IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

Trump impeachment: Pelosi Shift. TRANSCRIPT: 9/24/19, The Beat w/ Ari Melber.

Guests: Michelle Goldberg, Christina Greer, Eric Swalwell, Richard Ben-Veniste, David Corn, Daniella Gibbs Leger, Michael McFaul

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  And he is stealing it for his wall, having said the Mexican would pay for it. To use the money to expropriate, to take land away from farmers and ranchers on the border of the United States, how can any conservative support this guy?

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST: Senator the definition of conservative has changed so fast in our lifetime, we going to need a dictionary to keep with that.

BENNET: It is unbelievable.

TODD: All right.

BENNET: Thanks, Chuck.

TODD: Senator Michael Bennet, Democrat from Colorado, thank you so sir. Stay safe on the trial, by the way. That`s all we have for tonight. We`ll be back tomorrow with more MEET THE PRESS DAILY. Obviously, we`re rolling along here. This breaking news coverage is not going to stop. Ari Melber is picking it up right now.

Ari, the baton is yours.

ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: Thank you, Chuck and good evening to you. We begin here with breaking news rocking Washington.

Moment of truth, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says that is what faces the nation tonight. Right now as she stepped out and made this announcement just within the last hour.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I`m announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. I`m directing our six committees to proceed with their investigations under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry. The President must be held accountable. No one is above the law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Many House Democrats already said they were conducting this exact impeachment inquiry. But never the Speaker of the House, never like this. She is the one who decides if there will ever be a floor vote to impeach the President. Why now? Here`s the Speaker.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: This week the President has admitted to asking the President of Ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically. The action of the Trump presidency revealed dishonorable fact of the President`s betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: And in moments Republicans are expected to come out and give their first major formal on-camera response to this news that the Speaker made. We will monitor that and show any excerpts as warranted. We have a lot more reporting and a fuller breakdown on where the impeachment charge is heading later in this show.

But right now I want to get to the latest with NBC`s Heidi Przbyla from Capitol Hill;"The New York Times" Michelle Goldberg; and Fordham Professor, Christina Greer; and "The Root`s" Jason Johnson; as well as Former Federal Prosecutor Joyce Vance.

Heidi, what did Speaker Pelosi change with her announcement?

HEIDI PRZBYLA, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: According to a number of lawmakers who I talked to, Ari, it was both messaging and by putting all of these inquiries under a formal impeachment umbrella as she put it. They believe, and it is their legal theory, that they will have access through the court system to documents and they`ll be able to compel witnesses more easily.

And it is also partly the messaging, Ari. In that meeting, I`m told by several members who attended, she said that, look, this is not just a case of the President asking a foreign country to dig up dirt on their political opponent - on his political opponent. But to actually manufacture evidence against him, because the Ukrainians have already disputed these charges at the highest level in terms of this prosecutor who was dismissed.

MELBER: So Heidi, you are reporting - and this has been quite a day on the Hill with those meetings and then this traumatic announcement. You`re reporting from members of Congress there is that the speaker was outlining why Ukraine is different from what many of her members already felt, which is that there was already impeachable conduct?

PRZBYLA: She did outline why she thought this was a new level of - in her words corruption, by the President. She also outlined a phone call today that she had with the President that was very interesting, Ari. I got a readout on that. That the President actually said to Nancy Pelosi, "Hey, can we do something about this - whistleblower complaint, can we work something out? "

And she said, "Yes, you can tell your people to obey the law. "So she quickly swatted that down and made it clear that it is full steam ahead now. It is unclear, though --

MELBER: On that let me get you - for our viewers, a little more context on that you`re reporting that the Speaker and the President spoke today. He`s had a busy day at the UN, but you`re saying that the pressure led to this call?

PRZBYLA: Don`t know what specifically set up the call. But we do know that there was a call between the two and in the call Donald Trump used language that we`ve heard him use before in terms of asking the Speaker what we can do about this whistleblower complaint. How we can possibly work something out?

MELBER: Interesting let me -

PRZBYLA: --and she swatted that down, Ari.

MELBER: --let me bring in Michelle Goldberg. You`ve been writing and handicapping a lot of what the Speaker has been doing. I want to play a little more sound from Speaker Pelosi earlier today at one of her events where she also - to build on Heidi`s reporting - was talking about this Ukraine issue specifically. Why it`s so understandable, as in her view, an abuse of power. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: We have many other, shall we say, candidates for impeachable offense in terms of the Constitution, but this one is the most understandable by the public.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Your view of what the Speaker did tonight?

MICHELLE GOLDBERG, THE NEW YORK TIMES COLUMNIST: Well, first of all I`m grateful and relieved, because I`ve been very critical of Nancy Pelosi on this show, in my column yesterday. I am so glad that she is finally on board and that somebody in this country has taken charge of holding the President accountable.

But it`s interesting, because when I`ve talked to people in the past about why she`s been so reticent on impeachment, often they said the public isn`t there. And I think for pro-impeachment people that`s been very frustrating, because it`s the job of Democratic leaders to lead public opinion rather than follow it.

But I do think something changes in that, this is a much more - this is something that you can say in a few sentences. Right? You don`t have to read this incredibly dense report to understand just how corrupt -

MELBER: Yes.

GOLDBERG: --what Trump tried to do with.

MELBER: Our whole panel stays let`s listen in to a Republican leader McCarthy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): --investigate something in the back when you cannot find any reason to impeach this President. This election is over. I realized 2016 did not turn out the way Speaker Pelosi wanted it to happen. But she cannot change the laws of this Congress. She cannot unilaterally decide when an impeachment inquiry.

What she said today made no difference of what`s been going on. It`s no different than what Nadler been trying to do. It`s time to put the public before politics. Thank you.

REPORTER: --are you afraid that you are on the wrong side of -

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: A brief statement from leader McCarthy there. Michelle what we see there is Pelosi has done something big enough that there is a need for the President to call her for the House Minority Republicans to respond, although, they didn`t say much in content. As you were saying -

GOLDBERG: I think it was extremely striking how little they said to actually make an affirmative defense of Trump. And similarly we had a unanimous vote today in the Senate to - on a motion to basically - a resolution saying that they should release this whistleblower`s complaint.

And so, to be honest, I`m like a little bit flabbergasted by all the Senate Republicans voting in favor of that, and I`m a little unsure about what the strategy is of coming out with such a tepid statement in - not even in defense of the President, but just as opposing Nancy Pelosi. I mean, it makes me wonder if they assume that something bigger is coming down the pike, but I really just don`t know.

CHRISTINA GREER, FORDHAM UNIVERSITY POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR: So, I mean, I think a lot of Democrats are relieved that this - we`re finally at a moment, because as the Republicans are going to try and say, the Democrats are real litigating 2016 and that`s not the case.

The Democrats are finally saying, there are so many egregious acts committed by this President and he`s been aided and abetted by people in his party. This is now something where he`s actively moving towards 2020 and --

MELBER: Well, and such --

GREER: --possibly trying -

MELBER: --on such a big news night I don`t want to make light. But I don`t remember Joe Biden running in 2016.

GREER: That is true.

MELBER: As I understand it, one of the potential nominees, no one knows it`s going to happen, and a member of the Obama administration and a contender to run against Trump is the target of what, if any other citizen would, do could be an illegal campaign, international conspiracy.

GREER: Right, which is what some of the Democrats were concerned Trump did in 2016 against Hillary Clinton. And we know that Trump pretty much assumes that Biden will be the Democratic nominee.

And so his conversations with Ukraine, whether he thinks that the transcripts will show that he`s completely absolved of this or not are highly problematic.

MELBER: The whole panel stays. I am learning here, as we are reporting this out, that other Democratic leaders Clyburn and Steny Hoyer members of Nancy Pelosi`s leadership have now formally jumped in and endorsed the impeachment probe.

Jason Johnson, I think we have account somewhere that we can put up. But it is account that has grown quite a bit from just 24 hours ago tonight. Your reaction to what you think it means that Pelosi did, because we haven`t heard from you yet, and these other members jumping in.

JASON JOHNSON, THEROOT. COM POLITICS EDITOR: Well, first, we start with the Republicans. McCarthy basically did like the Congressional version of that`s it, that`s the tweet, like he had nothing to say. He just had to put a statement out there, because if he didn`t, the new store was going to completely overshadow anything Republicans would try to say in the next 24 hours.

Ari, what this says to me is something that I`ve always doubted about Pelosi, but now we know it`s true. She can count and she can read a calendar. She obviously has been behind the scenes all along saying, all right look, I don`t have the numbers. But when you see seven vulnerable Democratic freshmen write an op-ed saying it`s time for impeachment, Pelosi has clearly pocketed all the votes that she needs and now she`s rolling this out slowly.

Now the question is simply a matter of - we`re not worried about if there`s going to be a vote, it`s a matter of when the vote is going to happen and we don`t know if that`s going to be in January, February or it could be September of 2020 and force a bunch of vulnerable senators in the Republican side to vote for this right before an election.

MELBER: And that`s the big question. Did speaker Pelosi tonight create a irreversible road towards a House floor vote on impeachment? And if so, that appreciably increases the odds that President Trump will become one of the few Presidents in history to face impeachment.

JOHNSON: Right.

MELBER: Or did she leave herself an off-ramp? I could say - and I was just talking to my control room, some of it`s happening too fast to update our impeachment count. And I can tell you, there`s been many nights where that hasn`t been the case. Tonight the impeachment count growing so fast that we don`t have it up on the screen.

But I`ve got two brand new statements here from Democratic leaders telling us they`re jumping inland so we are now within - Jason, we`re within about 40 votes among the Democrats or less to having the constitutionally required majority in the House to impeach the sitting President. That`s a big deal.

Everyone stays as promised here about 10 minutes into our broadcast. I want to dig in a little more to what just happened. Washington on fire right now. So let`s go through what just occurred in the last 24 hours.

The Democratic Speaker backs an impeachment probe. The Republican Senate pushed for this whistleblower complaint. The President announced to cave to Democratic demands. He claims he`ll release notes on the Ukraine call, Congress waiting to see if he follows through on that, tomorrow. And this wave of House Democrats that we`ve been reporting on in real time, new members in the last 10 minutes since we came on the air, jumping into back a trump impeachment probe for the first time.

So last night, as I was mentioning, we had 136 Democrats supporting impeachment. That number now is over a 180. Now those numbers of snowballing as the panelists were just discussing, thanks to some people in freshmen in swing districts, with national security backgrounds who came out with this rare joint public statement backing impeachment.

These new members of the impeachment caucus are basically moderates and holdouts. These are the Democrats who were holding back after the Mueller report. Holding back after Bob Mueller testified to Congress. That was exactly 2 months ago today, but who say they are moved by the reports that Trump abused his power and pushing Ukraine to target Biden and abused his control over taxpayer funds to use it as a bargaining chip within that scandal.

And Trump has now admitted to key parts of this, including that financial pressure. Here was just this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: very important, I want other countries to put up money. I think it`s unfair that we put up the money. Then people called me they said oh let it go and I let it go. But we paid the money - the money was paid --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: As Pelosi pushes House Democrats demanding this full whistleblower complaint, more evidence and answers from Donald Trump`s Intel chief who testifies Thursday. Meanwhile, Adam Schiff says today he`s working with this whistleblower`s lawyer to get them to testify.

And as mentioned, the Senate unanimously passed a resolution that the complaint must be given over to the Intel committees. If it sounds like a lots happening at once in response to Donald Trump`s violation of the rules and in some cases law, that`s because it is.

And it also shows how post Mueller, Donald Trump may have felt momentarily like he was in some sort of clear, because it was right after Mueller testified that he dialed up foreign leaders for what is basically a new attempted collusion plot, flagrantly defying the rule of law and then now perhaps bizarrely confessing in public.

So we`re seeing this all come together. Democrats from vulnerable freshmen to these party leaders, to yes, also people who are often seen as the conscience of the modern Democratic Party. Take a look at a statesman and Civil Rights icon, if you haven`t seen this yet, John Lewis now saying enough is enough.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN LEWIS (D-GA): I believe, I truly believe the time to begin impeachment proceeding against this President has come. To delay or to do otherwise would betray the foundation of our democracy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Christina where does that idealism fit into what has been such a hard knuckle political battle?

GREER: Well, I think that so many people in this country don`t want impeachment. We don`t want to think that someone who has taken an oath to protect the entire nation would actually do things to work against our best interests.

And John Lewis is, obviously, a great civil rights icon, but he`s also not someone who goes into a battle when he is not prepared and hasn`t really thought about these things. We know that he`s a patriot. We know that he loves this nation. And I think it pains him to actually have to say that Donald Trump has done these things and we have to move this.

But, I mean, if we are in this civil rights vein that I say, impeachment now, impeachment tomorrow, impeachment forever if that`s going to be the case, because this President has clearly shown us that he cares about himself and his businesses more than he cares about the nation and the good will of the American people.

MELBER: Joyce Vance is also with us, federal prosecutor that we`ve come to rely on, and who we should mention as we often do, was sought by the house to testify on this very issue. Appreciate you being a part of this and your patience tonight.

I give you an open swing, everything we`ve heard thus far, including these new Democrats just this hour jumping in, as well as the constitutional significance of the Ukraine scandal being about what President Trump did in office, rather than in some cases earlier questions about acts before he became President.

JOYCE VANCE, : You know that is an incredibly important point, Ari. For so many people the Mueller investigation, the Russian investigation was very difficult to grasp, both because the legal charges were a little bit confusing, they were complex, but also because the conduct happened when President Trump was still candidate Trump.

JOYCE VANCE, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Now we`re talking about misconduct that he committed while sitting in the Oval Office, withholding congressional funds, trying to get Ukraine to deliver the goods on a political opponent in exchange for that aid. And that`s something I think that people can comprehend easily.

As we`ve heard some of the politicians say tonight, impeachment has both a political component and a legal one and it`s important for the country to be able to come along with Congress. There have been complaints that maybe Congress should have been leading.

But the reality here is that now Trump has committed something, as you pointed out, on the eve of the release of the Mueller report and Bob Mueller`s testimony, when perhaps you would think he would have learned a lesson. He was presented as someone who as politically na‹ve, who didn`t understand that this sort of conduct involving foreign nations and elections was wrong. And yet he trod right back the same direction, that`s something everyone can understand.

MELBER: Yes. It`s striking. Heidi before I lose you to do more reporting there on this busy evening, take a listen to a little more of what Speaker Pelosi laid out today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: There is no requirement there be a quid pro quo in the conversation. If the President brings up, he wants them to investigate something, that`s - of his political opponent, that is self-evident that it is not right. We don`t ask foreign governments to help us in our election - -

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Heidi, we saw her and Speaker Pelosi is such a masterful politician in the sense of knowing where her caucus is and also communicating. We saw her tee this up over the course today. Christina earlier referring to the - and Michelle and many of our panelists to how we got here, which was a lot of pressure and back and forth, as she tries to do what she has to do withholding her Majority Caucus.

I wonder what else you could tell us Heidi about what is coming out of the Speaker`s office. Can she ever un-ring this bell? Is there an off-ramp in any way or does this mean that you would expect a floor vote on impeachment of this President at some point.

PRZBYLA: So as of this Tuesday, in September, I would say that we only have an inquiry at this point. But we`re going to know darn sure very fast, because, Ari, on Thursday if the DNI does not produce that whistleblower complaint then what this is going to happen is that the legal brass knuckles will come out and they will use every resource they can to rein down on members of the Trump administration. But it all depends on what specifically is in that whistleblower complaint.

The Speaker is right. I`ve talked to a number of members who said look you don`t need to articulate the quid pro quo for you to execute the quid pro quo. If you`re withholding military aid, at the same time that you`re pressuring the leader to essentially - in the Speaker`s words, manufacture and cook up evidence.

Because, again, I can`t stress enough that her message in this meeting was that the reason why this is so nefarious is that the Ukrainians themselves had already determined and said on the record that none of this had any merit. That the investigation itself had been shuttered for about a year.

And so Thursday will be a real inflection point. That is why the President, obviously, is so disturbed that he would bring it up in a phone call and say to Speaker Pelosi what can we do to work this out of this whistleblower complaint.

MELBER: Striking. Heidi Przbyla on a busy night, thank you reporting from Capitol Hill. Joyce Vance, I want to ask you one more thing and that really to lay it out is. If you look at the analysis by "The New York Times", Peter Baker, we have gone from no collusion to according to "The Times" quote "So what if I did? "The man who once said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan without consequence seems to be testing whether he can do the political equivalent.

Before we lose your analysis, I wonder what you think about that. Because in some ways the Trump era exhausts precisely because of the way that he governs, if you want to call it governing. And things that were drip, drip, drip over - I recall covering, I know you do months in the Mueller collusion probe, really in this scandal on Ukraine took about a week and a half.

You had all the usual parts Rudy Giuliani, clumsily, messily does it, but tries to get the mess on his own suit to protect the President. We know that maneuver. Then the President comes out and admits little pieces and then bargains in public and private.

Heidi, saying, he`s saying to Pelosi, "Hey, what can we work out here? " which may be an echo of the way he talks to Ukrainian President. And then he tweets today from the UN, "Oh, I`m going to release parts of the Ukraine notes. "All of this seems to be him testing how much he can just say, "Yes, I did it. What are you really going to do? "

VANCE: This is really the ultimate expression of the way Trump governs or as you say doesn`t. It`s Trump trying to deal with the Russia investigations with no one else in the room who knows what`s going on. It`s Trump without those guardrails that protected him from the worst mistakes that he would have made on his own. And I think that that`s frankly why we`ve seen this accelerate so quickly.

What we don`t know here is, I think in many ways is interesting is what we do know. What should have happened here was that once the Inspector General for the intelligence community deemed that this whistleblower report was both credible and urgent, it should have been transferred by the Director of National Intelligence almost automatically in seven days to Congress.

There was no reason for Congress or the Justice Department to know that it even existed. But somehow that happened and somehow the Justice Department, the Office of Legal Counsel ended up making this really flimsy decision that says, well DNI you don`t have to transfer it to Congress, because the misconduct doesn`t involve a member of the intelligence community who you have authorization to control, which is really odd since we now know that that conduct was by the President of the United States.

So still unanswered here is this issue of how did this get loose from the DNI and get into the White House or DOJ. That speaks to trump without his guardrails in place.

MELBER: It`s interesting to hear you lay it out like that, because you`re putting your finger on the fact that there`s a bit of bad lawyering potentially going on. Bad lawyering by Giuliani at times and potentially bad lawyering on the President`s behalf at the DOJ, which is in some ways backfiring, because by making this circuitous argument they end up revealing certain things and the pressure, obviously going up.

Joyce, appreciate you, always good to see you. I turn now to the House Intelligence Committee, the action there as we`ve been discussing. Chairman Schiff revealing these talks are now underway to have the whistleblower come speak.

Also the high stakes hearing on Thursday where the Director of National Intelligence, who we were just discussing, who`s been dealing with this lawyering is withholding a whistleblower complaint that, again remember, they are required under law to give to Congress.

For all of this part of panel stays and we bring in a new member of our analysis team here, California Congressman Eric Swalwell, who of course, serves on Intelligence Committee as well as the Judiciary Committee.

I know it`s busy, thanks for joining me from the Hill tonight.

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): Of course, Ari, thanks trapped me on.

MELBER: Let`s start with this. What changed based on what Speaker Pelosi said tonight?

SWALWELL: Urgency of the issue. I mean, of course, this is not to dismiss the lawful inquiries into the President cashing in on access to the Oval Office, obstructing justice on the Mueller probe, working with the Russians to win his election. That is still ongoing.

But here in real-time he is asking a foreign government for help. When you ask someone for help you owe them something. And that means at some point in time, he would put another country`s interests ahead of Americas, that`s betrayal. That means we have to act.

MELBER: When you say you have to act, does that mean in your view Speaker Pelosi is committed by backing this impeachment probe to having a vote on impeachment?

SWALWELL: Well, again, I don`t want to speak for her. I think we are moving in that direction. There`s a big day coming on Thursday where the whistleblower complaint - again, we`re just operating right now under what the President has copped (ph) to. Right?

MELBER: Right.

SWALWELL: I mean, he is not denying what has gone on. But we don`t know if this complaint also articulates other concerns or a completely different concern. We know we`re entitled to it and we know that it`s urgent and that it`s credible.

And so if we don`t get that by Thursday, I think that certainly is obstruction of Congress and something that I would support impeachment for.

MELBER: You would support if this ultimately goes on and there`s never a floor vote in the United States House on impeaching President Trump. Do you view then what Speaker Pelosi did tonight is not enough?

SWALWELL: No. No, no, I think she`s just prioritizing this urgent issue is something we have to work on right now. She`s not - she`s not saying that the other issues and the other investigations won`t go on. But there`s an urgency to this. And the President should turn over the whistleblower complaint.

We`re not really going to give much credibility to what`s in the Presidential edited transcripts. We`ve seen them turn over false transcripts and false videos.

MELBER: Right. I understand that. I think our viewers are up to date on that. What I`m getting at is, for folks who are watching Speaker Pelosi, say tonight she backs an impeachment inquiry. Many people in the Democratic caucus had previously said that`s what was going on. True?

SWALWELL: Yes, in a bottom up way around -

MELBER: So if we doesn`t ultimately hold a floor vote, is that a disappointment to you in your role as a member of these two key committees? Is that what the Democrats think has been advanced tonight or is it not really advanced?

SWALWELL: If we hold a floor vote, I think, it`s because it`s clear that the rule of law has been violated, our national security has been jeopardized. I`m not going to prejudge what she`s going to do. I think, he should have been impeached a long time ago.

But there`s an urgency here and I think her decision tonight to involve herself and say that it`s her priority to have these investigations, shows the seriousness of what the President`s done.

MELBER: And now that we are at, we`ve updated our graphics here and we`re at 186 Democrats, an all-time high, backing this impeachment probe. As you know you only need 218 total.

Are you and other Democrats going to now try to rally? I mean, who are the holdouts now? Who are the remainders? We`ve seen some of the so-called freshman swing members and other centrists come out.

SWALWELL: Yes. Again, it`s a personal decision for each member. But what we are telling those members who have not yet supported it is that, if you do nothing, this President is going to get worse. He`s proven himself to only get worse.

And second, we`re lowering the conduct for future Presidents. But, again, we`d only have to look at what he did with the 2016 election. We have an election coming up that he`s already inviting another country to help him with. Like, we have to act now. Like, it it`s now.

MELBER: Well, is that point --

SWALWELL: --and we don`t have time to screw around.

MELBER: Is that part of the Democratic message that he tried to collude in 2016 when Russia initiated and now by 2020 he`s sort of gotten good at it and he`s trying to collude again, but he`s initiating.

SWALWELL: A leopard doesn`t change its spots essentially. And again if this was the only thing he had done, if he hadn`t cashed in on access to the Oval Office, if he hadn`t worked with the Russians, this would still be something worthy of an impeachment investigation, is what we`re saying.

MELBER: And were you in that meeting today?

SWALWELL: I was in the leadership meeting with the Speaker and I was in the caucus meeting that followed.

MELBER: I know there`s some stuff you guys aren`t going to tell us. We get that. Is there anything you can tell us, though, about what it was like in there? Because the Speaker who came out and addressed the nation, she almost seemed to be in State of the Union mode. She seemed to be suggesting it`s an inflection point.

But, again, I`m just listening and learning as I go. I`m hearing from you that doesn`t mean there`s going to be a floor vote, it doesn`t mean we know the future is. A lot of people around the country are looking up, they see on the news Pelosi backs impeachment after Trump admits Ukraine scandal. They`re thinking that means there is at least to be a vote on impeachment, if not actually him being impeached.

So with that space in between, and again, in fairness to you, what else can you tell us about the meeting or her seriousness or her sort of gravitas on this? Or are we going to be in two or three or four weeks and we`re going to hear, "Well, there`s a lot of committee meetings and we just have to wait and wait and wait", because some folks, as you know, are tired of waiting in your caucus.

SWALWELL: Yes. I heard from her an urgency to act. And I just saw in the way that she led the meeting that we really do not have time, considering how close we are to an upcoming election. And that the Inspector General said this is urgent and credible.

I met with the Inspector General last week, with the Intelligence Committee and he said it was urgent and credible when the complaint was made over a month ago and it remains urgent incredible today, and so let`s get moving.

MELBER: Let`s get moving. Anything else you want everyone to know out there? I ran my mouth a little bit, so I want to make sure to give you final words.

SWALWELL: No, again she`s not rushing into this, and I think that`s what - why so many of us respect her, is that she sort of been backed into this, but has nowhere to go when the President is telling George Stephanopoulos he would receive help from a foreign power -

MELBER: Backed into by --

SWALWELL: --and - by the President, by the President -

MELBER: --backed into it by this rising number of Democrats or backed into it by the President`s actions.

SWALWELL: I think the President`s action. Like, sorry, we`ve tried to work with you in a number of ways. There`s nowhere else to go. The national Security is at risk.

MELBER: Understood. Congressman Swalwell in the Venn diagram of the committees that the Speaker mentioned tonight, you are right in the heart along with some of your colleagues. Intelligence, Judiciary, busy night. Thank you for coming on.

SWALWELL: My pleasure. Thanks Ari.

MELBER: Thank you. Michelle what do you think of what we just heard?

GOLDBERG: I think that it`s true that until now Nadler and judiciary has been saying, "Well, yes, we`ve already started an impeachment hearing. "But they have - there`s been widely reported internal dissension within the caucus where Pelosi reportedly resented the fact that Nadler had sort of gotten out ahead of what she had authorized.

Nadler was trying to push this further than where a lot of the caucus wanted to go. I think because, they saw the urgency, I mean the people on the Judiciary Committee - that was one of the - they were in the in the center of all of this. They were in the center of kind of evaluating the Mueller report.

And so you more than half of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee come out for impeachment when it was still not a majority position within the Democratic caucus. I don`t know that it matters so much that she takes a vote on whether to authorize an impeachment inquiry, because you can just - because you can just start when in the judiciary -

MELBER: No, I mean, a vote on - are there - is there going to be vote on the articles of impeachment or not?

GOLDBERG: Well, look, I think that there`s no question that Judiciary Committee is going to report out articles of impeachment. And it would be, I think, politically - unless something radically changes, extremely difficult for Pelosi then to just bury those articles.

MELBER: Do you agree with that?

GREER: I completely agree. And I mean, and I agree with Jason as well. Nancy Pelosi has always known how to count. Keep in mind, she is the one who wrangled all the Democrats together to pass Obamacare. Obviously, Barrack Obama and Rahm Emanuel got lots of credit. But it was Nancy Pelosi who was making sure that every single vote was counted.

And so in this particular case, I think, the frustration that so many Democrats have had was we have enough. The ambulance clause, that every weekend at the golf - golf courses. I mean, just it seems as though the President has had brazen, abandoned in his behavior.

And she`s saying wait a minute, I know where our Democratic representatives are across the nation, and we don`t want to do this, because we see that the Republicans, as I`ve said several times before, have been acting as though they are agents of Donald Trump and not the United States.

MELBER: And briefly, because I have an expert on some of this, so I want to go to it. But before I bring the new voice in, when you see the President claim in public, "Oh, I welcome it bring on the impeachment, " and then in private, we`re told, called Nancy and say "please, help me. "What does that tell you?

GREER: Well, I mean, what grown sensible individual would ever want to be impeached? You join a very tiny club of Americans who essentially been voted on by their colleagues by people who were sent by the American public to represent them to say you have not done your job, you have not upheld the promises that you have made to the American public.

And as a President for this - for this President-- Clinton`s personal issues are one thing. This is saying Donald Trump has talked to a foreign entity as a sitting President in the Oval Office of the United and asked them to interfere in our democracy --

MELBER: And for someone -

GREER: That isn`t excusable.

MELBER: For some like him who does understand brand --

GREER: That`s off brand.

MELBER: That puts the impeachment Ukraine and other abuses of power alleged in his life history forevermore. That`s in your brand, when it`s the historical event.

Stay with me, as mentioned, we`ve got a couple different ways they`re coming at this story. Now, you hear this often, worse than Watergate. When it comes to Donald Trump asking for Ukraine to help him win re-election, though, consider what former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal says this really is worse.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEAL KATYAL, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: --it`s about as grave an offense as you can imagine.

I mean, even Richard Nixon, when he ordered the Watergate break-in, didn`t have the imagination to outsource it to a foreign government or a foreign intelligence service. Here Donald Trump is doing exactly that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: As promised, I want turn now to Richard Ben-Veniste day. He served as a top prosecutor on the Watergate task force, as a former assistant U. S. attorney in SDNY, also a celebrated member of the 9/11 Commission. You`ve held many different public service posts. Appreciate you making time tonight, Sir.

RICHARD BEN-VENISTE, FORMER WATERGATE PROSECUTOR: Thank you for inviting me.

MELBER: I have a lot of questions for you. But I begin with your view of what the Speaker has said out tonight and whether you think this is an advancement on the road to articles of impeachment?

BEN-VENISTE: I think it is. I think she has put this in the posture of utmost seriousness. It appears to me that Speaker Pelosi is moving toward the appointment of a Select Committee. I think that would be an interesting development in moving this along.

And I think what we have seen is, the perhaps the straw that breaks the camel`s back, in terms of a discussion of impeachment.

MELBER: And is that your view sir, is that straw substantively stronger than the other allegations and incidents that are seen as impeachable, because this is, as we were discussing with our experts, something that the President has done in office relating to his reelection and he`s admitted part of it.

BEN-VENISTE: I think so, I think, however, that this is all cumulative to the idea that the President has espoused of soliciting help from foreign governments in connection with his own personal political needs.

And to do this is a departure from the normative behavior of a President of the United States, and it`s very dangerous. Are we choosing up sides now in our political process to solicit help young different governments and different countries asking for different things -

MELBER: You said normative --

BEN-VENISTE: --from our country.

MELBER: --let me ask you this. In your view, based on what`s publicly known, is it an impeachable abuse of power?

BEN-VENISTE: I think it is abusive and I think it goes along with the disregard that the President has shown for the way in which our country has operated in the past in terms of balance of power.

The ignoring of subpoenas, the bogus claims of executive privilege, the refusal to honor subpoenas for documents and testimony, all of these things, along with the advice to witnesses and the Muller probe not to cooperate with Mueller, all of these things are cumulative yes to behavior that is so different from what we have come to expect from the chief executive of the United States and the chief law enforcement office.

MELBER: Yes. You remember your contemporary Carl Bernstein.

BEN-VENISTE: I do.

MELBER: Here`s what he has to say about the Ukraine scandal.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARL BERNSTEIN, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: I keep getting asked are there echoes of Watergate in this. And there are in the following ways. Watergate was very much an attempt by Richard Nixon to undermine the Democratic electoral process -

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Do you agree with the way he puts it there?

BEN-VENISTE: Well, yes, there are many analogies to Watergate and to the behaviors of Richard Nixon. But at the end of the day, I would note, that Richard Nixon exhibited a sense of shame. We have not yet seen that in this President.

MELBER: I want to keep you here and turn to Jason Johnson and talk about something that can get lost, which is, we`re dealing with a President who`s admitting things that may be illegal and maybe impeachable. The Congress will decide. But it`s not coming out of the blue as Richard and others are mentioning.

It comes in the context of a President who`s had more aides indicted earlier in his presidency than anyone in history at this stage of their presidency, and whose campaign manager and lawyer are sitting in jail right now.

I`m going to put up, so everyone can remember, you`ve got Paul Manafort, you`ve got Michael Cohen, you`ve got Mike Flynn, Papadopoulos, Gates, that`s five individuals, Jason, who have been convicted and pled guilty in every facet, so no debate whatsoever. Mr. Stone remains legally presumed innocent, but he`s the President`s longest advisor. He`s awaiting trial on some serious obstruction issues.

And then, Jason, take a look at the historical timeline, which I think on a night like tonight is pretty significant. Those are the aides charged, and now look at the timeline. This is where Donald Trump is. Obama eight years and a zero; President Clinton three; Nixon, 12, though, those coming much later; Donald Trump is record-breaking when it comes to indictments and convictions of his own aides.

Do you think that is an important piece of living historical context as the Congress decides whether to go down this very constitutionally drastic role of potentially considering articles of impeachment.

JOHNSON: Oh, definitely, Ari, because all of these scandals, all of these indictments, they were - a lot of them were summarized in the Mueller report. And basically ever since the Mueller report drop like, Congress has been waiting for Nancy Pelosi to say get the strap. Right? Like, it`s time to go.

We know who this guy is. It`s time to escalate, it`s time to move forward. And so we already know, the country knows, the voters know, the caucus- goers in Iowa know, the members of Congress already know the President has engaged in impeachable behavior.

The biggest impediment thus far had actually been Speaker Pelosi herself. One part of it is, she could count, but also she had sort of thrown water on the whole thing all along saying, well, I don`t really know. We got to have the public lead. It`s got to be a bipartisan event. And now she recognizes that we have moved past the point.

So to go to your question, yes, we have history that has built up to this point that we knew was coming. But on top of that, there is no off-ramp. We are all going off this bridge together.

There is no way after what Pelosi has announced today that in three months or four months or five months by the time we are halfway through Super Tuesday, she cannot not have had some sort of floor vote. It`s going to be very critical for her to do something before people get frustration.

MELBER: I think you`re talking about frustration, I think you`re hitting it, that`s the key question, that`s what we`ve been reporting out, that`s what we`ve been talking to people about that. That`s why she did, I should note, back off talk of a Select Committee and say no it`s going to be judiciary, which was seen by many progressives and pro-impeachment people in the caucus as a sign of supporting Jerry Nadler and being aggressive.

And, yet Jason, how we do and we love you, but we do it to anyone on the show. We`re going to clip that sound and play it back to you in three months if what you say has not happened, because I don`t have as good a crystal ball as you.

The whole panel stays, I should mention, Daniella Gibbs Leger, from the Center for American Progress joins me here in New York and we`re going to add some more folks. We`re in breaking coverage.

I want to tell you something else that`s relevant to all this, which is right before speaker Pelosi made this announcement of an impeachment probe. The Senate did something itself. It unanimously passed a resolution - non- binding, but unanimous, that is demanding something unusual. That Donald Trump release the Ukraine whistleblower complaint to the Intelligence Committees.

It`s unusual, because he`s supposed to have already done it under the law. But it`s politically interesting, because it required something you don`t see very often, a 100 senators agreeing on something Trump related, no objections. Think about how rare that is.

Meanwhile, there are a wide range of views on some of these scandals when we talk about a breaking point, take a look briefly at what`s happening at Donald Trump`s favorite television network.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is no known evidence that Biden did anything wrong. The whole thing involved corruption in Ukraine. Earlier this year, a Ukrainian officials said there was no evidence of any wrongdoing by Joe Biden or his son, Hunter.

The real issue here is the phone call, the claim that the President pressured a foreign leader to investigate a political rival and the failure to pass the whistleblower complaint to Congress.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the President said I`ll give you the money, but you got to investigate Joe Biden that is really off the rails wrong.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But if it`s something else, it would be nice to know what it is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: It would be nice to know. Joining me now in our rolling coverage "Mother Jones`" Washington Bureau Chief, David Corn, who`s reporting on this story today, including the House jostling over how to deal with what Speaker Pelosi announced, and as mentioned, Daniella Gibbs Leger of the Center for American Progress. Good to see everyone.

David what do you see as different in this town that you live in, that you`ve covered for so long, and his speaker Pelosi leaving herself, as Jason says, no off-ramp that there will be a floor vote on articles of impeachment. Or do you see this as something that continues to play out in baby steps?

DAVID CORN, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, MOTHER JONES: Jason`s a smart fellow. But I think in politics there is always an off-ramp. We may not be able to envision it now, but politicians can squirm out of things if they choose to. But what`s different is that Nancy Pelosi is finally calling a thing that existed the thing that it is.

We have had six investigations. Jerry Nadler has talked about this being an impeachment inquiry, a pre-inquiry or pre-presentation-inquiry, whatever you want to call it. And now she is saying that all these committees that are investigating all these various aspects of Trump`s corruptions, whether it`s emoluments, obstruction of justice, obstruction of Congress, campaign finance violations, all that, that`s it`s all now under an umbrella.

That umbrella has the big word impeachment under it. Which means that at the end of the day, when these investigations are done and they still may take some time - Congress isn`t moving fast and there`s not a lot of time left -

MELBER: And David, you`ve been reporting out what`s going on within the sort of Democratic liberal ecosystem. There has been progressives, including AOC today, who were basically rallying behind Jerry Nadler.

Whatever the criticisms - and we`ve aired some of them on this very show, of how some of the hearings have gone. But saying, on the liberal side, they still see him as the best person to take on Trump. What does that mean? And do you think any of that pressure is getting to Pelosi?

CORN: Well, what she`s doing is, she`s going to have all these committees basically report to him at the end of the day. Here is what we found, and here information that may be an impeachable offense and it`s still going to be up to the House Judiciary Committee, unless you does something differently. But this is how it would work under what we know now to come up with articles of impeachment and move forward with that.

This is a process that could take time, and indeed she and others have not been happy with him getting out there out front. And there was talk today of setting up a Select Committee that would look at the Ukraine matter, maybe other issues. And progressives fought back against that, because they did look at it - rightly or wrongly, as a way of diluting Jerry Nadler standing here.

But now the action turns to all these committees, including Nadler`s committee and we`ll see how long it takes them to come up with conclusions to these various probes and whether they report to him that there impeachable offenses that should go into articles of impeachment.

MELBER: Daniella?

DANIELLA GIBBS LEGER, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS EXECUTIVE PRESIDENT: I`m just so happy this is finally happening. Can I just say that.

MELBER: Well, I`m going to tell you, some Democrats that we`ve heard from and some critics of Donald Trump have said, they come to this more in sorrow. That it`s sad to impeach a President. You`re honestly saying that based on what you think this President has done and gotten away with, you`re happy.

LEGER: Yes, I mean - yes, overall, this is bad for our democracies, this is bad for our country. Of course --

(CROSSTALK)

GOLDBERG: --place for a while.

LEGER: Right. I much rather as have a President who didn`t abuse and break all of our norms. But now that we do have one, I`m very happy that we are now at the point that we are, as David has been calling the thing what it is -

MELBER: And your position is -

LEGER: --impeachment inquiry.

MELBER: --you don`t support impeaching Trump because you disagree with him politically, you support it because of what you see as his actions.

LEGER: Right. Of course, not. I mean I didn`t agree with George Bush, I didn`t agree with a whole bunch of Republican Presidents. But they did not, to my knowledge, do these horrible, obviously impeachable offenses. And I applaud the Democratic members who came out.

The ones who are in Republican leading districts, who are more vulnerable than people like Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler, and said look we can`t stand for this anymore. I think that is what helped put her at ease to say, OK, we need to do this.

MELBER: Do you think that`s sort of the hidden story of this, because they have deliberately stayed off the spotlight. They stay off sometimes the TV, but they came out, as you say.

LEGER: Yes, I think it helped. That was part of the dam breaking, was having some more moderate, some of these national security freshmen come out and say this is ridiculous. We have to do something. We have - no one else is going to stop this President unless we do it.

MELBER: And since we`ve come on the air, we`ve been tabulating the growing caucus back in impeachment probe. It`s now up to 187. That is more than it was 10 minutes ago. But you know who was not doing a happy dance in public was Speaker Pelosi. She emphasized the sadness of it. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: It`s really a sad day for our country actually. I feel very sad about it. And I hope that the Republicans will join us as they have joined in the Senate and just consent unanimously consent in passing a resolution for the release of the information. I hopefully the Republicans will join us in doing that tomorrow with on the floor.

But this is a sad day -

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Michelle, we don`t sit here as armchair emotional experts. But her stated sadness is consistent with what she has said publicly, which is that this was not her first instinct or her second or her third.

The story were getting from the Speaker`s office and the reporting we`re doing, and Heidi was sharing this, we`ve heard this today before I came on the air is, they weren`t planning to go this way. Ukraine and Schiff and the whistleblower took it up a notch.

GOLDBERG: No, I mean, I`ve been speaking to people in Congress who have been genuinely frustrated and thought that she was genuinely trying to pour cold water on Jerry Nadler efforts to keep the option of reporting out articles of impeachment alive.

She did not want this. I think she`s - I think she thought and probably still does think that it`s bad politics. That she wanted - you know and she`s a master legislator. What she has wanted to do is to legislate since taking the majority and they`ve passed all of these pretty excellent bills that have gone nowhere and there`s been a lot of frustration that they haven`t been able to break through.

But you can`t legislate in this environment. Right? It`s like trying to renovate a house that`s on fire. And so I think that, although she`s clearly sad that we`ve gotten to this point, I don`t think there`s anything wrong with being profoundly relieved that she now recognizes and that there`s no consensus about the gravity of the national emergency that we`re in.

LEGER: Yes. I agree 100 percent and I do think that people will give Nancy Pelosi credit for thinking about what this means politically. And I don`t think that`s a terrible thing to say that about the leader of the House caucus.

That she needs to think about what this means in political terms. But at the end of the day, when the House is on fire, sometimes you have to put aside the renovation projects, as you say, to go with that metaphor a little bit longer, and fix the problem.

MELBER: Well, you know, you`re getting very close to David Corn sweet spot. I don`t want to get too musical on such a big news night. David, but we`re very perilously close to a talking heads burning down the house reference.

CORN: Yes. Although, I was thinking of a song by Nas, "Trust", which has a great line, "I wanted to get it right. If you`re if you scared to take chances you`ll never have the answers. " Well, now we have a full-fledged investigation that we`ll get to the bottom, hopefully of Ukraine. This is maybe even the Senate will participate.

And I think this will give more impetus to the other investigations that the Democrats have really failed, I think, in a major way to keep center stage and to tell the story of Trump`s various corruptions to the American public.

Under the impeachment umbrella, as we`re calling it now, hopefully in telling - and sharing with the public all these details that can so often get lost in the chaos and disinformation that Trump spreads.

MELBER: Well, shout out to "Nas". Jason, who knew the road to Washington led through Queensbridge?

JOHNSON: Well, I mean, look, I`ll add Snoop, "Don`t stop". We`re at 187 on the impeachment clock.

LEGER: Wow.

JOHNSON: Right? And as the rest of this night goes on -

MELBER: You can tell we`re not talking a commercials tonight because everyone is losing -

JOHNSON: But it`s going to keep going. And here`s what I think is really critical, honestly, about putting that number up, Ari. Nobody wants to be the last person. Right? You want to be the last person to come forward. So as this number increases -

MELBER: And we`ll put up 187 is just in the last 10 minutes literally. Well, put that back up. Go ahead Jason.

JOHNSON: Exactly. So as everybody sees this number, those vulnerable members, their staffers are calling them now, they`re like, look, at 187. We could be 192. No one`s going to get mad at us for that. Right.

So the building of this momentum is a huge part of why not only Pelosi kind of knew that this was the point that everybody was at. But it`s also an opportunity for people who might have been vulnerable, who might have been nervous.

I`m guessing that the last couple of people who will come forward and officially announce will come from very blue, very safe districts, which will allow them to provide cover for all the other people who are coming forward now.

MELBER: So it`s fact they point of order -

CORN: But she still - it`s still a bit of a task. It`s not a bird in the hand yet to get those 31 votes.

MELBER: No kidding.

CORN: She knows - she was waiting, I think, to get closer before considering doing what she did today. But the Ukraine scandal forced her hand and -

MELBER: And look we`ve -

CORN: --created more momentum.

MELBER: We reported it, news viewers have been following this, so everyone does remember her saying, well, we`re not close to a majority, that`s a hypothetical. That was only a few months ago. Then when pressed on is this an impeachment probe? She said, "Well what do you mean? Do I concede this is what we`re doing? " And so she was basically trying to get some credit for impeachment without going as far as she went tonight.

There has been a shift. Where does it end? I don`t know. Jason Johnson thanks for being with us as part of our rolling coverage.

JOHNSON: Thank you.

MELBER: The rest the panel stays and I want to bring in a diplomat as we talk about this story. There`s the Ukraine piece of this. You had Donald Trump saying now he will actually release notes that his staff took of his call with the President of Ukraine. He hasn`t done it yet.

It comes after Trump spent several days completely dancing around the issue, including whether he abused taxpayer funds in this plot to get his rival investigated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELLY O`DONNELL, NBC NEWS WHITE HOUSE AND CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT: How do you explain delaying military aid given this whistleblower complaint?

TRUMP: I didn`t delay anything. We paid the military aid to the best of my knowledge.

We spent so much money not only to Ukraine, but to other places. And why isn`t Germany spending more money, why isn`t France. Why aren`t other countries in Europe helping Ukraine more? Why is it always the United States?

As far as withholding funds, those funds were paid. They were fully paid. But my complaint has always been, and I withhold again, and I`ll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute to Ukraine, because they`re not doing it, just the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Trump bobbing and weaving, while his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani admits that there was a political process to pressure Ukraine for these benefits and he`s claiming it was at the request of the State Department.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUDY GIULIANI, PRESIDENT TRUMP`S ATTORNEY: The State Department called me and said, would I take a call from Mr. Yermak, who`s number two or three to the president elect. Now the president.

I was put together with Mr. Yermak. I talked to him. He gave me enormously important facts. I conveyed them all to the State Department. Unlike the media lies, fake news, I wasn`t operating on my own. I was operating at the request to the State Department.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: I`m joined now by Michael McFaul, former U. S. Ambassador to Russia. Good evening. So many aspects of this we`ve been covering. Something we haven`t gotten to yet is the President now saying he will release Ukrainian call notes tomorrow, something that you`ve said, notwithstanding your criticism of Trump, but you have concerns about that becoming a precedent. Your view of that and the wider issues tonight.

MICHAEL MCFAUL, FORMER U. S. AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA: Yes, Ari, I`m 100 percent against that. I was an Ambassador in Moscow. But I also worked three years at the National Security Council with President Obama. I was on lots of calls. I read lots of transcripts of other calls.

And it`s the President the United States, a Democrat, Republican, needs to be able to conduct diplomacy without having to release transcripts of that. And if we do this, it means that every Prime Minister and President that talks to either President Trump or the future will now self-censor themselves.

So I`m against it on that grounds, but I`m especially against it, because it`s a diversionary tactic. We need to know what is in the complaint from the whistleblower.

MELBER: Right?

MCFAUL: And I think it is naive. I think it`s way too premature to assume that everything that that whistleblower did and was worried about was just this one phone call. I have my --

MELBER: Your view. (CROSSTALK)

MCFAUL: I think - but I think it`s wrong.

MELBER: Your view is that someone that high up in U. S. government isn`t risking everything, not only their career. But let`s be honest, the climate, as we pointed out in this show, where they`ve investigated the investigators.

Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Acting Director says that they tried to get a grand jury to indict him. They haven`t fully denied that. So we`re in a holding pattern. And in that environment someone took that risk over just a few notes from one call. Do you think they have a bigger plot and that`s why that whistleblower needs to face Congress?

MCFAUL: Well I don`t know. I want to be clear what I know and what I don`t know. But I do know one thing. It`s bad to release transcripts of presidential calls. That`s a bad precedent. And it is the law to release the whistleblower complaint to the U. S. Congress.

MELBER: Right, great point.

MCFAUL: It`s not a should. It is the law. The second point, though, that you make is also really important. Again, I`m not an intelligence officer, but I worked for five years with many people in the intelligence community. These are patriots. These are hardcore patriots. You do not take this action lightly.

This is, I think you`re right, it`s likely career ending for whoever this person is. And so just for me to think that this is based on one phone call, I just got to believe there`s more to this story -

MELBER: Which I think I understand your -

MCFAUL: --and we need to have the whole story.

MELBER: You`re doing analysis based on being in these rooms, which most of us have not been in, you`re not reporting out new information in the sense of what is known. But I think it`s very telling just as a way to help us understand.

And also the whistleblower complaint is what the administration is hiding, even violating the law -

MCFAUL: Exactly.

MELBER: The notes to the call is not what they`re hiding, it`s what President is tweeting about. I`ve been alive long enough within Trump era to know the stuff he`s tweeting about is more in his interest and the stuff they`re hiding it might be the facts that Congress should look at, without prejudging what`s in there.

Ambassador stay with me. Richard, I want to read to you when you think about the congressional interplay here what we`re seeing now, even again, as I mentioned this hour the breaking news coming fast and furious.

Chairman Schiff now putting out this new statement, posting it online as folks do to Twitter. "It`s bad enough Trump sought help from a foreign power in the last election. Worse still, he obstructed the investigation. Now he`s admitting to using his office to coerce another country to interfere in 2020. I fully support impeachment inquiry. " Richard, your view of this as it relates to where that inquiry goes.

BEN-VENISTE: Well, I think, Ambassador McFaul has put his finger right on it. We need to see the report from the whistleblower. At great risk, as has been said here, this individual, who is no doubt a senior person. Who has served in different administrations has taken the responsibility of analyzing what went on in that call and perhaps other things that are included in the report and decided that it must be revealed pursuant to the law.

And now we have unanimity in the Senate. Let`s take a look at it and then we`ll be able to determine how serious this is in consideration of the cumulative effect of what has gone before this by this President.

MELBER: As we draw to the close of a very busy hour, I want to do something we sometimes do on big nights, which is a bit of a factual lightning round. I now want to ask each of you in a single sentence to wrap it up for us and reflect on what did Speaker Pelosi do or accomplish tonight.

For viewers joining us, of course, the Speaker came out for the first time, addressed the nation and said she is backing an impeachment inquiry into the sitting President, and that has skyrocketed the number of Democrats who now support that inquiry. They are within thirty five votes of having a standing majority to impeach the President, should they decide to do that. Let`s go around with a sentence each. Michelle, what did the speaker do tonight?

GOLDBERG: Well, I think she finally held him accountable. I mean he`s been unleashed since the end of the Mueller investigation. If nothing else, the fact of this investigation could potentially curtail his worst in things.

MELBER: Going around the panel, Daniella?

LEGER: I agree. I think she started the accountability clock. I think also she has started to really unite her caucus around this.

MELBER: David?

CORN: With the addition of a new scandal she has finally made it a priority of the Democrats in Congress to tell the story of Trump`s multiple corruptions.

MELBER: Ambassador McFaul?

MCFAUL: It`s a necessary action to preserve our democracy, but it`s also a sad day. I agree with Speaker Pelosi. This is not an exciting day for me. This is a sad day and a sad moment in American history.

MELBER: Richard?

BEN-VENISTE: Speaker Pelosi has taken an important step in alerting the country and then alerting her caucus to the fact that she has now put her standing behind a full investigation that could lead to the impeachment of the President.

MELBER: I want to give a special thanks to each of the panelist you see on your screen, and everyone who joined us for an hour of rollicking breaking news coverage here on MSNBC. Thanks to all of you.

Let me tell you where we are here at the end of this hour. The Speaker of the House has endorsed this impeachment probe, uniting the work of several committees. The Republicans in the Senate who are often hectored for their lack of response to anything Trump does, have joined in that unanimous vote, demanding the whistleblower complaint, which is at the heart of the Ukraine scandal.

And 188 Democrats now in the House backing impeachment. If it feels like things are basically accelerating, they are. If you ask us, "Well, what happens next? Does this mean there will be an impeachment vote as our experts said tonight? "That is yet to be determined.

As always, thanks for watching THE BEAT right here on MSNBC. We will keep on reporting this story. So I will see you again if you tune back again at 6: 00 p. m. Eastern tomorrow. But I wouldn`t go anywhere, especially on a night like this. "HARDBALL" with Chris Matthews is up next.

  THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END