to vladimir putin for being -- >> he praised him. >> let me ask you legally corks these little bread crumbs of affection and warmth toward vladimir putin become evidence points in a legal capacity? >> i think that the special counsel will look at the leaks we're seeing as well as what is the there, there? are there accounts? things of value? federal election law makes it a felony to give money to a foreign campaign. >> we've gone long and that's because you're going for lebron and not my warriors. i'm nicole wallace. "mtp daily" starts now. >> you coastal elites can go root for -- i'm going to be with the working men and women of ohio. >> talk about elites. oh, please. we'll have this fight tomorrow.

>> you've got it. >> if it's thursday -- i guess we'll always have paris? maybe not. climate control. >> we're getting out. we will see if we can make a deal that's fair. >> plus, the russia investigation. an executive privilege. can he use the executive privilege to prevent james comey from testifying about their intersnakss and biden time. the former vice president has his eye on 2020. this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now. good evening. i'm chuck todd in washington and welcome to "mtp daily." we've been trying to figure out

mr. trump. after taking 141 policy positions on 23 issues as a candidate. what actually guides him? perhaps the 45th president does seem to have one consistent philosophy. he would like to dismantle the legacy of the 44th president. even those decisions show telltale signs of at least some indecisiveness like the one he just announced moments ago from the white house about the 195-nation agreement forged under president obama. >> in order to fulfill my solemn duty the protect america and its citizens, the united states will withdraw from the paris climate accord but we will negotiate and see if we can make a deal that's fair. if we can, that's grateful if we

can't, that's fine. >> are we out? can we go back in? are we leaving now or not? are we upholding the agreement's exit terms which mean we can't formally exit for a number of years. the president didn't offer any actual specifics. the reporters are getting briefed right now on the specifics. as we get clarity, we'll share it with you. the bigger message was clear. this was a wake-up call to environmentalists. he framed this as a boone for jobs which will play well with supporters and frankly, it is not necessarily factually true if the jobs will come back but that's how he framed it and it could be a successful political frame. the battle between jobs and the environment, jobs will often win out politically. this was trump back on message in a way we haven't seen him in a while, returning to his america first mantra. >> the paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the united states.

the agreement is a massive redistribution of united states wealth to other countries. i was elected to represent the citizens of pittsburgh, not paris. >> and as we mentioned, this president is often spurred into action when it comes the undoing president obama's achievements. mr. trump has been pushed to repeal obamacare, he with drew from the tpp agreement, he is expected to reverse policies on cuba, he might return two russian compounds that president obama effectively seized for russia meddling in our election. mr. trump has deflected controversies about preferring the michael flynn to nationwide protests by finding ways to blame them on obama. all new presidents who hail from a different political party use their predecessors as a punching bag when necessary burgs what makes this president a bit different is he hasn't outlined a better way on a lot of these

big issues. simply saying, obama did it, we're undoing it. what is his alternative on cuba? on wall street regulation, russia, trade, climate change? you get the picture. we're not spirely sure because he hasn't entirely told us. the public doesn't like and it he is even saying, we need to replace it and he's saying, we're not sure if he likes the policy or simply likes what the policy represents which is undoing a signature legislative achievement by his predecessor barack obama. joining me now, senator lee, welcome back to the show, sir. >> thank you. >> let me start with the president's decision here and this idea of negotiating back in. one of the reasons why three of your colleagues, while there wasn't any come being supported being in it, three of your colleagues didn't want to get out. and i think bob corker from tennessee said there's no obligation that comes from this accord. it doesn't require us to do

anything. i think they may take a little time to assess if pulling out makes sense. now what was the urgency doing this now? >> it does involve sending tens of billions of u.s. dollars to cronyist interest controls by the united nations. a lot of people who aren't exactly comfortable with that and it does contemplate long material framework. the united states would be subject to targets long before the other member nations would be subject to they will. the president of the united states did the right thing by pulling us out of this agreement today. and i want to be clear about something you said. you referred to this as an accompli accomplishment of president obama. president obama never submitted this to the senate for treaty ratification. he didn't do that because he knew there was no chance of getting the necessary two-thirds majority to get it ratified. so this wasn't binding anyway. wasn't binding because hit never been ratified as a treaty chit needed to be under the u.s.

constitution. >> should there be rules of the road when it comes to emissions for the world to follow? >> look, the united states is the world leader in cleaning up the environment. we are the world leader in terms of the rule of law. we're not perfect but we've done a lot to clean up our air, our environment. and we shouldn't have other nations lecturing us on how to clean up our environment when we've done a really good job of it. we've seen stationary sources like power plants and mobile sources like automobiles, they've come down in spite of fact there hasn't been something like the paris agreement in place as a treaty. it is coming down as a result of inover operation is results from the free market economy. >> pinlds. but you didn't answer the basic question. do you think there should be international rules of the road when it comes to the environment? that a minimum here? do you think that should be in place since we all share the planet. >> sure. there are international rules when it comes to environmental

issues. there are international rules that take the place of treaties that took place in decades past. the question isn't whether there should be but what they should be. this presented a good opportunity for the american people. the president of the united states decide it didn't and it needs to be pittsburgh before paris. i support him in that decision. i think it was the right thing. >> why do you think so many members of corporate america have been so supportive of this? i'll highlight walmart, for instance, a huge employer in utah. >> it has become politically fashionable to make statements like. that i completely understand that. the fact is that we have a federal government that currently impoesss $2 trillion in regulatory compliance costs on the economy every single year. now contrary to popular belief, this is not borne by the corporate fat cats who run walmart. this is borne overwhelmingly by

america's poor and middle class who pay for these regulatory compliance costs with goods and services, diminished wages and unemployment and underemployment. so these leaders have every right to speak on a matter of public kernel to support this approach to governing. but they are not the american people. the american people elected donald trump to be their president and he made a decision today that i believe was right for them. >> the a lot of scientists of said, it is something like 95% agreement around the world when it comes to this issue. the idea that man can help pull back this warming of the planet. when should that be taken into account? when should that balance, when should the united states be worried about this as a global partner? >> first of all, whenever you have people coming up with a frame boring, a regulatory framework, domestic or international, they can promise

only a chance of a few hundredths of a percent of a reduction in global temperature as a result of very aggressive regulatory intrusion on our economy. one that could have devastating effects for america's poor and middle class. i think we have to take a close look at and i not be too eager to jump head long into it and say yes, let's go. if the best they can promise is that this might reduce global temperatures a tiny bit and they're still not sure. i have grave concerns with doing that given the certainty that's we do have. economic opportunities will be lost and innovation. the kind of innovation that has reduced emissions in the united states will also be lost. >> why pooh-pooh the temperature issue? this is a case where it doesn't sound like lot but 1 degree is a lot. a half a degree is a lot. it is hundreds of years of progress, if you believe the science community on this one. so it's not as if a percentage

of a degree is not an accomplishment. it would be considered a big accomplishment. not a small one. >> you continue to speak as if the science sxhut a monolith. but not speaks with one voice. . on the left are enthusiastic about it. saying all scientists agree and anyone who doesn't agree is an idiot. that isn't true and it isn't fair. we've seen lot of political manipulation that has occurred. the fact is sfls disagreement. >> manipulation. the jobs argument against environmental regulation has been used for years and it isn't always true. coal is not going away because of climate issues. coal is going away because there's another private sector industry that has gone like gang busters. >> fair point. if that's the case, why do we need another regulatory frame work? why do we need enter into an agreement that is very favorable to other nations and their

political ambitions, and their political world view that has some potential on further erode american job opportunities. especially when we have been the global leader in innovation. we have laws on the books already environmentally that are a standard for the developed world, and we have a system that believes in the rule of law. we actually enforce our laws, unlike many of the countries in this agreement. >> are you confident that we will hit the goals we've agreed to in the paris agreement? do you think we'll hit the goals anyway in. >> i think it is entirely possible we will. entirely outside of this agreement. that's why i struggle a little bit with this doomsday series of predictions we've had from people saying, we're going to have the stars falling from the skies. dogs and cats living together in the streets. book of revelation stuff. this is up in a essential. absolute nonsense.

>> are you concerned that china may be seen as the global leader when it comes to bringing countries together, more so than the united states? >> chuck, that's laughable. that is completely laughable. i assume you asked the question in jest. that china would become the global leader on environmental regulation on, air quality is ridiculous. that's not going to happen. certainly not as a result of this but it is not happening anyway. >> i ask many questions to many in jest but one thing i don't do is let people know which questions were in jest or not. senator mike lee, republican from utah, i always appreciate you coming on and sharing your views. thank you. let me turn to another republican but one is who have is against the president's decision of pulling out of the accord. cyst kristine todd whitman, form he governor of new jersey. >> good to see you. >> let me start with the president's decision that

included a caveat. the but in there that is at least open to coming in under different terms. does that, do you take him at his word on that? is there new terms that are worth negotiation? is that a feasible caveat? >> i don't think so. not at all. you have almost 200 nations that have signed on to this. this has been a process that has been ongoing for years. you've seen major commitments by countries all around the world. we joined a very exclusive group when you consider nicaragua had, syria and north korea, the only ones who won't sign. that's a very exclusive group. i'm not sure it is one where we want to be associated but that's where we are. we've already seen the doubling down by the chinese reaching out to the european union saying we'll negotiate even more. that they would like to see more in making their agreement very real. >> look. the president framed his

decision under the jobs argument. this is not the first time that the issue of jobs is pitted against environmental concerns. and you and i have been around long enough to know, when given the choice, the voter is usually going to side with the jobs argument over the environmental, a utility. there is no urgency on the right, period. how do you develop a sense of urgency? >> well, first of all, that's the wrong argument. we have proven over time from 1990 to 2008, we were able to see our population grow 20%. our electricity demands grow by 35% west more than doubled our gdp and at the same time reduced pollutants by 60%. this idea that you can't have a healthy thriving economy with a clean and green environment is wrong. that's one of the few things said today that i agree with.

scott pruitt said we've been doing a wonderful job voluntarily. we have. but there are a lot of players on the field who are not complying with that. and i would go for, for me, the jobs. if you talk about energy and you want to reduce pollution, nuclear. nuclear energy calls on, the average nuclear reactor full time employment of some 3,000 to 5,000 people at jobs that pay 30% more than the average. >> are you going to take us down that rabbit hole, not in my backyard? the nuclear debate opens up a whole other can of worms. but i take your point. >> i agree. there are challenges there. but right now it is because of the low cost of natural gas which gets back to one thing president trump harped on today. coal miners. it is being phased out because of the low cost of natural gas and economic decisions made by the utilities.

and trump is all for it. >> given the number of states including our country's largest state, california, who wants to enact policies as best neck abides by the accord. and essentially realize, they have to do business around the world so they'll abide by a global set of rules. is it possible that while the united states government is not signing on to it, there are enough entities in the united states, that we hit some of the goals? or we make progress simultaneously with the paris accord? does our lack of presence in it give carte blanche? >> yes, we will continue to make progress and the president was right when he said we've double more than many. we have. we can do more. it would be better if it were something the entire country was

committed to. but right now private sector states and localities, municipalities have made commitments. they understand this problem is real and there are things we can do about that it don't hurt the economy. so that is off the table. will other countries bail? there's a possibility but i don't think so. i think there are some who might, india prarnl, perhaps mi bail. there's enough put into this that it would be difficult for them to bail. things like the green fund. we're not required to put billions in there. there's no requirement for a specific amount of money. it just called for the developed countries to put more in and that's to enable to us provide money so the developing countries can get new technologies which we could export if we were at the forefront of developing them. we seem to be coming back only. trade wars go both ways.

and even though they may be setting their own goals, i think you'll see some nations say, hey, we'll put some tariffs on things come from the united states. >> that would be an interesting game changer there and something to watch for. an interesting way to end. thank you for coming on and sharing your views. >> always a pleasure. coming up, what does this decision mean in the larger scope of president trump campaign promises? we'll talk about that. plus the international fallout. we'll be right back. almost everything, so we know how to cover almost anything. even a coupe soup. [woman] so beautiful. [man] beautiful just like you. [woman] oh, why thank you. [burke] and we covered it, november sixth, two-thousand-nine. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you bp developed new, industry-leading software to monitor drilling operations in real-time, so our engineers can solve problems with the most precise data at their fingertips. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.

vladimir putin is the name on everyone's lips these days as the russian investigation continues. and tonight in st. petersburg, megyn kelly. and tomorrow she'll have an interview with vladimir putin, the man everyone wants to talk

to. the first interview with him since we have learned of the special counsel decision to investigate. you can see that interview during the premier of sunday night with megyn kelly. this sunday on nbc. don't miss it. this is a story about mail and packages.

and it's also a story about people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you flmt the president gave himself a reentrance strategy, a way back into the agreement and that seems to fit a pattern with the president and it is developing a bit of undecisiveness. >> you're going to have such great health care and a tiny fraction of the cost. and it will be so easy. >> an unbelievably complex subject. nobody knew that health care could be so come reply indicated. >> i don't think anybody knows it was russia that broke into the dnc. >> as far as hacking, i think it was russia. >> it is very hard to say who

did the hacking. with that being said, i'll go i know what russia. it could have been china. >> we have nafta which was a total and complete disaster. >> i was going to terminate nafta as of two or three days from now. i decided rather than terminating nafta, which would be a pretty big shock to the syst system. >> can you imagine, we're going to announce you're a currency ma anymore lator tomorrow. >> let me bring in tonight's panel. the chief correspondent for the "washington post." >> there you go. dan, let me start with this. does this headline deserve the but? he pulled out of paris climate deal. but. it does seem as if this is

almost classic trump. he doesn't want to be definitive on anything. he is leaving himself some wiggle room. this seems like pretty difinitive decision. i think the notion of a but, i don't know what the way back this actually is. it is a little like britain and brexit. once you're out, you're out. you can't say i want to be halfback in. i think that was a rhetorical phrase. >> i don't think it carries any weight. >> i think it is more, it is a very trumpian thing to do to say that might be a better deal and i would be the guy who could make it. he so i think he was leaving open the possibility that there might be a different way to address some of the same problems that he would be able to do later.

bucket one is the impact on the world. and then the other thing is the issue of the jobs. >> the european commissioner said today that they're being unwittingly pushed into china's arms. that he is shocked to find himself in the unwilling position to have -- >> that really offended mike lee. does this mean you're ceding the world to china. >> if we don't engage in the world stage nrgs international treaties like the climate change treaty, then we are. china is a party to this treaty. that was the whole point of getting on board. having they will involved at least. for the first time ever, the kyoto talk. >> if you hear from anyone in

the american diplomatic community in general, republican or democrat, they're very concerned about this impact. is it as catastrophic globally? >> it is in ceding american leadership, undermining the idea that when the united states signs on the dotted line, that it means something. american diplomats are general winly horrified. and former officials of all parties, even not diplomats are horrified. in terms its practical effect, what will it mean about how the united states conducts business, probably a good deal less than some of the hair tearing that we're seeing now. but it's real. the sense of america stepping back from a commitment it made, it has unknown ramifications

down the road. >> it used to be a jesse helms favorite. we won't give thought money and let the united nations decide how they'll spend the money. >> any time on that front. >> i think that's right. there is an isolation string. the idea that we should not in any way cede sompblt. that we are the united states of america. we ought to do it the way we want to do it and the agree to which they seem to put constraints on us. we ought to throw those off. so there is a portion of the american electorate that will cheer this in the same way that the people in the rose garnet were applauding when the president made the announcement. >> it is striking to see two

things, one, the at of time that says he trump says they won't laugh at us nil. this sense of american pride. and then two, how he is unifying europe. the united states is ceding. >> there is another issue. just the gentle forces that have been moving in the direction of doing things about climate. that's not because government was forcing it. private industry has made decisions. individual have made decisions. >> do you know what's striking about this? here is something very pro industry. essentially 90% of they will, if they're not elected republicans, they're people donald trump appointed them. do you know what was not on there? any company. any corporate ceo. some would argue, well, it's not good politics for them.

>> to something you said a moment ago about domestic forces, this is clearly playing to a different set of domestic forces. we've had several instances in which trump basically bowed to the status quo once he got into office. nafta, china. >> i want to owned this. i think today should be a wake-up call for the environmental community. there's a good 40 to 45% of this country that does not believe there's urgency to this issue. not just, forget the scepticism argument. the jobs argument wins every time.

>> it is still the rust belt argument that elected donald trump president. people are still struggling in detroit, wisconsin, we were surprised where trump won in the election. at the same time, they're withdrawing from the paris treaty doesn't change the situation in pittsburgh at all. like he had already deregulated. he had already rolled back the obama regulations. withdrawing has no impact. >> this issue, do they need change their messaging on how they sell the urgency? >> i think it is difficult to do it. in every poll, jobs trumps almost everything else. you can't make an either or argument. >> you have to be careful. when it back's choice and the

people most emfat bigg it. that's where it gets lost. >> i have a suggestion for they will. call the next one the pittsburgh treaty. >> what about the paris-texas. we'll let people discuss how many parises there are in this country. the date is set for james comey to head back to the hill costly the president throw a wrench in that plan? i'll explain next. think again. this is the new new york. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov

when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. p3 it's meat, cheese and nuts. i keep my protein interesting. oh yea, me too. i have cheese and uh these herbs. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein. new biwhat are we gonna do?ys... how about we pump more into promotions? ♪ nah. what else? what if we hire more sales reps? ♪ nah. what else? what if we digitize the whole supply chain? so people can customize their bike before they buy it. that worked better than expected. i'll dial it back. yeah, dial it back. just a little. live business, powered by sap. when you run live, you run simple.

and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you discover card. hooh, you're real?? you know i'm real! at discover, we're always here to talk. good, 'cause i don't have time for machines. some companies just don't appreciate the power of conversation! you know, i like you! i like you too! at discover, we treat you like you'd treat you. get the it card and talk to a real person. the opioid my doctor prescribed for my chronic back pain backed me up-big time. before movantik, i tried to treat it myself. spent time, money. no go. but i didn't back down. i talked to my doctor. she said: one, movantik was specifically designed for opioid-induced constipation-oic- and can help you go more often. number two? with my savings card, i can get movantik for about the same price as the other things i tried.

don't take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. movantik may cause serious side effects including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and/or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. movantik may interact with them causing side effects. don't back down from oic. talk to your doctor about movantik. remember mo-van-tik. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

up next, a phrase you may hear a lot of soon. executive privilege. we'll give you the primer only phrase. but first, hampton pearson with the cnbc market wrap. >> the dow and s&p 500 had stronger than expected highs. private sector hiring and manufacturing. the dow gaining 135 points. the s&p adding 18. the nasdaq finishing 18 points higher. more signs of an improving market. private sector businesses added 253,000 jobs last month. beating the expectations. the government release as more comprehensive hiring report on friday. shares of hewlett-packard fell after reporting weaker than expected quarterly results. that's it from cnbc. about people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries

to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ take on the mainstream. introducing nissan's new midnight edition. ♪ you didn't know we had over 26,000 local activities listed on our app. or that you could book them right from your phone. a few weeks ago, you still didn't know if you were gonna go. now the only thing you don't know, is why it took you so long to come here.

expedia. everything in one place, so you can travel the world better. ♪"my friends know me so well. they can tell what i'm thinking, just by looking in my eyes. but what they didn't know was that i had dry, itchy eyes. i used artificial tears from the moment i woke up... ...to the moment i went to bed. so i finally decided to show my eyes some love,... ...some eyelove. eyelove means having a chat with your eye doctor about your dry eyes because if you're using artificial tears often and still have symptoms, it could be chronic dry eye. it's all about eyelove, my friends. and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you

a week from today the world will stop, washington will stop. the public will hear, we think, from former fbi director james comey himself for the first time since he was fired. he is set to testify in front of the senate committee. sores close to comey have said that it is reasonable to expect the conversations with the president could come up. the former fbi director's allies say he has been eager to testify since his firing since they believe was part of an effort to thwart the bureau's investigation into russia. this hearing promises to be must-see tv. assuming it happens though. it is possible president trump could try to had invoke are executive privilege by saying the president has the right to keep his conversations private. what exactly is executive privilege and how would it work?

joining me now, during the impeachment of bill clinton non. >> let's talk about the issue of executive privilege. explain it. what does it mean? >> a phrase you've heard, executive privilege. a very important concept and it really should exist. it is not explicitly stated in the constitution. the supreme court has basically said, it arises out of the most important notion of separation of powers. >> when was invented? when did the supreme court create this? >> the supreme court didn't invent it. they mostly recognized it during the famous case of president nixonon. we'll come back to that. it was first invoked by george washington in 1796 in order to stop congress from messing around with what was happening behind the scenes when he was negotiating the treaty with the united kingdom. it was next invoked by president jefrg. who wanted not to testify in the

treason child of aaron burr. and it was invoked various times. people don't know. it is bipartisan. eisenhower did it for the mccarthy hearings. president clinton did it 14 times. president bush, seven times. president obama, once or twice. >> if turn president's lawyer and he was asking you, i want to invoke executive privilege, not to prevent him from testifying but about the personal conversations. >> now you know where it comes from. >> could he invoke it in this sense? >> that's a narrow finding of definition. not everything that comes out of president's mouth would be covered by executive privilege bauflt conversation about someone like a job interview, how would you like to be the fbi director, what do you think we should do about x, y or z subject, in the deliberative process of a president making

his decisions, is within the realm of executive privilege. the most powerful assertion requires there to be something about the president's seeking information for which to make a decision. and if that's the case, then it fits within its definition. it is most powerful when it is the congress trying to invade the executive branch's deliberative process. it is least powerful in a criminal investigation, as we learned in the nixon tames. >> i'll not the lawyer. you are. not only is the president tweeting but specifically, the president. james comey, you'd better hope there are no tapes. there's this idea of waiving any executive privilege. when he said it publicly. is that correct? >> so executive privilege has the last name privilege. the first name executive.

and we are tried and true in the blah what a privilege is and what it means. if privileges exist, they can be waived. but in some cases, very difficult to waive them. a president saying what that statement was doesn't waive executive privilege to. waive it, a president would have to say, i, a, think this would be covered because it was a conversation about my deliberative process, and b, i hereby allow to it happen. and it has happened. i gave you jefferson. jefferson gave his letters up to the trial but did not testify. in the clinton years, when he was trying to invoke privilege to prevent aides from testifying about what his relationship was with monica lewinsky, there were some able to go and some not. so there are compromises. at the end of the day, executive privilege is something that gets negotiated most of the time and very few people take it to court. >> i was going to say, if it is taken to court, there is only

one place to go. >> it is not straight to the supreme court. >> even though this is a decision between two branches. >> kit get there very quickly. and here's an irishonic factoid. two times it has been litigated to the pend a president has asserted it. both times they've lost. everybody knows the most famous one, united states versus nixon tapes. the second time was president clinton. >> what about this, he may know in trying invoke executive privilege to prevent the questioning of what happened in their private conversations, does, if he doesn't invoke it here, if he doesn't try to make the case that this should fall under executive privilege, does he lose his right to invoke in it other aspects? >> no. there are in privilege, something called, this is so nerdy. people will fall out of their

chairs. there is subject matter waivers. if the president said, i'll going to allow some questions in that conversation, he might be said to have waived the subject of whatever it was. if he and comey were talking about, what do you think we need to do to have our law enforcement priorities about x and y, you can't selectively do it. but yesterday's conversation doesn't relate to the one two weeks before. each are individual events. >> politically, it is hard to see how this is a good idea and how it would play. legally, if you were advising the president, should he try to invoek it here? >> i think you and i are missing some part of equation often he knows what was actually said. it depends. >> is there a precedent that says, if he doesn't invoke it here, or if he does, he is drawing a line? >> i think it depends. people don't recognize that the whole term of president clinton, it was invoked 14 times.

president bush did it to prevent two things, his white house counsel from testifying and karl rove about the firing of the prosecutors. >> smartest man in washington. thank you. up ahead, a presidential statistic. that surprised me today and now i'm obsessed about it. my daughter is... ...studying to be a dentist and she gave me advice. she said... ...dadgo pro with crest pro-health. 4 out of 5 dentists confirm... ...these crest pro-health... ...products help maintain a... ...professional clean. go pro with crest pro health crest pro-health...

...really brought my mouth... ...to the next level. and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you tonight i'm obsessed with

presidential ages. what was the last time a president over the age of 60 became president? if you thought it was lind johnson, you would be wrong. if not lbj, it has to be truman. no. he was 60 when roosevelt died. when you said woodrow wilson, you would still miss the mark. he was 56. you have to go all the way back to eastbound 57 to find out the last time a democrat over the age of 60 became president. when james buchanan was sworn in at the ripe old age of 65. why do i care about this? joe biden would be 78 by the time he was worn in if he won the white house in 2020. need i mention hillary clinton? elizabeth warren? bernie sanders? you get my point. after the break we'll talk about biden. there's a jacket that's reflective for visibility...

...a sleeping bag jacket, jackets that turn into tents. i usually do my fashion sketches on the computer. i love drawing on the screen. there's no lag time at all. it feels just like my markers. with fashion, you can dress people and help people. it's really cool to see your work come to life. and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you

bp engineered a fleet of 32 brand new ships with advanced technology, so we can make sure oil and gas get where they need to go safely. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. welcome back. fire up your speculation

machine. you have 2020 vision? former vice-president biden thinks he does. he just launched a new political action committee and it is of course sparked, you don't do that unless you're running for something, right, joe? meanwhile president trump is said to head a reelection fund-raiser later this month more than three months before voters head to the poll. i can't remember the last time an actual president -- every other president -- we did this, has waited at least two years before doing an in-person fund-raiser. every other president. >> we're in a time war. everything is speeded up. >> everything is sped up. you heard my obsession on age. we see joe biden. he wants in. there's no doubt he wants in this conversation. the question is can he sustain it? >> well, he wants in the conversation and he can stay in the conversation, but at some point he's going to have to make a decision about whether he's going to run. i don't think this is about he's got his eye on running. i think this is a necessary step to fund the travel that he wants to do. he's in significant demand to be all around the country. he enjoys that. and as you say, he wants -- he

has something he wants to contribute. >> interestingly enough, ann, i would say he is the most accessible senior states man in the democratic party. i say this in that barack obama, he's the ex-president. you can't have him as the party leader. hillary clinton polarizes the democratic party let alone the country. i noted that in the conversation sparked by her. biden seems to be the one figure in the party that does have this cross-appeal. >> yeah. he has had that for a while and has used it, right? uncle joe, grandpa joe persona, which he tried to use on clinton's behalf. even as you could tell he wanted very much to be the candidate up there last time and had a hard time reckoning with the fact he wasn't. he has said himself he's unlikely to run again. there are so many reasons that make it unlikely. but you don't make this step

without knowing there is going to be an enormous amount of speculation and squirrel. and to your point, it's early. he likes that. he wouldn't be doing it if he didn't. >> you say it's early. jay, going back to the point we made about age, it is -- i was on one hand surprised. on the other hand, though, there is a message there. democratic party does best when they actually go find somebody young that meets the generational moment. whether that's -- whether they succeed or not as president, but there is a pattern here. obama, clinton, kennedy, carter was younger at the time. i mean, there is something to be said there. >> there is and it's the turning of the page, the next generation, sort of moving beyond the inspiration, the hope, and certainly one of the things -- one of the groups hillary lost was the millennials. so, the person that can capture those millennials and bring them back is the one that's the best position to lead that party into the next generation. >> a lot of this is going to be based on trump. what does the party want, is it a desperation to beat trump?

that's great news for joe biden. or has it become fixated on a primary test? that's tough for joe biden who has not been pure enough on abortion, voted on the iraq war. you can nitpick him to death in the primary. >> it's hard to game out what that nomination process is going to look like. again, we were don't know what the trump presidency will look like by the end of the mid terms in 2018. that's when people have to make hard decision bz what they're going to do and what kind of campaign they're going to run. are they going to run as an outsider, insider, new candidate, whatever. we have decisions that have to be made in the absence of knowing what the conditions are going to be. >> this is simply saying, hey, just save my place at the table. i may be coming. thank you very much. after the break, say cheese. this is a story about mail and packages.

and it's also a story about people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service.

priority: you there's nothing traditional about my small business. i count on my dell small business advisor for tech advice. with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs, and i get back to business. ♪

the future isn't silver suits anit's right now.s, think about it. we can push buttons and make cars appear out of thin air. find love anywhere. he's cute. and buy things from, well, everywhere.

how? because our phones have evolved. so isn't it time our networks did too? introducing america's largest, most reliable 4g lte combined with the most wifi hotspots. it's a new kind of network. xfinity mobile. well, in case you missed it, it's been a week of some pretty tough headlines for wisconsin ites. google trends reported many folks in the state can't spell the state name. now we find out the land of self-proclaimed cheese heads has just gotten around to making cheese the state's official dairy product. i mean, come on, man. come on, man. i mean, is there any state more identified with a food than wisconsin and cheese? the georgia peach has been the state fruit since 1995. idaho potato their state vegetable since 2002. my state orange is the state

fruit since 2005. orange juice the state beverage since 1965. you would get off at a rest stop and be handed free glasses of orange juice when you cross the border. wisconsin declaration came when fourth graders made their case early this year. good for you, fourth graders. that's all for tonight. we'll be back with more mtp daily tomorrow. for the record with greta now. >> i heard those fighting words. at least we can count. you have problem with ballots in 2000. at least we can count in our state. >> what took so long? give me my guda and make it the state cheese. let's go. >> i don't know, go pack go, thank you, chuck. >> you got it, greta. >> breaking tonight, comey to spill the secrets. one week from today, former fired fbi director will testify on thursday. it will be his first chance to defend himself from president trump who not only fired