David Gergen

If Bloomberg stays in through Super Tuesday, and I think he will, it could very easily -- could be that Texas would go to Sanders.

I think he can do -- he's already starting to pick up some steam in places like Virginia.

But it's very clear that the President of the United States believes that he has the right, and he will exercise it, to take a sword to his enemies through the Department of Justice, and - and build a shield for himself and for his friend…

It may turn out - I think we have to give A.G. Barr a little time here and to see if he's honest. I don't think - I'm very skeptical that he wants to be truly independent.

It's hard not to be cynical tonight about what was really going on here today.

I think it'd be a mistake for the White House team to go 24 hours.

They're going to come out of this now with some nuggets that they can use, some things that'll be familiar to them.

I have a sense, Anderson, this is going South in terms of getting witnesses and documents.

Absolutely, absolutely. I -- Because the Republicans have gone at this in such a different way than the Democrats, the Democrats have been arguing the facts and the evidence, and the Republicans aren't contesting them on the facts.

There's no question, Anderson, it does strengthen the case for the Democrats to get both documents and witnesses.

I think Mike Pence has that. But Nikki Haley could well be a surprise choice to become secretary of state in a second term.

He will be a tougher act to follow than I think people appreciate, and that is because he's the strongest man in National Security around the President.

I think Donald Trump is going to emerge very differently from Nixon and Clinton. He's not going to be contrite. He's not going to take responsibility.

This is a letter from a two-bit dictator in a banana republic.

If the Biden are subpoenaed and I would refuse to go. Go to court with it.

I think the Trump White House is simply not taking the Constitution seriously. They are acting like this is a circus. It's just all politics when, in fact, at the heart of this there's a very serious question about our democratic system…

What we see here is overwhelming evidence -- and this helps to confirm what we learned tonight about the president what he -- what he knew and when he knew it.

Well, we know a lot more if the president weren't stonewalling. And the hypocrisy here is that the Republicans are claiming there is no direct evidence, we don't have the president on tape or doing something that's very direct.

I think it's important for the country to make a decision based on the whole body of evidence about the conduct of this presidency.

Absolutely. Absolutely. It's clear from the last few days that he has a story to tell. There's a part of him that would like to tell it. He's sort of dangling it in front of us. I think it's worth exploring.

I think there are additional elements that have been forgotten and there's a path -- there's a narrative about the president's entire activities as president. The trail that we have seen, the amount of obstruction, the amount of dismissal…

The Democrats have done a very good job amassing the evidence and made a compelling case that the President and his team... did something that was very wrong and inappropriate.

I think it's unbecoming. It's sort of cheap and cheapens the presidency.

What did the President know and when did he know it?

If you're the president of the United States and you got people in your organization who in effect have become disaffected and have, you know, testified against you in some fashion, I don't think it's unreasonable for a president to sort…