[Camerota:] It's a new morning and that means another allegation from John Bolton's unpublished book manuscript. According to the New York Times, the former National Security Adviser says now that the President directed him to help pressure Ukraine to dig up dirt on Democrats back in May of last year, that's earlier than previously revealed. But here's where it gets really interesting: Bolton also says that Patsy Baloney, the lawyer representing President Trump at the impeachment trial, was also in the Oval Office at the time of this conversation, and so was Mick Mulvaney. Back with us: John Avalon, Joe Lockhart, Charlie Dent and Laura Jarrett. Laura, I'll just read a portion of this from the New York Times: "Mr. Trump gave the instruction," Mr. Bolton wrote, during an Oval Office conversation in early May that included the acting White House Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, the need the President's Personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and the White House Counsel Patsy Baloney, who is now leading the president's impeachment defense." Patsy Baloney, correct me if I'm wrong, had said that the President didn't do anything wrong, and he didn't know anything about this.
[Jarrett:] Well, there you go. I think I think two things about this. One, the fact that it happens in May is notable. We can all remember that Giuliani had gone out to tell the New York Times he was going on this adventure in the Ukraine, he eventually doesn't go after all the hoopla about it. But that was what the purpose of this was and why in the world is the president directing Bolton to send Mulvaney on I mean to send Giuliani on this excursion? If he really was so worried about corruption, there are so many other ways to go about it, but instead, he used his fixer, Giuliani, to do his
[Camerota:] His personal lawyer who has nothing to do with the U.S. government as Giuliani himself tells Ukraine that, too, is
[Jarrett:] And then, at the same time, Patsy Baloney is in the room. So, as you mentioned, he is now a fact witness to some key events, while at the same time being an advocate for his client, but really the presidency is his client. And so now, I think there are fair questions about whether the D.C. bar should look into this. I am not confident that anything will be done about this, even though I know John Avalon has some strong feelings about this, but I don't think that we have seen any suggestion that there are going to be any repercussions for this whatsoever.
[Avalon:] Well, look, in the political realm, we've seen that people are willing to allow hypocrisy and partisan self-interest and polarization to cause them to abandon anything resembling a principle that they've advocated for decades. But there's still the hope that the law retains a degree of integrity beyond politics, and there is a thing as you know, called the witness advocate rule. It's an ethical standard in place but you can't be an advocate in some place for you should be witness. And this is the White House Council got the floor of the Senate in front of the Chief Justice and appears to have lied, and a lot, and that should matter. That should matter. This is not simply Lionel Hutz, making a case on it and an infomercial on T.V. This is this is a very serious moment. And if he knew he was lying, advancing an argument to the American people, there should be, there should be a recourse.
[Berman:] Let me just read a little bit more of what the New York Times reports, it says: "Mr. Trump told Mr. Bolton to Zelensky who had recently won election as President of Ukraine to ensure Zelensky would meet with Mr. Giuliani, who was planning a trip to Ukraine to discuss the investigations that the President sought in Mr. Bolton's account. Mr. Bolton never made the call, he wrote." Now, the President put out a statement overnight saying that he never told John Bolton to do this. And Rudy Giuliani put out a statement which denies nothing, as far as I can tell. Giuliani says, "I think he's making some of it up. He's sure making up. Well, I wouldn't call it making it up, but he's acting like a real scumbag by never telling me that he objected once and then saying, I was a time bomb or a firecracker or something." It was a hand grenade but, but we'll give him that one. So, look, you have the President denying it, you have John, you have John Bolton telling one story and the President telling another. There is a way to find out the truth. Sometimes you can put someone under oath, right? But the Senate's not going to do that. And now from a political standpoint, Joe, it is interesting, because there's the Alexander, Lamar Alexander, doctrine now, which is Republican senators can say: Oh, I believe all this happened. I believe John Bolton story here. I believe it could get even worse than that. But I still don't think the President should be removed, and I still don't want to hear everything John Bolton has to say under oath.
[Lockhart:] Well, I mean, that that's the hard part. for them. It is it is legitimate to say something doesn't reach a threshold. And that's a decision a senator has to make, you know, with his own conscience and having talked to his constituents. You can't then extend that and say, there's evidence out there, there are witnesses out there, but we don't want to hear it. That, that what they're saying, in effect is there is no threshold. There is nothing the President could do that would make me want to remove him. And that's an abdication of their responsibility as a United States senator.
[Avalon:] This president, because he's popular with the base, despite the fact he's massively unpopular with the American people and 75 percent of the American people want witnesses and the founding fathers were incredibly clear about the fact that foreign interference, asking for foreign interference in a domestic election was exactly the kind of thing they were worried about.
[Camerota:] Hey, Charlie, how are your Republican friends, your colleagues in Congress that you, I assume, are still in touch with? How are they wrapping their heads around that this is what they'll get for the next five years, if they have their way in the election, that the President doesn't think what he did was wrong with foreign interference and he'll do it again?
[Dent:] This is they're being tortured by all this. And that's why so many have retired. Let's face it, I suspect you're going to see more retirements. I mean, this is I've said this for since Trump's been the president, this has just been simply exhausting. And they're very frustrated by this whole thing. I mean, it's they don't I think their silence speaks louder than anything. They're silent. They can't explain it. They can't justify it. And they, they just, they just muddle through. And I think it's I don't know, when it breaks, I really don't. But somebody should talk to the members who lost in 2018, because I can tell you what they'll tell you why they lost their elections, for the most part is because of the President. And that's where we are again.
[Avalon:] But, but silence is total cowardice. I mean, you've got people with real power acting completely impotent. I mean, Senator Murkowski's statement was nonsense. The Senate's broken, I'm very sad. I'm a member of the Senate and I could help make it better by voting for witnesses to make the system work. But instead, I'm going to feel overwhelmed about how broken the system isn't very sad. What the hell is that?
[Lockhart:] In their defense, they're stuck, Charlie, you know, this, which is if they, if they cross the president, they lose their base voters. They lose they'll most likely lose their seats. If they defend the president, they lose 60 percent of their constituents.
[Avalon:] She got re-elected as an independent candidate.
[Lockhart:] He has put them in this situation. And I think this one of the things that was behind extending this beyond the State of the Union was their little feeble attempt to say, you can't tell us what to do, Donald Trump. We're going to we're going to do this to you. It was feeble.
[Berman:] The witness vote was the way to do that. That's
[Lockhart:] Yes, of course.
[Berman:] That's why the witness vote was important here to a lot of people because you can say, you know, what, removing the president is an incredibly high bar. But I will call witnesses as a middle path here to signify that what the president is saying here is not OK with me, and I want to hear a different story. They did not choose that route. They did not choose a route that was available to them.
[Lockhart:] But it was they were motivated by fear. They were motivated by the fact that the President would retaliate against them and, and, and it's cowardly, but it is these it is a state of
[Dent:] Most of them represent very safe districts. So, they have to really cater to their base. There weren't many guys like me who represented swing districts. I always had to be thinking about those independents, I ended 25 percent of Democrats to win. I just couldn't speak to a base and most of them don't have that experience. So, you've got to and they're in this no one situation if they crossed the president, they lose the base. And if they, if they step, step away from them, they needed the independents and moderates.
[Berman:] I am very interested about how the President will treat the State of the Union Address on Tuesday night, because if he does walk in there and say I made a perfect phone call, right? Does the Lamar Alexander clap? Do all the senators who have said that it was inappropriate? Are they going to cheer everything he says there? He asked
[Jarrett:] Probably. Probably. I mean, to the extent that their judges are getting cleared, and to the extent that Elizabeth Warren doesn't win? I think the answer to that is yes.
[Camerota:] I mean, the chances that President Trump doesn't say that he's completely vindicated and that all this was a sham are zero, of course.
[Jarrett:] That's what he's been saying.
[Lockhart:] It's not likely, he's not given a major speech recently off a teleprompter, a big policy speech. He's been doing rallies, so it's really hard to think that he'll be disciplined and read the words in front of them. He's going to, at some point slip, and tell us what he really thinks. And it going to be, you know, I'm persecuted. They tried to get me. They didn't do it. I'm protecting you from them and just all the nonsense you hear in these rallies.
[Berman:] All right friends, thank you for being here on Saturday morning, much more to come. The first vote inside the Democratic nominee, the Iowa caucuses.
[Camerota:] Is that what you're calling it?
[Berman:] I'm calling it the Iowa caucuses.
[Camerota:] The Iowa caucuses, got it.
[Berman:] 48 hours away now. The candidates are in Iowa.
[Camerota:] For the caucuses.
[Berman:] For the caucuses. Campaigning. We're going to go live next.