juncture, i say to that note. But how, you have a president who was running a back channel into the ukraine for his own political purposes to underminejoe biden as a political opponent. He is almost trying to obstruct the investigation, leaning on the ambassador, the career diplomats and state department, bullying them. You have one one woman here that feels that he was personally attacking her. I have been pretty outspoken on the show but my opinion about the president s behaviour. Certainly it can appearto be, president s behaviour. Certainly it can appear to be, it is not conventional, but again for one was worked in the white house for four yea rs, worked in the white house for four years, one who did not always agree with the policies of the administration put forward by george w. Bush, that is yourjob. They get to initiate policy and administrative Foreign Policy and domestic policy, and if you do not like it, you can resign and so the question that a staffer felt threatened and then investor felt threatened, the president still does get to formulate Foreign Policy. You still have donald trump notjust with the ukraine, but publicly on cameras asking china to investigate the bidens. Is that all right . There is no doubt that the president is acting ina is no doubt that the president is acting in a very unconventional manner. I do not like it because a lot of our allies around the world are saying what is the United States doing non Foreign Policy. What is the status quo . How are we supposed to trust with the american president might do in the future . However, does it rise to a high crime or misdemeanor . That is the question i keep going back to. And if were to remove a president that so many put in office, we have an election 264 days from now. I wanted to ask you 364 days from now. I wanted to ask you 364 days. I wanted to ask you about donald trump over the weekend repeatedly pressing on this question of the whistle blower and finding out what identity. Dealing with corrupt politicians, he must be brought forward to testify, written a nswe rs , brought forward to testify, written answers, not accept. This is after the whistle blower agreed to answer in writing, questions from republicans. This is a cancer he might to bring the whistle blower to capitol hill, bring them behind a screen, modify their voice and whoever this person is should be subject to cross examination rather than having written answers stop by but held to a different standard than the president was in the mother investigation. It was not a removal from the president from office or ending an impeachment proceeding. Thank you so much forjoining us on the programme. There is been so much going on today, it is difficult to keep track of everything. But there was a ruling in the new York Appeals Court today saying that he would have to produce, the president that is, eight years of tax reports going back eight years. That seems to be a growing problem for the president because he has not been forthcoming with those tax returns and now am i right that he goes to the Supreme Court . This is something that donald trump has over the convention so much, typically candidates even before they are elected released copies of their tax return, this is only that donald trump did not do. This then followed on and off there are various attempts to the court, the latest in new york where you had lawyers there are basically trying to pursue donald trump and get his tax returns released. It is going to the Appeals Court as you point out and they have basically ruled against and says yes to turn over eight years. He goes to the Supreme Court. It is interesting is that a frequent commentator and guest on this programme tweeted out that it is certainly no foregone conclusion where they may go on this. Because it is so atypical for an official not to release their tax returns. Doesnt rain, it pours. Certainly the case. But to the report includes evidence of uk intelligence the uk governement has decided not to publish a sensitive report on russian meddling in elections. The report includes evidence from uk Intelligence Services concerning russian attempts to influence the outcome of the 2016 Eu Referendum and 2017 general election. The 50 page document has been with the Prime Ministers Office since october 17th but needs to be cleared before being released. But it seems the report will not see the light of day until after the election. To understand what could be the governments motives, i spoke with bbc newsnights diplomatic editor mark urban. They have seen this report and said it is something that should be published before a general election. Do you have any clues as to what is in it. Effectively he is the author because he is the chair of the intelligence and Security Committee of parliament which is a rather unusual setup. We have only the broadest ideas, the draft of the report is still classified, secret in downing street and we now understand not before the general election. We know the right from the start of their inquiry, they were looking at things attached to whether or not russia try to influence the brexit referendum in 2016 and possibly 2017 election. But also whether the russians of trade through political donations or other means of influence peddling to get their teeth into the Political Parties here. For applying for the government and says that many select Committee Reports are produced in the government has to respond properly and it cannot be done in haste. Despite the fact that parliament is due to be absolved in two days time and therefore has to be shoved into Parliament Comes back. Yes and the main downing street argument has been dominant grief tried to put this through without undue speed. It is the clea ra nce without undue speed. It is the clearance of the thing to be published and then you can expect in the time, the government response. The problem with this is the downing street people talk about several weeks, but ive spoken to a number of officials and i would stress that they have told me in the context of they have told me in the context of the work that needs to be done in ten days, which is quite reasonable from the point of your committee will be quite normal, the thing on the 17th of october, i think it is reasonable to assume that it should have been ready by now. It took them quite a while to get this investigation off the ground. Quite a while to get this investigation off the groundm quite a while to get this investigation off the ground. It did indeed and the origins go back to 2017 but most of the evidence was heard last summer. The evidence that you heard about the uk intelligence agencies giving testimony, how does it compare in terms of what we think happened with russian interference with what happened stateside and russian interference in the 2016 election . I think you would argue in a way that this is not as high up on the ladder of state interference in the ladder of state interference in the sense that clearly the most shocking are one of the more shocking are one of the more shocking aspects of the 2016 election and interference with this claimed that russian intelligence and military intelligence hacked the dnc and then passed it on through proxy and then used networks to amplify its effect on the political picture in the us. Some aspects of that we know from previous things that we know from previous things that Intelligence Services in the uk said were replicated with regard to brexit and that there were accounts amplifying those messages but what you do not have is that element of hacking and stealing information from a Political Party or one side of the referendum and getting it out into the wider political atmosphere the time. The life pictures, the race has been narrowed down to two. Eleanor lange has now bowed out and we are down to a two horse race. Deputizing for john bercow, he is probably the favourite, but he is up against chris bryant, the labour mp, both labour and peace but chris bryant the labour mp. So two of them and to the labour mp. So two of them and to the rules, the successful speaker would need to have 50 plus 1 of the commons so a would need to have 50 plus 1 of the commons so a majority, a simple majority in the voting and it seems that they have just gone out into the lobby so if we get a result in the lobby so if we get a result in the next few minutes, we will bring that to you. Sticking with news from russia, and the last ever leader of the soviet union, Mikhail Gorbachev, has warned that tension between russia and the west is putting the world in colossal danger because of the threat of nuclear weapons. Gorbachev, who is now 88, negotiated with president reagan to reduce the Nuclear Arsenals of the two world superpowers of the era. He has been speaking with our moscow correspondent, steve rosenberg, to mark 30 years since the fall of the berlin wall. These days, its rare to see Mikhail Gorbachev in front of a camera. Aged 88, he avoids the limelight. Im slowing down, he tells me. I can barely stand up. But the man who helped to end the cold war has a message for the world that his achievements are at risk. And one of his greatest achievements was ending the arms race between the soviet union and america. His diplomatic double act with Ronald Reagan slashed the two superpowers Nuclear Arsenals.