>> and every republican on clin wi capitol hill will be running for a closet. the people of alabama will have sent him there and that is that. moore himself had the nerve to say i think i could help with the judiciary committee as a senator because i understand the constitution, understand what jumps do and when they put themselves above the constitution. you think? that's exactly what you did, not once but twice. >> we're out of time and ewe al know this is a disgrace. that does it for "deadline." i'm nicolle wallace, right now it's steve in for chuck todd. the year-end scramble. account house and senate get it together in time to avoid a shutdown? and moore support.

how will the president's endorsement of roy moore land with voters? >> i don't really pay attention to the president's tweets. i talk to voters. >> this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now. and good evening. i'm steve kornacki in new york in for chuck todd. welcome to "mtp daily." did the president obstruct justice? can the president obstruct justice? the president's legal team is now arg dpui arguing the presidt obstruct justice ever. at the firestorm this tweet from president trump's tweet saying i had to fire general michael flynn because he lied to the president and the fbi. the president ousted flynn for lying to vice president pence about his contacts with russia and the president's lawyer said this weekend that the president was told that flynn gave the fbi the same story he gave pence.

so if you put those two things together, it could lead you to the conclusion that the president knew that flynn had probably lied to the fbi, and that he knew flynn was in trouble when he directed fbi director james comey to drop the investigation into him. that was comey's testimony, saying he interpreted the conversation with trump that way. that looks like obstruction, but there are caveats. the president denies ever asking comey to drop the flynn probe and reiterated that denial on twitter yesterday and that the justice department did not explicitly say flynn lied to the fbi, that he was just confused. and testified before congress earlier, sally yates, acting attorney general at the time would not give clarity whether or not she told the white house that flynn lied to the fbi. finally, going back to that tweet about firing flynn, the

president's lawyer john dod says he wrote that tweet, not the president and insists he mangled, although it hasn't been corrected or taken down. whether you think the president tried to obstruct justice or not, the president's legal team argues it doesn't matter. dowd, the lawyer, arg gurs the president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under the constitution and has every right to express his view of any case. it's been the view of the house of representatives that a president absolutely can obstruct justice, articles of impeachment against richard nixon said he obstructed justed, against bill clinton, obstructed and impeded administration of justice. end of the day, those aren't legal standards per se, political ones. neither nixon more clinton was convicted by congress on the charges. nixon resigned before it ever came to it. the question remains. did the president obstruct justice and can the president

obstruct justice, joining me, one of the prosecutors during the watergate era. also now an msnbc krishcontribu. start with that question. the president's lawyer says it's clear under article two of the constitution. the chief law enforcer of country can weigh in on any case anyway, no restraint on that power. what's your read on that? >> that would be a horrifying thing for america to face a president who could do such things, and i'd like to remind people that if you don't know history, you are doomed to repeat it. president nixon was named an unindicted co-conspirator, his words used to convict all of the other deftness that case for obstruction of justice. he was guilty of obstruction. that is nixon, and i believe that it is perfectly within the realm of the law that the

president can obstruct justice. it was like when nixon had an enemies' list, you can't prosecute the people on his enemies' list just because he doesn't like them. that's a dictatorship, authoritarian, the worst thing that could happen to democracy. we cannot let that be the standard. when nixon said anything i do is okay, because i am the president. so nothing i can can be illegal. everyone laughed, and i think that we should be looking askan of the statement of the president's lawyer the president cannot obstruct justice. >> get into that question and look at that tweet. apparently seemed at the time from the president now the white house saying this was actually his lawyer. saying it was a hmong bung male mangled tweet saying he fired general michael flynn because he lied to the vice president and the fbi. the crucial part of the tweet.

if that's true, if the president at the time he fired general flynn was under the impression flynn had lied to the fbi and the president turned around the next day, had that conversation with comey, the fbi director at the time and suggested it seemed to comey he back off of flynn, then the president is doing that with the knowledge that flynn lied to the fbi. how much does a potential obstruction case against trump hinge on whether he knew at the time of that conversation with comey that flynn lied to the fbi? >> well, there are a number of pieces of evidence that point to obstruction in addition to in this. let's look just as this piece. obviously, if the president tried to stop an investigation when he knew that the person being investigated had comitted a crime of being untruthful to the fbi which is a felony, and he tries to stop it, that is obstructing an investigation nap is obstruction of justice. so if he knew that, it is very

significant evidence. there are other elements that could point to his being guilty of obstruction without that being true. and if his lawyer in fact wrote that, he should fire his lawyer right away, because that is something that gets him in trouble and is not in his best interests. and if the lawyer is now saying he did it and he actually didn't do it, then the lawyer should be disbarred, because he's lying. so it's not a good xwasituationr either the lawyer or for the president and i think it is very significant. >> it also seems we're dealing president? have that kind of trial? as we said, when you start talking about these cases with nixon and clinton it is a political question. it's a question of how the congress chooses to define what a high crime is. that's the term -- if there's evidence of a high crime,

congress has the power to impreach. there's no desfinition what a high crime actually is? >> we're talking two different things, though. it is clearly a political question whether the president can be impeached and that is up to congress to define what a high crime in this demeanor is. it is not the same when you're looking at a criminal case. under the obstruction of justice laws of the united states, i don't believe any man or woman is above the law, and that includes the president. so if the president as nixon did, for example, says to the cia, stop the fbi from going ahead. tell them there's national security involved, and that's a lie, that's obstructing the fbi's investigation. if he tells witnesses, you can say i don't remember, i don't recall, even when you do, that's not true. that's asking someone to commit perjury, and that's obstruction of justice and a crime. so there are many ways that you

can obstruct justice. >> is there another direction this could potentially go to? again, in the political realm, outside of a legal courtroom, talking about congress, how congress might interpret all of this is there an argument potentially made there in the political realm that says, okay. maybe the president does have this power? maybe, let's take what the white house is saying at face value and say he does have the power here to weigh in on any investigation but it's an abuse of that power, in terms of abuse of the power as grounds, could that be the direction this goes? >> it could. and abuse of power is another article of impeachment against nixon and could be the same against president trump, because you cannot do certain things. they are so against the norms, and when we think as american people, what do we want the norms and standards for the president of the united states to be? we don't want him picking and choosing his friends as people who get rewarded and his enemies as those who get penalized.

i think that's what's happening here. he's being able to protect those that he wants to protect. if he overuses his pardon power, that could be an abuse of his power. he has unlimited pardon power, but at some point the american people will say, enough is sufficient. and we can't let him pardon everybody who's involved in this. crimes have been committed and people must pay the price. >> all right. thanks for the time. appreciate it. >> thank you, steve. time to bring in our panel for this evening. with us, senior editor for politics here at nbc news and msnbc, professor at princeton university and msnbc contributor and a columnist of the new york post, contributor at the weekly standard and also msnbc contributor. beth, talking about how this ends up being a, can end up being in cases like this a political question how you define obstruction of justice. looking back at bill clinton's trial, impeachment trial in

1999, charged with obstruction of justice. one of the senators who voted to acquit him said i believe he did commit obstruction of jut st is but not serious enough in this kashgs the question of lying about the lewinsky affair, serious enough to warrant removal from office, therefore i'm voting not guilty. when it become as question there in congress it become as political question like that. >> yeah, but doesn't seem as though clinton lawyers ever argued that the president couldn't be charged with obstruction of justice. simply said he hadn't obstructed justice and perhaps that senator you quote and others determined that was the case. wasn't serious enough. did not rides to the level. we know he was acquitted of that charge. struck with your last guest and the whole question of obstruction, donald trump said he fire ed mr. comey because of

the russia investigation. looking for secrets when it's late to in plain sight. >> i'm trying to interpret this tweet from saturday. the lawyer decided to p ed td t out. treat that as skeptically as you want to. comes back to me, looking at this, eddie, a scenario donald trump put it out, coughed it up on twitter. on my mind and seems to be a fairly damns thing, if that's the case. part of me looks at this and says what do we know about donald trump's natives? invents them on the spot, self-agridizing way wildly contradictory with something said and done before and a part sees in the news flynn's pleaded guilty, and instinct, i knew it and that's why i fired him, thinking that woo look good and lawyers saying that's the worst

thing you could have tweeted. >> both apply. except it's not just simply a kind of random decision, because of the news cycle. we're on the verge of a constitutional crisis if this thing continues to proceed. talk about the dershowitz argument, call it the dershowitz argument about the president can't be accused of obstruction, seems to me, it leads to this -- what happens if he's criminal charged, the fbi comes to arrest him and the secret service protects him? we have this issue, right? how this could play itself out. so part of what i'm trying to say, think about, right in this instance is, how do we hold him to account? and in the context in which we have the imperial presidency -- >> what we know, though, based on how this worked in the past would be look at ken starr, claiming obstruction of justice with bill clinton. put a report today. gave it to the house of representatives. they decide to file impeachment charges. in the past that's been the

framework. >> so the constitution envisions the president as head of the executive branch. this is an unusual thing. all the powers of the executive branch flow through an individual person by the fact he was elected president of the united states. the argument that he cannot be arrested or convicted -- you know, by the -- for obstruction is justice is that effectively he would be arresting himself, because the justice department and the fbi have no powers independent of the president who is he n. that is why the congress wrote, the constitution includes the impeachment clause. all legal action that needs to be taken against the president must be taken by the congress. the house has to vote to impeach. the senate has to told the trial that will either lead to his removal of office or his acquittal. that is where we are. so that in theory, mueller should be going around the same path. if he gets to a point at which

he finds that trump has committed obstruction of justice he said, he committed obstruction of justice. here are the charges. house of representatives, this is now on you. now which is actually what happened in '72-74. to say that the reason that he was called an unindicted co-conspirator and evidence from the tapes was used to convict the other people was he was not yet in the docket. that doesn't mean his words can't be used against others. and so this really puts the burden on congress. if he's going to push and push and push, but it does make sense. it he's going to arrest himself, then he ought to be, ought to quit office. and this is where the constitutional crisis comes in. it's not because they're going to come to arrest him. it's that he'll fire mueller, and then rosenstein won't appoint a new mueller and then -- >> or just becomes -- >> when i say it become as political question. exactly what i mean. mueller puts this in the hands of congress. i found what i consider a

potentially impeachable offense, obstruction of justice, maybe something else, you sort it out. i could see potentially emerging a political argument breaking down like this -- some saying clear-cut obstruction of justice. you heard that case clearly before. an argument from trump defenders one or both of the following. he has the power. no matter what to fire for any reason or, two, you're talking about obstruction of justice here maybe with no underlying crime. if this is about conversations that flynn had with the russians postelection saying, there's a logan act never enforced in court successfully. really no underlying crime. this is bad but -- that argument jim jeffords made with bill clinton in '99. >> we don't know what the obstruction of justice it. it's getting out way ahead of this. if it comes down to the issue about struction of justice he pretty much did with the interview with lester holt this is the political argument can go

no further. >> steve, you're on to something. what flynn pled to on friday was lying to the fbi about a phone call in which if we are to believe what was said about the phone call, nothing untoward particularly happened. he was told, he called kislyak, the soviet, russian ambassador to lobby him about not voting for a u.n. resolution against israel and if he lied about that, then the argument that would be made, if that's the only thing, if that's it, if that's the only thing mueller mentions that he obstructed by firing flynn for doing this thing that he pled guilty to, then the argument would be made, well, okay. do you overturn the results of an election of which he got 304 electoral votes? because of this thing -- now, if it's bigger. >> that's the other -- it's other question. what everybody says is, if it's that clear cut, nothing really for flynn to cover up, a., certainly should have known it was a conversation moenitored ad why lie about that conversation? raising the question about a

month ago, talking about this guy papadopolos like it was the center, we've forgotten, moved in this direction and maybe another because we don't know what's going on behind the scenes in that investigation. stick around. much more this hour. it is that time of year, also, when the shutdown threats are in the air. talk about that next. plus, the question of whether the president obstructed justice, with republican congressman jim jordan. stay tuned. i'm open to that. lower premiums? extra benefits? it's open enrollment. time to open the laptop... ...and compare medicare health plans. why? because plans change, so can your health needs. so, be open-minded. look at everything-like prescription drug plans... and medicare advantage plans from private insurers. use the tools at medicare.gov. or call 1-800-medicare. open to something better? start today. ♪

off to conference committee they go, lawmakers from each chamber work to hammer out differences between the two bills. the legislation out of conference must pass both houses before going to president trump for signature. senator susan collins was one of the handful of undecided republicans only voting for the senate version after several

amendments she pushed for were added among other promises received. yesterday on "meet the press" told chuck her vote was not guaranteed. >> you're comfortable with your vote on this tax bill and there really no matter what comes out of conference? >> no. i mean obviously i want to see wa comes out. >> by the way, the tax bill isn't the only thing on the docket this week. the house and senate both need to pass a short-term funding bill before friday to avoid a government shutdown. up next, ask a leading house conservative if there's an obstruction of justice case against president trump. and how this tax plan will look when it comes out of congress. more people shop online for the holidays than ever before. (clapping) and the united states postal service delivers more of those purchases to homes than anyone else in the country. ( ♪ ) because we know, even the smallest things are sometimes the biggest.

welcome back in to "mtp daily." house of the freedom cakes is with us, congressman, talk about the pressing issues and a potential shutdown and the tax deal and of course the top issue on everyone's mind in politics now. the president and potential

obstruction of justice. if you were watching. show earlier you heard we had a discussion. the president's lawyer is out there saying that the president cannot as a matter of law commit obstruction of justice. do you agree with that argument? >> i think argument is because he asked comey to not go after michael flynn a guy who served our country, a general, who served in our armed services that somehow that's obstruction, i don't see how that's obstruction of justice. that's a weak claim we're hearing from some, and i always back up and say, look at this overall investigation. mueller's team is looking at, was there a coordination between the trump campaign and russia? how about the fact we have learned in the last few weeks that the clinton campaign paid russians, right? they paid the law firm who -- >> wait. >> hang on -- >> this dossier. how about that fact? >> i asked you about obstruction of justice.

you can't see how it's interpret 24 that way. i'll give you the sbempg interpretation. let me put it out there, have you respond. the interpretation put out there is as follows -- with know that the president on saturday said in a tweet, now saying hi lawyer put this out a tweet under president trump's name came out on saturday. people are suspicious about the authorship of this saying he fired general flynn because general flynn lied to the fbi. and we know that after firing general flynn the president met with then the fbi director james comey and the fbi director testified to the committee, said he felt the president was directing him to lay off of flynn. so if the president knew that flynn lied to the fbi, then sits down with the fbi director saying, lay off -- what people are saying is obstruction. you don't see it? >> no, no. i see the argument you're making but you have to go back to the

beginning. a special counsel investigation potential investigating coordination between the trump campaign and russians and we know the other campaign coordinated with the russians. in fact, they paid the russians, and what did they pay them for? a dossier. the reason for the dossier? opposition research to go after the other parrot's presidential nominee. >> what does that have to do with the facts i just laid out? >> everything to do with it. the premise of the special counsel is up for debate, and certainly most americans i think, a lot of americans, say really? the guy elected president, now going to have this, this is what mueller will go after him for? really? that's going to be the case when we know, learned in the last few weeks what the clinton campaign did? really? how we're going to handle that. >> is your standard, if you disagree with the investigation you get to lie to investigators? >> not saying that at all. go back to the premise. the premise, we have a special counsel, a coordination between the campaign and russians. no evidence that that took place, but all kinds of evidence that the other party's nominee,

their campaign and frankly the democratic national committee did coordinate with russians and paid them through the law firm and gps to -- >> we have evidence of. >> evidence of what i just said. >> evidence the man, the president of the united states aspointed his national security advise pleateded guilty to lying to the fbi and we know the day after the president fired him he met with the fbi director and suggested he lay off flynn. we have a tweet now in the president of the united states name say i knew at that time that he lied to the fbi. >> we'll see what robert mueller comes back with. see what he comes back with. all i know is to date there's not one bit of evidence showing president trump actually coordinated with russians during the campaign but all kinds of evidence the democratic national committee and clinton campaign coordinated with russians to influence the election. that's what we know. we'll see what mr. mueller comes back with. i don't think it's obstruction of justice. i believe. there's lots of americans who

would reach that conclusion and say, really? a special counsel investigating president trump when we know the clinton campaign actually worked with the russians to develop a dossier. that dossier may have been the basis for the court warrant to spy on carter page and americans associated with the campaign. if that took place that is as wrong as it gets and so that's a big concern i have. frankly, some of the questions i'll have for director rey when he comes to the judiciary committee thursday i. got your answer on that. i want to get this in before time runs out. the fiscal issues on capitol hill. >> sure. >> this conference committee, this is the hill newspaper, reporting this. they are reporting that paul ryan speaker is expected to name, a list here of nine of your fellow house republicans to this conference committee. ironing out the differences between the tax bill you passed and senate bill. not one of your freedom caucus members is on the list. is that your understanding? no freedom caucus member on the committee? are okay with that? >> i've not seen the list.

what i hope happens is if we go to conference i want the best elements from the senate bill and the best elements froms house bill to be the final package. we're focused on getting the best bill possible including cleaning up the things like the fact some people in new york, some people in california will see taxes go up. we don't think that's should be the case. we want some kind of hopefully guaranteed, not guaranteed, word from leadership we'll get the best elements from the house bill. not the worst. we want the bill to be bet fer in fact it goes to conference. >> let me ask this way. you look at the bill the senate passed. is there a deal break jer something from that bill in the final version you can't vote for it? >> not saying that i want to see the package. i like they're getting rid of the individual mandate in obamacare and not that they're delaying the corporate tax cut. we like the good part and make sure that our bill, which says the corporate tax cut takes effect right away, that's how you put the good parts together and get the best possible deal for the american people pap bill

that cuts taxes, simplifies the code. >> and about the prospect -- >> one week from now. >> democrats say bottom line on this, coming up with money to fund the government, their bottom line, they want some kind of protection in there for the daca kids. is that a deal breaker for you? >> we don't want that. i mean, look -- they're going to hold up -- mot going to pay our troops because -- they think it's more important to allow people who came here illegally to stay in this country? i don't think that flies with most americans. so certainly we couldn't be for that. what we want to do, make sure our troops get what they need, hold the rest on the spending package. not enthused about a two week deeg. any spending bill lands two weeks before christmas usually means not a good deal for taxpayers. not in favor of that. a meeting tonight and will discuss it. >> thanks for the time, jim jordan. >> you bet. up next, the supreme court

rules on the president's travel ban. keep it here. only invisalign® clear aligners are made with smarttrack® material to precisely move your teeth to your best smile. see how invisalign® treatment can shape your smile up to 50% faster today at invisalign.com -oh! -very nice. now i'm turning into my dad. i text in full sentences. i refer to every child as chief. this hat was free. what am i supposed to do, not wear it?

next thing you know, i'm telling strangers defense wins championships. -well, it does. -right? why is the door open? are we trying to air condition the whole neighborhood? at least i bundled home and auto on an internet website, progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto. i mean, why would i replace this? it's not broken. i mean, why would i replace this? touch is how we communicate with those we love, but when your psoriasis is bad, does it ever get in the way? embrace the chance of 100% clear skin with taltz. taltz is proven to help people with moderate to severe psoriasis achieve completely clear skin. with taltz, up to 90% of patients had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. in fact, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. don't use if you're allergic to taltz. before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms, or if you've received a vaccine or plan to.

inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz, including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. ready for a chance at 100% clear skin? ask your doctor about taltz today. and go to taltz.com to learn how to pay as little as $5 a month. ♪ ♪ everyone deserves attention, whether you've saved a lot or just a little. at pnc investments, we believe you're more than just a number. so we provide personal financial advice

for every retirement investor. breaking news tonight. the supreme court will allow president trump's travel ban to be enforced completely. i want to bring in nbc news justice correspondent pete williams. pete, this has been going back and forth a while. what does this mean? >> reporter: it means now that people who were exempt from the latest version of the travel ban, people who had close relatives in the u.s.,

grandparents, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters-in-law are covered by the ban just like everybody else. this is the third version of the travel ban. the one that went into effect in late september. you may recall, the administration said it did so after a census of how every country in the world handles requests from the u.s. for background information on people who want visas to come here. after doing all that came up with this third version, which applied to most of the countries as the original travel ban way few exceptions. it was immediately challenged. the lower court said you can't enforce it against people who have relatives in the u.s. the government came here to the supreme court and said that can't be right, and today without explanation in a brief order, the supreme court lifted that restriction. so now the travel ban is fully enforced against everybody who wants to come here from those named countries including people who have relatives here and i think the significance of this, steve, is that although the supreme court didn't give any

reasons, remember, the whole beginning of this exception for relatives came from the supreme court over the summer on the earlier versions of the travel ban. now they say you don't need it on this latest one. so that may be a sign, hard to predict, but may be a sign that when this third version gets up here in a couple of months it may fare much better than the first couple ones did. >> pete williams outside the supreme court. busy night. thank you for joining us. up next, president trump is putting his full support behind roy moore. sound like mitch mcconnell might be onboard as well. we'll take you to alabama for the latest. it feels good to be back. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

well, it'sonce again.eason >>yeah. lot of tech companies are reporting today. and, how's it looking? >>i don't know. there's so many opinions out there, it's hard to make sense of it all. well, victor, do you have something for him? >>check this out. td ameritrade aggregates thousands of earnings estimates into a single data point. that way you can keep your eyes on the big picture. >>huh. feel better? >>much better. yeah, me too. wow, you really did a number on this thing. >>sorry about that. that's alright. i got a box of 'em. thousands of opinions. one estimate. the earnings tool from td ameritrade. pepsoriasis does that. it was tough getting out there on stage. i wanted to be clear. i wanted it to last. so i kept on fighting. i found something that worked. and keeps on working. now? they see me. see me. see if cosentyx could make a difference for you- cosentyx is proven to help people with moderate

to severe plaque psoriasis... ...find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx, you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease, tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. never give up. see me. see me. clear skin can last. don't hold back... ...ask your dermatologist if cosentyx can help you find clear skin that lasts.

welcome back. no more beating around the bush from the white house. president trump is now explicitly backing roy moore for senate. this morning the president tweeted a full-throated endorsement for the alabama republican nominee. moore faces allegations of sexual misconduct from multiple women. allegations he denies.

moore's wife kayla took to facebook announces president trump talked to moore on the phone and gave him his "full support." the white house confirmed that later. president trump had already implicitly backed moore last month. he didn't want a democrat in the senate, and on friday will hold a political rail in the mobile media market. mitch mcconnell once said moore would be welcomed to the senate with an ethics committee investigation and possible expulsion now has this to sanchts the people from alabama are going to decide a week from tuesday who they want to send to the senate. it's up to them. a robust campaign with a lot of people weighing in. the president and i supported somebody different earlier in the process, but in the end, the voters of alabama will make their choice. >> joining me now, john archibald, columnist for the birmingham news and aol.com. this moves as a move in

confidence of roy moore's chances in the polls on december 12th that moore can win the race, much more in doubt a week or two ago. is that the sense on the ground down there? that this race changed a little bit in moore's direction? >> yes, i think that's a true statement and that mitch mcconnell's comments indicate the same thing a realization nationally. what a lot of people were saying local locally for a long time. that roy moore is likely going to win the race regardless of the allegations and that dawning is appears nationally. >> what do you think moved this a little bit? when the allegations first hit, a bit of a delayed reaction but polls showing a small lead for democrat doug jones. looks like more recent polls show it moving back in moore's direction. is this a case of shock wears off with time? gravity reasserts itself? some are saying it's the scandals involving democrats in washington. conyers, franken.

maybe that's changed the psychology of votevoters? do you have a sense what moved it back in roy moore's direction. >> internationally, locally as well, team took at the allegations and found them believable and credible and measured them against their own conscious. what they didn't take into account is that a lot of the people who will be casting votes next tuesday didn't bother to do that and have over the course of time decided that it doesn't matter or that they don't believe the allegations, and i think that that, when people start realizing it has no effect they sfatart saying, roy moore ow guy. better get behind him. >> the signals mitch mcconnell, top republicans were sending three weeks ago, go ahead, alabama. you elect him, greeted with an ethics investigation, testify under oath and face compulsion. a far cry from what we're

hearing from mitch mcconnell compared to that. is the sense in alabama this is final? if roy moore is there, voted in next week, he's there, the senator through 2020? >> yes. i think that's it. and all of that talk about expulsion, all of people in alabama oh, they're take care of it up there. they're saying alabama will be the jury in this and if alabama jurors decide that he is worthy of the seat, they won't pursue it further. i would say when he's in, he's in. >> look at this from the standpoint of democrats of doug jones, look to get even a competitive senate race in alabama, takes extraordinary circumstances for a democrat. it is at least competitive right now. what is the democrats' boast home last week of this campaign if they still pull it off somehow? >> they've got to stay motivated. which they are. i've never seen the democratic party this -- this excited about a race in a long time, but what he really has to do is, if he's going to really make it a race, motivate black voters to come out and vote, and that has been

his weak spot. fairly remarkable, considering he prosecuted the 16th baptist church bombings. >> how did the alabama republican leadership, most prominent in the alabama republican party, how are they handling this? still keeping it arm's length from moore? starting to embrace him? if elected, part of their establishment at all? how's that going to work? >> the republican party came out aggressively saying if as republicans you do not support our candidate, then you will face repair cushion repercussi. the only politician saying he would vote for somebody other than moore has been senator richard shelby, who kind of, i guess, transcends the party. otherwise, the republican establishment is on notice they better support moore or face consequences. >> there was this emergence about a week ago. lee buzby saying run as a

write-in, a republican. actually didn't want to get into the question of roy moore and all of these allegations. ducked that question. that looks like it's not gotten traction. is that a fair readout? >> nobody knows who this guy is, honestly, and gotten a little traction in the press and that's sort of thing, but i think most republicans realize that any real successful write-in campaign assures doug jones of winning and that's about it. i wouldn't count too much on him or anyone else. particularly someone else no one actually heard are making a dent there. >> thank you for the insight. john arch babought.archibald. we'll be right back. i just got my cashback match,

is this for real? yep. we match all the cash back new cardmembers earn at the end of their first year, automatically. whoo! i got my money! hard to contain yourself, isn't it? uh huh! let it go! whoo! get a dollar-for-dollar match at the end of your first year. only from discover. i've always had that issue with the seeds getting under my denture. super poligrip free. it creates a seal of the dentures in my mouth. just a few dabs is clinically proven to seal out more food particles. try super poligrip free. ♪ let's get the big guy in place. the ford year end sales event is here. i can guide you in. no, thanks , santa. i got this. santa: uh, it looks a little tight. perfect fit. santa needs an f-150.

that's ford, america's best selling brand. hurry in today for 0% financing for 72 months across the full line up of ford cars, trucks and suvs. for a limited time, get an additional $1,000 cash back on top of 0% financing for 72 months. get these exclusive offers during the ford year end sales event. welcome back. president donald trump traveled to utah today to announce he is rolling back obama era national monument designations he says will reverse federal overreach and return the land to utah. critics say it could open up the land for mining and drilling. first a message for the state's senior republican senator on hatch. >> he's a fighter. we hope you will continue to serve your state and your country in the senate for a very long time to come. [ cheers and applause ]

>> that is significant, because all year the president has been urging the 83-year-old hatch to run for re-election in 2018. hatch had ban strong ally of the white house and recently helped deliver the republican tax bill in the senate. but could president trump have an ulterior motive? trying to avoid senator mitt romney from becoming a reality ji sources close to romney tell nbc news he is only interested in running for this seat if hatch chooses to retire. he would not run against hatch. a former white house official tells nbc news "mitt romney gets elected, america's number one never trumper in the united states senate." he would be jeff flake on steroids. be right back. my day starts well before

i'm even in the kitchen. i need my blood sugar to stay in control. so i asked about tresiba®. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® is a once-daily, long-acting insulin that lasts even longer than 24 hours. i need to shave my a1c. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® works like my body's insulin. releases slow and steady. providing powerful a1c reduction. i'm always on call. an insulin that fits my schedule is key. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ i can take tresiba® any time of day. so if i miss or delay a dose, i take it when i remember, as long as there's at least 8 hours between doses. once in use, it lasts 8 weeks with or without refrigeration, twice as long as the lantus® pen. (announcer) tresiba® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients.

don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue, or throat, dizziness or confusion. ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ #. time now for "the lid." the panel back with me. beth, eddie and john. i want to talk about this issue of alabama, beth. the signals you're seeing here

from not just trump's endorsement today but mitch mcconnell now saying basically look, we're going to respect what the people of alabama say. a far cry from what he way saying a few weeks ago. is this a republican party in washington getting ready people of alabama say. is this a republican party getting ready to say we're going to seat him, not expel him, moving on? >> who knows, but for sure now. donald trump, mitch mcconnell, it's practical. they want the vote in the senate. all they have to say. not making bones about it. reliable vote. trump's tweet on taxes and everything we're trying to do in washington, need him there. not forgive him or say choir boy but we need that vote. >> one word of potential machiavellian defense of mitch mcconnell, he's unpopular among republicans in alabama, anything he says against moore could redo

you understand to his benefit. wants to remain silent now. said they shouldn't vote him in, won't help the cause for him to full-throatedly denounce him. >> do you get the sense they're dropping this? >> absolutely not. some are supporting him to make machiavelli look like a nice guy, no matter the calculation, i'm asking what does it say about the republican party to throw their weight behind a pedophile, fired from bench twice, bigot, white supremist in any form or fashion. political things we are charged to talk about but this is who he's supporting. >> issue that arises, if you have the election and he wins, voters of alabama put him there and republicans in washington say this isn't right, expel him.

kick back to the voters of alabama, liable to turn around and do the same thing. >> at this point it's done deal. republican party don't want him there, actively pushed from him in the past, but he's the candidate, likely to win, going to deliver on the president's agenda. let's see what happens. >> roy moore is in a war of words with mitt romney, potentially a candidate in utah. going after roy moore, said would be a stain on the republican party in the senate and the nation. leigh corfman, then 14-year-old and other victims are courageous heroes. not worth losing honor or integrity. moore responded saying romney has lost his courage or -- if orrin hatch retires, poll

numbers look terrible and romney's are the opposite of terrible. that's a dynamic you could have in washington. >> this is one republican state that doesn't like trump very much and it loves mitt romney. idea that you set up a rivalry between trump and romney i think in that case romney benefits from being independent of trump. this is a family values state that doesn't like roy moore morality. that would only help romney i think. >> and romney -- >> to set himself up as moral beacon in republican party that seems to have lost its way for voters in utah. >> and 2012 republican nominee would be welcomed by democrats. >> bizarro world, romney could

be a reasonable democratic position in the senate. >> or just reasonable. roy moore done no campaign events for days, no credible interviews. but getting into twitter fights with mitt romney, jimmy kimmel. sequestered himself from contact with alabama voters but going at it on twitter and excites people who want to see fight against somebody like mitt romney who a lot of base trump voters think is a squish. same with kimmel, a hollywood liberal in many people's eyes. >> what does this sut about the state of our politics? not just state of alabama but someone like roy moore may very well be in the senate. >> this is a special election on december 12th. not many precedents for this, not other races on the ballot, no idea who is turning out.

closer than any race they've had a generation. it's volatile. saying that roy moore looks like he's in good shape. republican in alabama, in terrible shape. >> but may edge over the finish line if he wins or doug jones may edge against him. but doesn't say anything particularly good about the country or republicans of alabama they put him in that position. >> week from tomorrow we'll find out. be right back.

in case you missed it. richard cordray is in and ohio state is out. according to newspapers former head of the consumer federal protection bureau is running as democrat next year. but ohioens are more focused on something else. out of the college football playoffs. sorry buckeyes, beating wisconsin to win the title not enough for buckeyes to slide into one of the top four slots. edged out by 11-1 alabama who didn't play in the conference title. joining clemson, oklahoma and georgia. outraged ohio state fans say bama couldn't win division. diehards point to ohio state's

two losses on the season. i don't care about any of it. my calendar is for cactus bowl in arizona, ucla and my beloved kansas city wildcats. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. good evening. >> wish you luck on all the games. about to do this filing from bob mueller. news never stops. >> take it away. breaking news, bob mueller filing papers we just got in newsroom, approach signed by bob mueller is a request to cancel paul manafort's bail deal. reason, prosecutors allege as recently as thursday of last week, before the flynn came out. say paul manafort was working