robert: the acting attorney general under fire. democrats rising and washington divide. i'm robert costa. welcome toin "waon week." president trump: we're looking at different people for different positions. it's very common m after t terms.si robert: prent trump begins cleani house. attorney general jeff sessions steps down. atthew whitaker, a critic of special council robert mueller rises, and democrats express alarm about the probe. >> it wouldreate a constitutional crisis, and protecting mueller is paramount. robert: and a diverse field of newcomers and look to the future. >> we will have a responsibility

to loot your oversight responsibilitieses. robert: and the president remains defiant. blaming the democrats for their defeat. >> they decided not to embrace whether it's me or what we sndta for. they did very poorly. robert: we discuss this turbulent moment next. ♪ nouncer: this "washington week." funding is provided by -- >> kevin. kevin. >> kevin.dv >>e for life. life well planned. learn more at raymondjames.com. ro funding isded by newman's own foundation donating all profits from food products to charity and nourishinghe

common good. ku and patricia ewing, committed to bdging cultural differences in our communities. the ethics in jourmism foundation, the corporati for blic broadcasting and contributionsur to yo pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. once again from washington, moderator robert costa.: robeood evening. we begin tonight with a shakeup at the justice department. jeff sessions out asrattorney ge trump a lyle math you -- ally matthew whitaker in. rattling washington raising new questions about the future ofal the spe council's investigation that's looking into russian i and it's all as the democrats are poised to take over the house next year following this in the midterm elections.

joining me is chuck todd moderator of "meet the press on nbc." molly ball of the "time" magazine. and karoun demirjian of "the f shington post." and mark landere "new york times." let's start with matthew whitaker wnoho was u just days ago. he's taken a tough line on mueller's investigation. >> there is a red line. there is a very specific scope to this investigation. and anything that is outside of russian coordination or the 2016 campaign would be the guide to the scope of that investigation. h democrats have asked for him to recuseself. and today the president was asked about him. president trump: i didn't know matt whitaker, but matt whitaker

is a smart man. he is very respected, athe top of the line. bert: chuck, the president says he doesn't know him. he said he's a loyalist. what does it mean for robert mueller and his independence? >> i don't think we know yet in fairness to mr. whitaker. first of all, you don't know whatyo happens where actually in the job. he expressed those opinions when he was a political pundit for cnn. he has take than oath as a u. attorney in iowa. you don't know what happens when he's actuallyti g briefed by robert mueller about what he's und. in fairness to mr. whitaker, we have to see what happens when he gets briefed. robert mueller knew this was coming. this was telegraphed. he knew he s going to have a new supervisor soon. he's off-loaded parts of the inveutigation. he'some of it at the southern district of new york. and the east district of virginia has gotten a piece of

it. he's protected the probe that there isn't much whitaker can do. he may be the eyes and ears for the white house. that is not illegal.pl many p would call that unethical. perhaps, he's therenc to l another investigation. maybe he has als atalkedbout opening an investigation into hillary clinton. maybe he's not there to c or trim the sales of mr. mueller but maybe to add a probe which of course as far as the president's concerned is all about diluting the scandal pull if you will. i actually think mueller's probe is as safe as it can be. robert: the democrats, they don't believe that. what canhey don the lame duck before they take power in the house next year to try toh protecte mueller investigation? molly: make a lot of noise.he once t lame duck is over and they're actually in power at hey can trye house, t to use that power to investigate anything they can that theyhid is untorrid or fishy or happens to be where mueller had to leave

off in their estimation. at this point, cck, you're right, we don't know what they're going to do. but by making the switch it gives democrats all t ammunition they need if they're not satisfied with the findings. if it falls anything wrong and findingng wing you're going to see people saying wait a second there could have been interference and it's going to launch the investigations that twere goio happen as to what sort of activity was going on in the d.o.j. even once mueller is done even if he had beente ped the whole way through. this is putting more fuel to the fire that we already knew was coming. they've been clamoring for him to recuse himself. they can't make that happen. they're going to have t deal with whoever the president wants to nominate on a consistent basis that's not just interim. and that could start a whole

knew round of fights. we don't know where mueller would lbe at this point -- mueller will be at this point. this is optics. and we know now this is going to amp that up. robert: the republicans don't want to act torotect mueller. mitch mcconnell said he's not going to move forwardhe legs. nator susan collins said it would be appropriate to bri some legs to protect mueller. where's the g.o.p.? are they still standing by him and how he's handling this? >> they've been in the same o pretend ich is t that none of this is happening. and that's something that mitch asconnell feels done them in good stead. they're not going to b going toe able to do that once the deocrats get intower in the house. but you know, the danger is i think not only optical.

there's a potential legal complication as well because a lot of conservative legal expeits argue that er cannot be appointed. cannot act as the attorney general because he hasn' been confirmed by the senate. and that sets up the potential for anything that h e actually does in that position to be challenged in the courts. so anything that he actually tries to do, i think, as chuck is saying could -- could -- he hasn't actually doneth ag. we haven't prejudged him. mueller.t fired he hasn't interfered in anything that we know so far. but when and if he did that could potentially be undone by the courts. robert: but younge been loo at some question marks when you think about mark whitaker. it not just his statements about the mueller probe. there are iues about his business dealings. the f.b.i. in miami is looking into his past business experiences. he's friend with sam clos, a witness in the mueller investigation. what else have you foundhat's

hanging over whitaker as a cloud? >> well, one of the things that many legal theorists talk about being the most fundamental is his view of the role of the courts. heas asked to enumerate bad decisions by the supreme court. he singe out marbury vs. madison. -- by raising a doubt, by iticizing that ruling, you could read ha to mean that he sees t courts as having an inferior position in the government. for the legal theorist in washington, that more than maybe more of the other issues including to his prior statements of the mueller investigation are what has him worry. it doesn't pass statements or not predictive of future actions, but in this case he's well outside the legal mainstream. a lot of people in washington are worried about that as well.

robert: what about the president's pick to replace attorney general sessions and put someone over whitaker? could he look to a judge or a senator or a chris christie or acosta? >> it looks like he's going to get stuck with chris christie. i find it interesting secretary azar would love this job if marco rubio had been president. buthe apparently secretary has put out word, ask me again after mueller's done. there are some people that do not want the responsibility or the burden of having to be in that awkward position. they saw d at happe jeff sessions. the amazing thing in the jeff sessions thing, he enacted the president's agenda when it came to law and order, immigration. there's a bit of separation on policy. the sole reason that he was fired was his recusal over this. you can tell the bitterness in jeff sessions. he made sure wet knew t he had -- he was asked to resign.

meaning i was fired. ironically if the president had waited until thanksgiving, maybe sessions would have resigned. but i think the pic of the house getting going democratic has the psidentanicked, and that's why he made this move so fast and so quickly. and frankly done in hayes. it looks like this white housen didn't e vet, they didn't realize that the guy speculated -- kell, youw, maybe a recessed opponent -- appointing general could defund the mueller probe. so he describeed what perhaps he was actually about doing. robert: talking aboutesons, a final note on his legacy. edssions, of course, got the president irrit because he recused himself from the mueller probe overseing it. but on immigration, he was right there. >> right. he f pushedward an agenda like you were saying just a second ago was a trump all the way. the zero tolerance at the

border. he held the line when it came to criminal justice reform angering people in his own party. anything thales the d.o.j. touched -- i mean, that didn't have anything to do with russia he was right there in lockstep. he had cover because democrats didn't want to touch him because he was so important to keep in place in order to protect the line abo mueller, otherwise, you would have seen a ground swell of opposition toward him. you would have seen much more vitriol out of jeff sessions. >> it's all about the mueller probe. >> even wn the democrats thought jeff sessions had lied under oath to them about what he knew when, they still said, you know what, we don't have time to get into that because they were focused on protecthis guy because he recused. that's- it's almost comical in a sad way that that's his. lega he went from having a very, very conservati, very, very -- noted for his anti-immigration policies when he was a senator that could haveo carried him t

the d.o.j. but right now, he's been, you know, turned into an enemy because ro the russia. he was always an enemy with the democrats. and 's leaving with his tail between his legs but some people are sad to seeiaim go espy on the democratic side. whoever signs themselves next you're signing for their last fate. you don't want it to be your last job. ebert: and the trigger was the midtermctions. sometimes we forget it actually happened this week on tuesday. things moved so quickly. let's think about whatne hap democrats seize control of the house majority winning 225 seats. that's accord dog the "assiated press"'s latest count. republicans won 1297 seats in -- 197 seats. in the senate, they held on to 51 seats. but there are two t ract remain too close to call. in florida, rick scott hold as

narrow lead over bill nelson is suing two democratic county bow ward and palm beach ciming they are engaged in rampant fraud. >> i will not sit idly by while liberals try thi steal election from the great people of florida. >> in arizona, kristen sinema has taken a slight lead over martha mcsalley. there ar still many, many votes, thousands of ballots that have not been counting. most ofou thtanding ballots they're coming from arizona's largest county maricopa county which includes sinema's congressional district. molly, your headline seems to tell the story about post election america. red or blue, it's a great story. you thin about this done there, a split decision in the midrm elections. what did we learn? molly: first of all, it was a spli dision, but it was mostly for the democrats. let's not falselyer -- falsely,

quivilize. it was an incredible night for the democrats. there are still several races yet to be called that could add to the house majority. there is,f, you know, if they're on the knife's edge and there's a run-off inississippi that we assume the republicans will win, but even if -- but if theemocrats manage to win those races that a still being counted, the republicans would only have picked up one seat in the senate. and at was the friendliest dnvironment for them in decades. it was mostly a night for democrats. but there were some unexpected resultst that w the republicans way. most of the polls would have led you to believe that claire mccaskill would have pulled it out. and that joe donnelly, the democratic senator from indna

didn't survive and it wasn't close. what we saw democrats were hoping that what we would see was that the backlash to trump was so overwhelming that he was etpudiated comy. instead what we saw an intensification of all of the trends that began in 2016, all of thef -- all o the galvanization that trump started to put into plati -- place because heerted himself sometimes to the chagrin of his own party. yes, democrats were enthusiastic and were aroused and wanted to send that message to washington and a lot of independents and suburban ice. but t base was activated too. that's why the turnout was off the charts because the republicanedwere almost as r up as the democrats. robert: florida native, chuck todd. what a tight contest -- chuck: i'm sorry. have to apologize for m state.

robert: what happened there? chuck: what was interesting about florida in gene it is the microcosm of america as i always say as i always joke it's america's sedyment. robert: it's better than that. chuck: there are great parts in florida. there are very few swing counties. it was margins in every county that didn't touchalt water was once again just like 2016 showed up in big numbers. the counties that touched salt water were the places crthat des did pretty well in. look, thisoiecount is g to be, i think the first round of what is going to be ay blood partisan warfare for the next two years. this is going to be the backdrop to 2020. the presidenter is ing himself into this. there's going to be a lot of court battles believe it or not there will be threeecnts.

one for the senate race. the governor's race continues to shrink too. don't think it's going to get into the hand recount, b it's something else. one larger point i want to make though. this was a blue wave but there was more realignment that necessarily wave. because you saw, for instance, ohio -- i think ohio is moving -- it's off the presintial battleground. republicans won in a fairly comfortable -- still under five points but by a bigger margin than we thought for the governor's race. and indianaes m indiana come with the democrats. they always move in wave years. that didn't happen this year.th on the hand, you saw oklahoma -- the suburbs wen so blue whether it was northern rginia, oklahoma city, seattle, you can name it. in that sense, i think we' een this metropolitan versus urban -- rural-urban divide

shown across the country. robert: you think about the democrats, their strategy. does that mean they move for impeachment of president trump or try to work with him on infrastructure and other things? >> there's not going to be any impeachment. the leaders are not goi to let it happen unless mueller finds something to obviously gring unconstitution that that trump did that republicans would hop onboard too. the leaders just don't wt it. and what they're nervous about is the leaders who won in trump country, they ran on ae'essage of work with the presidents. they don't want to answer forn impeachment vote that can never get through the senate anyway. he's going to get removed from office. they're going to put a lot of capital in investigations of his finances, of the security clearance process in the whi house, or why the d.o.j. didn't

defend the a.c.a., the hea bh carell in court. and then they will also probably focus on infrastructure and other areas where they can work with the president. but they're not going to gool hog into impeachment. and i think that is kind of a representative -- real thing in terms of the legislative prioritys that reelects what's going on in the democratic party as a whole. they need f toigure who they are. the answer for the suburbs in the00 the answer is be your own person say ywoou'l with the white house and with trump. that didn't work so well for claire mccaskill and joe donnelly. i guess wtked well for joe mancin. you can say that mccaskill and donnelly ran to the center and abandoned eyeir base. ave to figure out how to campaign as one party in two years' time. robert: mark, what about the

white house? of course, sessions is the news are we expecting more departures inside the cabinet mbe chief of staff john kelly. >> well, kelly has stayed he will stay until 2020. the next name they will focus on as jim mattis. that's a possible shoe to drop and one thatill be more consequencetial than almost any other. the bigger question around trump is if you look atis progression from his psychology from his hapless effort that this was a success and not a setback, to the greater degrees of aer all week lashing out at reporters, getting involved in the florida senate race, alleging vote rigging. i think we're seeing what we may see in the coming year. he's not responding well to losing the house. and how well he deal with the incessant round of investigations next year will be

one of the major stories to watch coming up aft the midterm. robert: what about stacy abrams, beto o'rourke? democrats were hoping for a new generation to emerge. some did. many women won across the country. but not a total win for the democrats. >> right. and some of those rises stars had capture the heart of the democratic party. become celebrities in the left. the margin is shrinkg, it's a t of votes for him to make up there. but that raceasn't been call. but beto o'rourke also certainly -- these were all long shot races. these were all really toughst es. maybe florida a little bit less so. he was leading in the polls going in. but these are all uphill states. for democrats, i think there are a lot of broken hearted people. these were all promising, is

chtic candidates. what democrats are looking for more than anything is not someone who checks bunch of boxes in terms of ideology or resume. they wwet to be off their feet. they want to be inspired. that's why they haven'tnelocked to of the many sitting senators who are lking about possibly running or the old guard and all of them seemingly zillion democrats over the age of 7se names are out there. isey do need that influx of new blood. as been the complaint against pelosi as well is there hasn't been the opportunity for the democrats to put forth an inspiring new generation of leaders because of the old guard. bert: the house leadersh races. looks like kevin mccarthy, the majority leader, the frontrunner, chuck,or minority leader in the house, pelosi, a lot of dissatisfaction among the house in the democratic conference ut not really a rival. >> there's nobody to run. i just interviewed abigail spanberger who is from central

virginia outside the richmond suburbs. d she was defiant, i not going to vote for nancy pelosi. i'm not going to hedge. she wasn't going to be begged. i asked her has anybody contacted you? she sd no. because there's nobody there. i have to say, i'm stunned. but guess this is happening that pelosi, hoyer,bu c, steny hoyer, jim clyburn who were the last one, two, three, i guess they're going to end up the same one, two, three. nobody's running against hoyer. and there is one can't ainst clyburn. but i don't think that person can win. it's a head scratcher to me that the democrats in our national exit poll, she had aav funfave rating of 156 -- going at because she's to be a transitional -- >> i think it's interesting. hakeem jeffress, someone that the black caucus wanted to get

behind has agreed to run for the number four spot. i think they cut a deal. >> there may be something up there. but also there is no obvious personn the democratic party anywhere to take over leadership if you try to have a big free for all message of challenging nancy pelosi, you fritter away some of the momentum because everything matter looking ahead to 2020. robert:ll this debat is the democratic caucus. where are the neweaders and there will be more running for president in 2020.e we going to have leif it there. you can find us friday's after 10:00 on our podcast. i'm robt costa. have a great weekend. and thanks for joining us.

announcer: funding is provided own, nancial services raymond james. and newman's own foundation, donating all profits to charity and nourishing the common good. and the excellence in journalism foundation. committedricia ewin to bridging cultural differences in our communities, th corporation for bub broadcasting, and by contributions to your pb station from viewers like you. thank you.

(miranda) hello, i'm miranda hart and there's nothin more (than pottering around uour gardens.randa hart so my mother keeps telling me. . oh, and here she com gosh, this garden goes on forever, it's enormous. (miranda) for my mother d none other than hart dyke, one of britain's best amateur gardeners. (dee) trachelospermum. sounds like a male disease, doesn't it? (mir pda) she's aslants for the rhs d specializes in perennial plants and shrubs. (dee) if anybody wants a shrub for late summer heptacodium is what you need. (miranda) she's never left her garden for more than four days in a row. (dee) when i get back from holidays et i can't wait tonto the garden. it's like seeing your children again. (miranda) d for 27 years, she's been a proud entrant of the little yellow book. lo "what is the ybook?" i hear you ask.

it's the national garden schemes handbook,