Federal crimes, betrayed the nation. All of that part of this Closing Argument by the democrats. Now the senate is no longer waiting to see what happens. You have democratic leader Chuck Schumer demanding that trumps trial include the kind of firsthand witnesses that the white house has been blocking, including Mick Mulvaney, and of course, mr. Drug deal himself, john bolton. Trials have witnesses. Thats what trials are all about. To engage a trial without the facts coming out is to engage in a coverup. The American People will rightly ask what are you, leader mcconnell, and what is President Trump hiding. Democrats also reminding republican senators of the exact oath they actually have to take at the start of the trial, something weve covered right here on the beat. It is a pledge to do, quote, impartial justice according to the constitution and the laws, so help me god. You can keep that oath in mind, though, as you listen to republican senator lindsey graham. I am trying to give a pretty clear signal i have made up my mind. Im not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here. I am clearly made up my mind. Im not trying to hide the fact that i have disdain for the accusations and the process. So i dont need any witnesses. He doesnt need any witnesses. He doesnt even need any more information. Thats the president s one of his staunchest defenders in the senate, and thats previewing one approach here, a boasting of a kind of bias while basically saying lets shut this whole thing down. That certainly may appeal to some trump supporters. This is a political process, its been said. Well, the congress is going to have things that are done for political reasons. But also watch whats happening. That kind of approach, coming out swinging before the senate has even established the entire procedure for the trial, it may alienate some of the very senators trump needs as jurors. I think it would be extremely inappropriate to put a bullet in this thing immediately when it comes over. I think we ought to hear what the house impeachment managers have to say. And what will those house impeachment managers say . Well, depends of course on who they are. I can tell you tonight sneaker pelosi is expected to name them very soon within a matter of potentially days, and some democrats are pushing for an interesting name, former Republican House member justin amash to be on the team. Who better to make an argument that this is a time for people to be open to changing their minds, as he did. But as we get ready to bring in our experts, i want to mention there is something larger going on right now, as you look at all this jockeying. Whats going on is a fundamental question between two houses of congress, the house thats marching to impeach and the senate that will catch that impeachment indictment and decide how to try it. What do they want to do . The more that you hear that, well, the votes are counted and there is not going to be a big difference in whatever goes down in the senate, the more you have to ask yourself, if thats the case, why are so many people, like mr. Graham who i just showed you, going out of their way to try to reduce this to a sham . This is a moment in history not only for the president , who stands accused of, quote, multiple crimes tonight in this new report, its also a moment for the congress, because the rules in the senate havent been set, you can bet there is a lot more jockeying to decide whether this is going to be a deliberate sham, dont even try to be fair, or something more, something appealing to the oath in the constitution these people are sworn to uphold. To get into all of this, i want to bring her in right now, former federal prosecutor paul butler and Eleanor Clift for the daily beast, who closely covered the clinton impeachment. Good evening to both you have. Eleanor, your view of what were seeing based on the package in of this town, washington, the way it runs today and the way its handled past impeachments. If the house goes ahead and votes on wednesday, thats 21 years almost to the day that the clinton Impeachment Vote occurred in 1998. And after the articles passed in the house, in a Republican House in that year, they went to the senate where the republican leader and the democratic leader agreed on the format for the trial. And the rules for the format were passed unanimously. Now bill clinton, when you compare his experience today in terms of numbers, i think he lost Something Like 31 democrats in the house that supported impeachment. And when it got to the senate, there was real suspense about whether the president was going to survive. It was a Republican Senate. And they were not able to muster the twothirds super majority to convict him and remove him from office. They werent even able to get a majority vote. So you had a number of republicans supporting the president staying in office, and you had democrats universally condemning the president s behavior, but arguing that it wasnt impeachable. So today were looking at the senate. We seem to be pretty confident that the outcome will favor President Trump. I dont know that history will, but the republicans dont have that big a margin. They can only afford to lose two republicans on the procedural votes that set the format for this trial. And you now see senator schumer came out today and over the weekend with his letter basically taking a page from the republican playbook and arguing procedure, that this is a Kangaroo Court in the senate. You have senators like lindsey graham, as you pointed out, saying i dont need witnesses, i dont need information. I know how im going to vote. I think its a powerful argument. It may not work. Mitch mcconnell has proved himself slavishly capable of sticking to his narrow interpretation of what will serve President Trump and Republican Senate and sort of ignoring the country. I think its a fight worth having. To your point, the opening bid for how to do this was done in the clinton case in a private setting between the senators, kind of a seriousness about the process that led to the unanimous agreement, as you mentioned. The opening bid here was made on fox news on sean hannity, and then the Schumer Office was then saying okay, i guess were going to do this in public. They released their letter. Briefly, because then i want to bring in paul, what does that tell you about the different dynamics were in right now . Youre addressing that to me . Yes. First of all, its the introduction of fox news, which was, you know, a minor well, it wasnt even around. You have a much more bifurcated media. You have two parallel tracks, one fake news and one fact news, and you have the president and the Senate Majority leader basically in cahoots along with a very powerful media outlet. And the democrats, they have an opportunity here. If they can seize it, to make the case to the country how this its rigged, its set up, its a sham. What trump has been saying, now its coming to bear. And let me bring in paul here. Fake news fact sounds similar yet so different. Chairman nadler has been hammering the president here in the Closing Argument. Take a look. This is a crime in progress against the constitution and against the american democracy. We cannot take the risk that the next election will be corrupted through foreign interference solicited by the president , which he is clearly trying to do. What do you see is important in the Closing Argument where democrats are going beyond the constitution doesnt require crimes, regular felonies to impeach, but theyre actually going out of their way in the report today to say there are multiple crimes. The report makes the case that the president is a present danger to National Security and free and fair elections. So it rebuts the argument that we should just wait until the election and let the Voters Decide whether the president should remain in office. If you read the report, you see this consistent pattern of corruption. Its not just the july 25th thug act by the president against the president of ukraine. Its also during the 2012 campaign, his openness to russian interference to get him elected. And what do we know about last week . Rudy giuliani was in ukraine. President trump has not been deterred by the Russian Investigation and he has not been deterred by impeachment. What do you think of the strategy, you want to call it that or the offsetting of the arguments that the democrats basically have a report now that has more bad stuff in it than the articles of impeachment, which only have two things . So i think the democrats are going about this in a very strategic way. Theyre keeping the American People eye on the ball. Its about the way that the president cheated and the way that hes ignoring congress, that hes not subject to any restraints. And so if he is not removed from office by the senate, he is liable to do anything. And we have evidence to support those two main cases, the evidence is again all of his other criminality. It doesnt have to be statutory crimes. It turns out that the president , were he not the head of state could, be indicted for honest services. Thats a wire fraud based on his telephone calls with ukraine. Right. And also bribery. So statutory as well as constitutional offenses. Will you lay it out. A lot of us wondering where would bribery and the other lams fit in, and theyre fitting in as the sort of supporting arc connect cher. Paul butler on the law, Eleanor Clift on the swamp, my thanks to both of you. What will the senate do . Well, im thrilled to bring in two experts, a current member of the United States senate, Richard Blumenthal who is on the critical Judiciary Committee, and acting solicitor general neal katyal, who has argued dozens of cases before the Supreme Court in the Obama Administration and his new book fittingly called impeach the case against donald trump. Good evening to both of you. Good evening. Senator, what does a fair trial look like in the senate . A fair trial in the senate is a full trial with witnesses and documents that donald trump has so far blocked in his attempted coverup. The American People deserve to see and hear these documents and witnesses. They deserve a trial with the dignity and integrity and decentsy that this paramount constitutional constitution provides, and they deserve to understand the continuing threat that this president poses by failing to show any remorse or regret. Clinton at least apologized again and again and again to the nation. Donald trump says it was a perfect call, and he is continuing to support and suborn in effect the threat to our National Security when he empowers giuliani to go abroad seeking to sustain these conspiracy crackpot conspiracy theories about the ukrainians, not the russians posing the threat to this nation when in fact Vladimir Putin is continuing to attack this country. Neal katyal, same question. Yeah, so i completely agree with the senator. In a different way of thinking about it is why is it that the president has stonewalled congress so that not a single witness can testify under his orders and not a single document . And why is mcconnell now signaling oh, were only going to have a show trial with no witnesses . Well, two times of the justice department, two different tours i was, there and the one thing i learned is when a defendant does that, ari, its because they have something to hide. Theyre not just doing it willynilly. Its because theyre scared of the truth coming out. And here this president is so scared to have these first Party Witnesses like john bolton and Mick Mulvaney testify. Indeed, i think he is afraid the testify himself. And i think the democrats should be calling donald trump to testify. If he is so sure as the senator was saying that this call was perfect and beautiful, let him say it under oath. But he is afraid to do that. Thats a great point i also want to get into. Senator, do you think that donald trump, Rudy Giuliani, bill barr should all testify before the senate trial . We have proposed an opening list in effect a beginning bid of the witnesses that the American People deserve to hear. There may be others that they should call, either republicans or ourselves or the managers. And i think very, very let me respectfully press you a little bit. We saw the opening list here from your leaders, senator schumer. I know you all want to Work Together so, youre loathe to come out and punch him on tv, but you can understand an issue of this magnitude, people are looking at the list and going wheres giuliani . Wheres barr . They were the two people named by the president in the call to carry out this plot which some of your colleagues have said is a reason to remove the president. Should they be heard from in a fair trial . Well, let me talk to you a little bit like the prosecutor i was for many years, federal United States attorney and state attorney general. If i were trying this case right now, i could say i rest my case. You have the president s own words which are the smoking gun. Then you have powerful corroborating witnesses, dedicated Public Servants who had everything to lose and nothing to gain by speaking the truth and corroborating that crime of bribery. And lets be very clear. As you know, what the president did here was bribery. Its specified in the constitution as an impeachable crime. He asked for something of personal benefit, that investigation of a political opponent, in return for an official act. Military assistance ordered by the United States congress. We voted for it. No discretion on his part, yet he held it back to a country that was fighting for its life. Lives being lost. So i think there is a very powerful case here, and as you all know, there is a danger of overtrying the case, calling unnecessary witnesses. These four witnesses that have been put on our list have direct knowledge of relevant facts, and if there are others who can add, they should be called as well. But its what the American People deserve, the truth. I hear you on that. I want to get neals view on that. Part of your argument is, well, you dont need to overdo it. I think the counterargument to that is potentially its 2019. Its the trump era. Everyone is overdoing everything. So the opening four witnesses, when i looked at them, i thought thats interesting, but it seems like some are missing. But like you say, youre the former prosecutor. Youre in this process. You know a lot more than some of us about how some of these decisions get made. Neal, do you want to weigh in on any of the above . Yes, i agree with the senator in that the evidence against trump is overwhelming. You dont need any live witness testimony. Youve got the partial transcript that donald trump himself revealed, and that itself establishes all the elements, both criminal as well as high crimes and misdemeanors. No question about it, he is right. My only point is that the republicans are afraid to have live witnesses, not because they think its going to actually make him somehow innocent, trump somehow innocent. Thats not it. Theyre just afraid of him coming on tv and lying again or of these other witnesses going and inculpating him even further saying he did some more bad stuff. None of this is strictly necessary, but it does really raise the question, and i think every senator has to look into their heart and say why would why would it be that Mitch Mcconnell would not want a live witness to go and testify . It cant be oh, theyre worried about the process in the house of representatives. Give me a break. Its in the senate at this point. The republicans control it. If theyre afraid of a trial, its because of a good reason. And youre talking about drawing that inference. These are going to be busy times for people like both of you, and well be eager to have you back, particularly if and when the senate trial unfolds. Senator blumenthal, thank you so much for making time. Neal katyal, good to see you. You can get more from neal on impeachment and these issues on our dedicated page opening arguments, thats msnbc. Com openingarguments. This post will be up there later tonight if you want to review it. Coming up, my special breakdown on how facts really can change public view, even on impeachment. A special panel with watergate prosecutor and rob reiner also later. Giuliani confessing to another part of the ukraine plot. Why that could backfire. And a special guest later tonight taking us inside the trump impeachment defense plan and where we go from here. Im ari melber. Youre watching the beat on msnbc. Msnbc. I like chillaxin. The united explorer card makes things easy. Traveling lighter. Taking a shortcut. Woooo taking a breather. Rewarded learn more at the explorer card dot com. For a limited time, get a outb4course meal your holidays even better starting at 15. 99. Treat yourself to the perfect gift today, because the aussie 4course wont last long and now, get a 10 gift with every 50 in gift cards. At to cover the essentialsyou have in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. Because when youre ready for what comes next, the only direction is forward. For the holidays you cant beat home sweet home. We go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. 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 allday allnight protection. Can you imagine 24hours without heartburn . What are you doing back there, junior . Since were obviousl