time for "up with david gura," steve kornacki is in for david. have a good one. and welcome to "up." i'm steve kornacki in for david gura and you are waking up to breaking news as we enter hour eight of a government shutdown. >> we're going to have a shutdown. there's nothing we can do about that. >> both parties at an impasse over the president's border wall and the blame game in full force. >> the democrats don't want to support something that will actually secure the border. plain and simple. >> what we've seen is the total trump takeover of the republican party and including a brain meld. >> hundreds of thousands of government employees fur. lowed just days before the holidays. >> president trump could care less. he is in meltdown mode. >> it's saturday, december 22nd and the shutdown is on, but nobody wants to claim ownership.

>> amazing! he started the meeting calling it a pelosi shutdown and ended saying it's my shutdown. can you imagine if he ever does get arrested? i'm not guilty. yes you are. okay. great. i want to go to jail. that was my plan. handcuffs? my wrists are freezing. >> here with me this morning, a star-studdeds team of experts and reporters. clinton watts security analyst and former fbi special agent. al joy williams is host of "sunday civics" and beth bowie a senior politics at nbc news and geostrategist and edmund siegfried rounds out the panel for the morning. covering the story from the white house to the capitol where we begin. from the stand it point of congress, mike, how long is this thing going to last? >> you know, we just played that open there where everybody went through their talking points. it's a question of how long until they figure they've talked themous and someone's going to have to make a deal. a couple of deadlines are

looming. unfortunately for the 800,000 people affected. the 800,000 federal workers who may not get paid and if they do likely on a delayed basis, a lot depends on how fast people want to get out of town and how fast the president wants to get to palm beach and mar-a-lago. he was supposed to leave yesterday. look, there is an impasse here. there is no sign either side is going to give at this point. the senate is due in at 12:00 noon today. the streets, halls around the capitol and the halls within the capital building and russell building where i'm standing now, completely deserted. it's unlikely anything will happen within the next few hours. this is the weekend before christmas. people banking on the fact not a lot of people are paying attention to yet another game of brimp brinksmanship, and this is the most consequential, happening over the holidays. you saw the president after that

infamous photo op. the fight, squabble with nancy pelosi saying i'll take the mantle for a shutdown. you don't have to worry about it, chuck, talking to chuck schumer. today, this morning, on twitter putting out a video saying it's the democratic shutdown and they democratic votes. this is all a matter of talking points at this point. it's a question of making the talking points, making their case, trying to gauge the temperature of the public, firing up their base. once all that is sufficiently done to everyone's satisfaction, then, only then, stephen, will we see inny breakthrough in the capitol. >> and one quick thing. if this stretches out days and into weeks, democrats in two weeks get control of the house and changes the dynamic. is that factoring in? >> then all the pressure points are on mitch mcconnell. he would be forced to pass what nancy pelosi can pass january 3rd.

right. two weeks until democrats take over the majority of the house. the house can pass something in the blink of an eye almost and send it to the senate. they had a vote yesterday. record duration five hours. mike pence here, mick mulvaney, jared kushner, negotiating behind the scenes as the vote dragged out trying to negotiate, but there's no wiggle room. ultimately, we saw that the vote came to a conclusion with no conclusion, no solution to the shutdown, but one thing was clear. there are not the votes in the senate whether talking about a simple majority of 50 or a filibuster-proof majority of 60 much less to pass what the president passes. so if, in fact, we go into a shutdown that lasts over the course of the next two weeks until the new congress convenes and democrats take over the house, then the pressure point is on the senate. whether it gets that far or not, steve, is an open question. >> feels like another year -- actually it is next year that would be. from capitol hill, thanks for joining us. bringing in the panel here.

look, there's always the question of blame game when it comes to shutdowns. go back to the 1990s. you had these things. it's almost become a staple of government the last generation in american politics. we haven't seen polling on it yet. i guess i put the theory out there. if smub wanomebody wants to dis. everything in politics breaks down on a familiar line. what do you think of trump? for trump, you blame democrats. against trump, you're going to blame republicans. low 40% in the polls. somewhere around 50% disapproval. polling will probably line up with that. >> steve, the bigger issue, the reason for the shutdown is because of this wall and going hard line on immigration. we recall right before the midterms he dug in on immigration there too. warns about the caravan. starts warning about all the people will come invade the country and bring in drugs and diseases, all that stuff. it failed m eed massively. something like nine percentage points democrats won the popular

vote and 40 house members lost their seats. it was a losing strategy then. why does he think it will be a winning strategy now? bearing down on the base did not work for him then. why would it work now particularly shutting down the government? >> the base was waiting for the wall. that was the promise. the promised land and donald trump hasn't delivered on that with both chambers of congress for the past two years. what happened, everybody saying, oh, right wing radio and fox news that pushed him here. no mark meadows and jim jordan, the actual leaders in the house gop caucus. not steve scalise or kevin mccarthy. they started moaning about it saying how dare you. what happened this week, remember, mitch mcconnell had a deal with the president in the white house, passed the cr, president signed it degrudgingly. now here we are. you're seeing the negotiations that are going on. john cornyn said yesterday, you know, it's up to the white house and chuck schumer to negotiate. the senate republicans have taken themselves out of it saying, the white house, you

created this mess. you mix it. >> what you're pointing to, sort of, almost an impossible jam. i'm looking at where the situation is sort of evolved. from trump's standpoint, from the republican base's standpoint that listened to trump in the campaign say the wall, the wall, the wall -- this is it. republican control of congress expiring in two weeks. here it is. this is your bottom line demand on this, if you punt if that deal this week had gone through, you punt now, democrats are in control of the house. good luck getting it through there. if it's ever happening it's this moment or nothing. the democrat standpoint, avlg., get the ho us in two weeks what they're thinking, and b., they don't want anything called a wall. dug in about as far as they can be. >> right in terms of leadership and the house recognizing as well as the base recognizing that there really is no pathway towards a wall after this. right? so it's either dig in the wheels, at least show that you

are fighting for us. you know, even if they're going to continue to say you are a failure and you can't get this one promise done, but to your point in terms of it didn't work in the midterms but it works in terms of firing up the base to get him elected in the first place. right? he's going back to those things that worked, because he's going to lose control, or the ability to be able to have a republican leadership, to actually get the work done he said he would get done. they recognize, this is it. to your point, democrats could unfortunately, the workers, federal workers, being the recipients of this kind of deal, the democrats can just simply ways it out and then immediately it demonstrates democrats can govern. right? because it demonstrates that we're able to move this. we're going to pay the people, back pay, that sets the democrats up to continue to govern and show that we can run this country better than this president can. >> let's take a stop here for a

second and digest all this. the third federal government shutdown. a partial shutdown here but at least part of the government shut down for the third time this year. it kicked in at midnight last night. just over eight hours ago now. this is the nation's capitol thrown into chaos funding or the proposed border wall. unclear if it could last hours, days, even longer but about 380,000 employees furloughed. another 420,000 people will work without pay in what's considered essential areas like law enforcement, veteran affairs, tsa, mail delivery and food inspections. negotiations will continue today. 75% of government operations are actually funded through september of next year. so, again, this is a partial shutdown. about a quarter of the government, we're talking about, right here. president trump postponed his two-week holiday stay in mar-a-lago remaining at the white house and released a new video reiterating this case. >> it's very dangerous out

there. drugs are pouring in. human trafficking. so many different problems, including gangs like ms-13. we don't want them in the united states. we don't want them in our country. the only thing that's going to stop that is great border security. with a wall, or a slot fence, or whatever you want to call it. >> joining me now is geoff bennett at the white house. geoff, talking about walls. how about bridges? bridges between the two sides, specific terminology the president used in that statement. he says wall, then says or slat fence -- >> right. >> used the term border security. the bake impasse here is the democrats don't want to ever tell their base we gave trump money for a thing he's now going to call a wall. so that seems to be bottom line for democrats. bottom line for trump has been wall, wall, wall. is there theoretically something where they can come together here where trump can claim

victory and democrats can say they didn't give in? is a slat fence the answer to that? >> reporter: it appears that way. look, without officials say they're working out numbers of a potential deal. might that mean the president backs off his $5 billion demand. maybe. might it mean he accepts this steel wall, the slat fence instead of a concrete wall stretching to the heavens? perhaps. interesting about this, steve, is that you have a majority of the american public who are against this concrete border wall stretching from sea to shining sea, but so, too, are careerists at the department of homeland security. i've covered congressional hearings going back to 2016 where border patrol agents have said on the border you need what's called situational awareness. that you need to be able to see what's on the other side of that barrier. so that is why, maybe, why the president now is coming back to this notion of a steel wall. something you can see through, because the idea of a concrete wall, all that gets you, you know, these officials say, is

either a tunnel underneath that concrete wall or a ladder going over it. so we'll have to see if this is acceptable to the republican base. more to the point if it's acceptable to the rush limbaughs and ann coulter's of the world. remember, president trump tried it earlier in the week. fudge the difference between a concrete wall and metal fence and the right wing media wasn't having it and why he then was against a spending deal he was once for. so, again, we'll have to see what kind of off ramp comes from this. both sides saving face. that is what matters most. this is a political issue for donald trump. not necessarily a policy one, steve. >> and let me gept you t you in this. interesting, the wall or a barrier you can see through, partially see through. something that's just concrete. from a security standpoint, do you see significant differences there? >> yes. walls without overwatch is what we'd say in the military are no good. you can't see what's on the

other side, just like he was talking about. they're easily penetrated. this is ridiculous. the other thing is, there are many ways we could secure our border with advanced technology that would be far more effective and that technological investment would help our country move forward. we don't need to reinvest in concrete. we've got that figured out. we can use some technological advantages and actually fuel these industries. what we've didn't good at, actually, over the last 15 years. whether department of defense, department of homeland security. investing in technologies that advance our security, we could do that down there. the other part, border patrol agents, anybody down there will tell you it's more effective to put either more humans, more eyeballs, more sensors out there. we've had sensor technology 15 years used it in afghanistan and other places. this is the dumbest way to do it. a $5 billion wall, to maintain that wall over the next 50 years will cost another $20 billion or $30 billion.

this is fixed construction. we're not reinvesting in advanced technology that's out there. even beyond that, just to speak to the message of our president. e were went from kennedy to this message last night, which is you have nothing to fear but insufficient amounts of fear. the president of the united states does not inject fear on his people. he should be pushing for and say, here is how we secure our country. here is how we lead forward with this. here are things we can do that are better than everyone else. it's a remarkable turnaround. the dirty secret that we're starting to see play out in congress is most senate republicans know that there's a more effective way to secure the border than with a wall. the democrats already know that and are pushing for it. if they can make it over the next month or so, you will see tougher border security. i think everyone's for border security. there's a lot better ways to do it than building a $5 billion wall. >> a lot more to talk ab's stay with us. shutdown, not going anywhere the next few minutes. the panel will chew that over when we come back. geoff bennett at the white house, thank you for joining us. coming up, president trump

pulling a bait and switch at the last minute allowing a government shutdown after conservative media bashed him for a sign of bipartisanship earlier this week. >> he was going to listen to the, what i would call the right wing loudmouths who accused him of being a coward.

♪ the kenya tea development agency is an organization that is owned by tea farmers. every week we sell this tea, we get paid in multiple accounts. we were looking for a bank to provide a safe and efficient technology platform to pay our farmers. citi was the only one that was able to ensure that this was done seamlessly. and today, at the touch of a button, all the farmers are able to get their money, pay school fees and improve their standard of living.

with citi, we see a bright future for our farmers and their families. ♪

welcome back to "up." i'm steve kornacki at hour eight

and counting of the partial government shutdown. we say it often. really, one of the most dramatic weeks to rock washington since donald trump took office. much of it hinging on the president's surprise decision midweek to turn against a deal that would have kept the government open through the holidays. tuesday night a bipartisan deal seemed to be in place that would have essentially kicked the border wall down the road a few months and kept the government funded in between. by wednesday the president was facing intense blowback from some of his most loyal and influential supporters. >> it's a textbook example of what the drive-by media calls compromise. trump gets nothing and the democrats get everything including control of the house. >> so the president reached out with a promise -- >> the president has gotten word to me that he is either getting funding for the border or he is shutting the whole thing down.

>> and now here we are. the third government shutdown this year. reportedly influenced by trump's conservative media allies in part turning on him. >> they know that he's promised not once, not twice, but three different times that he would get border wall funding. >> democrats win. because they didn't want any money for the wall. >> this is going to be a problem for republicans. i think a lot of people who voted for president trump counted on him on this particular issue. >> federal workers christmastime are missing -- a bunch of people sounding like christine ballsy ford all the time. >> he also is doing exactly what he criticized president obama for doing. he said president obama is founder of isis. he just refounded isis. >> and the panel is back with us. talking about this a little last block. beth, the politics of this are interesting to think about, because you made the point what just happened in the midterm elections, the president chose to close the midterm campaign with a very hard-line message on immigration, sort of a cultural

war message there and the democrats sort of having that large victory certainly in the popular vote on the house side. yet here we are. from trump's standpoint, he needs to expand his base, probably, to win re-election, but at the same time, he needs the base. >> yeah, but he's got the base. look, the base loves president trump. the wall is not the only thing that's going to keep them with him. they are a very diehard base, more loyal than we've seen a base to any president. he's got them. what he doesn't have is anyone else. look what happened in the midterm. primarily driven by suburban women, college educated white folks who live in the suburbs, typically receptive to a republican candidate or message basically saying they cannot stand this man. they cannot go along with the republicans in congress, because they see when they look at them they see trump. he's got to get some of those folks back, if he has any prayer of winning re-election in 2020. if he doesn't want to doom his party to being a rural white

older party, he has got to expand his base and he's so in that conservative media bubble that you described in those clips we just showed he has not throughout this throug thought this through. there is no path for him or the republican party if this is the way he positions himself. >> is there an argument politically he risks losing some of the base. whether focus sit out the next election. wouldn't be enthusiastic? if you don't follow through on the wall of all things. the thing he shout the at every rally. had the audience responding to, and then you start seeing limbaugh, you start seeing conservative talk show hosts, the folks who normally have his back on just about everything and normally go with him when he sort of bobs and weaves, that they seem to be drawing a line. is there any risk there? >> a think it's clear from his actions, and sometimes inaction, who he governs for. it is the conservative media hosts. to save face. i think back to earlier this week. there was someone on this

program talking about the deal that was struck, in that if somebody -- if he continued to watch tv or listened to radio he'll change his mind again. we saw exactly him, you know, doing that. i kind of agree with you. i don't think the hard-core base is going to go anywhere. right? there's going to be another message spin why he wasn't able to do something because it's the democrats fault, the swamp's fault. someone else to blame besides himself. i don't think that core is going anywhere. however, i do think it may -- the conservative media hosts sort of continuing to etch at it will create doubt. whether or not that the will mean the entire base that he enjoys at this moment will go anywhere or do anything, i don't think that's necessarily the case. look, if they're willing to put money, they're own selves into funding a wall, you know, which they are doing right now, they can go -- >> gofundme page.

>> yes! >> i don't always get a chance to drive around but i put on talk radio as this was playing out. interesting to listen to, conservative talk radio pap show i listened to, the mood changed from the callers to that show between tuesday and wednesday. palpably. it went from one of dejection to this idea that the -- oh, i can't believe he's not going to fight, too. he has our back, he has our back. he has our back. striking to hear that. this was a talk show i think you would describe at trump's base. >> talk radio callers are the essential barometer of the republican base. when they're fired up about something and saying they'll abandon trump they mean it. he could really lose a sizable enough chunk of his base, where if he stayed on that course it would absolutely impact him in 2020. we were sold a bill of goods, and maybe these never trump people were right and they'll stay home. >> if you keep them -- if you then do the things that will keep them happy and keep them from staying home, is there any

feasible way to expand your coalition further? seems like -- >> donald trump has never had any interest in expanding his coalition whatsoever. to seven say even say he wante fool's error. two things, elephants in the room. one, donald trump isn't serious about the immigration issue. first, the wall will never be built. we could fund it 100% today. what will stop it? eminent domain. a ton of private land has to be taken from people. the fence act, still in federal court litigating getting pieces the federal government needed to do that, of land. taking decades. same for the wall. two, illegal immigration, since the year, or since 2007, over the more illegals that entered, two-thirds illegal or undocumented immigrants came in through visa overstays. donald trump has done nothing to address that problem whatsoever. republicans talk about it in the 2016 gop primaries.

chris christie unartfully put forward a biometric entry exit -- >> but it -- >> the wall. something people understand. but donald trump doesn't talk about it. he's not serious about the problem of immigration. it's just the wall because it looks good. he's a builder, which is contrary to fact, but he wants to say it's the wall. it looks good. it's going to be big, beautiful, shiny. now steel slats. what's next gentleman moat? >> also tangible. it's physical. something you can see. >> we're forgetting something, too, about this shutdown, which he's going to cause, which is, he lost a lot of -- any voters in the middle he had i knew that were republicans, he started losing them big time because of the markets. a sizable contingent of the republicans even some democrats look at the markets. the markets have been doing great since he took office. not anymore. that's gone away. add the shutdown on top of it. if you add the shutdown on top of it, this employment figure we've talked about, at an all-time high will start to creep back the other way.

within two weeks you'll start to the see contractors lose their jobs, if they are on government contracts. this thing, the democrats are in a powerful position, because the longer they can delay that, this will start to affect in other ways, totally out of his control. >> and the markets lost 3,000 points or 12%. >> yeah. >> since hetweeted, i am tariff man. >> another form of security. stability and the president governing in a rational manner. to have markets plunge, the shutdown, to pull troops out of a wr zone, impulsively, no consultation of allies or the military, his military leaders looks like complete chaos. that does not provide stability and security the president is supposed to paroles. the border, southern border, is one, one tiny aspect of that. overall, we're looking very unstable and very insecure. >> this whole conversation, too, about his political standing and looking forward to two years. it does strike me. there's sort of two paths here.

the more traditional incumbent president path where you try to, hope for a good economy. hope for stability. hope to get credit for the things that folks think are going well. try to expand your base from when elected. doesn't look like trump has taken that course at all the last two years leaving you with option b. replicate the formula and the coalition that got you elected. the problem for trump there, yes, he did win. did get elected, but that was a very specific, very precise, very narrow set of conditions to -- i'm not saying it's impossible. he got elected in the first place, but to get that margin of 77,000 votes across the three states while losing the popular vote upward of 3 million votes with less than -- 46% of the popular vote is one of the most narrow imprecise set of conditions -- >> the greatest election of all-time. >> huge upset. no question. in terms of not taking steps to try to expand out of that base, you have to replicate it. taking everything you got in 2016 and can't lose an inch or a

fraction of an inch. quick ten seconds. >> i say that he has the ability to continue to lie, to continue to focus on something else and i think that's what we're missing's that even if we decide or we are now deciding that he may lose on this issue, he has the ability to lie, create new facts and create a whole another issue his base will then follow. a quick break. much more to come. shutdown continuing. clock, lower right-hand side of your screen. 8.5 hours now since a quarter of the government stopped being funded. jim mattis calling it quick this week. the man in the situation room with president trump and secretary mattis while they discussed how to handle syria and isis. stay with us. us

opportunity is everywhere.

like here. where nothing stands between you and your best friends. ♪ (boy) got it. nooooooo... (dad) nooooooo... (vo) quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is two times more absorbent. bounty, the quicker picker upper.

became the next cabinet member to say he is out and it is the latest in a dizzying array of white house depab chrtures star not after the president took office. other minds like john kelly and h.r. mcmaster. final straw, finally, the president's decision to pull troops out of syria. blindsided his cabinet, generated massive backlash on

capitol hill and chaos in the region. next morning mattis handed president trump his notice saying in part you have a right to the have a secretary of defense whose views are better aligned with yours. back with me, my panel. joining us, former director of the national counterterrorism center and the national security analyst. nick, thanks for taking a few minutes. i understand in your time in government you were actually present in the situation room with the president, with the secretary of defense, with jim mattis, talking about these topics, syria, isis. just take us through what those conversations were like. >> well, thanks, steve. in the first year of the administration while i was still serving in government, these were issues very much on the table. the president clearly came into office with the idea that he would draw down our commitments in afghanistan and syria. and much of that first year was spent in conversations why that would be adding significantly to our risk profile. how we would be in a sense making america less safe were we

to move too quickly to take those steps. in one sense, it shouldn't come as a surprise the president moved in the direction of drawing down our troop presence in syria. on the other hand, doing so in this abrupt a manner and doing so in a way that caught allies by surprise, even caught our own troop commanders by surprise, that obviously was pretty unconventional and pretty disruptive. >> remember, from the early days there when trump brought mattis in to the administration, he seemed to great afekds for him. loved the nickname mad dog. loved the military profile and military background. to see where it's ended a couple years later. it's been about a year since you were there. if you could describe the relationship between the two that you observed. was there a decline? how would you describe the reship that you got to watch? >> clearly, the early period of the administration, the president was reliant on people around him with much more experience dealing with national security issues. it's my sense that in the second year of the administration, the

president became simply more confident his instincts were the right north star to the following. that in effect, when he was listening to some of these experts, even people with such distinguished trash records as secretary mattis, they ended up taking him in directions he didn't want to go. sustaining the engagement in afghanistan, for example. that was something the president agreed to only very reluctantly and made clear when he agreed to extend our campaign in afghanistan that it wasn't something he was happy with, and he was going to revisit the issue again and again. so it's my sense that the president in a sense gained confidence in his own ability to make these decisions. certainly you heard him say that when he's talked about knowing about as much as isis as the jenning. obviously, that puts secretary mattis in a very difficult position. pushing a president to do something he didn't want to do is not a viable position for very long for a cabinet secretary. >> let me bring the panel back

in here. beth, start with you. where does trump's foreign policy go from here? >> great question. he's got john bolton in as national security advisers. somebody he trusts very much. pompeo he seems to like. as we've seen with president trump and many other people he turns on people on the dime. they're only in his good graces for however long he chooses to let them stay there. i think the bigger issue, though now, what we saw last week was that the mattis deciding to leave and to do so in the manner he did, basic repudiation of trumpism in terms of dealing with foreign powers, you know, the importance of alliances. not immediately, you know, believing that places like russia and china have our best interests at heart. he drove a wedge with establishment republicans in way that hadn't happened with other issues. they clearly, they stepped out. mitch mcconnell issued a statement very much concerned about what mattis did, and basically taking trump to task

for allowing it to happen. lindsay graham, close, close friend, stepping out. now saying he wants hearings on this saying basically isis will be regenerated as a result of this. many people have been willing to go along with trump for many reasons, placated him and this was a fracture. pushing people away that he needs and, again, coming back to the issue, if this republican coalition somehow managed as you said through the eye of the needle to bring trump to victory in 2016, they start to peel away, he's in a lot of trouble. >> interesting too, voices you're talking about. bringing back memories to me of republican primaries in 2016. that was one of the fault lines where trump was taking positions on foreign policy, on the idea, isolationist, called, the idea taking a very different approach there and some voices you're hearing from again now were his loudest critics back then. some haven't been at vocal since then but now maybe hearing from him on this. nick, thank you for joining us. coming up, a little over

eight hour, almost nine hours into the shutdown. the blame game is well underway. the president going from being proud to shut down the government to pointing fingers at democrats. chay the ford f-1s you best-in-class torque, best-in-class payload and you got it, baby... best-in-class towing. this is the big dog! this is the ford f-150. it doesn't just raise the bar, pal. it is the bar. hurry! 0% financing for 72 months on ford f-150 ends january 2nd. see your ford dealer today. carla is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast on ford f-150 ends january 2nd. cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with

hormone receptor-positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. carla calls it her new normal because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc.

[woman 2] ..this... [man 1] ...this is my body of proof. [man 2] proof of less joint pain... [woman 3] ...and clearer skin. [man 3] proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... [woman 4] ...with humira. [woman 5] humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. [avo] humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection.

[woman 6] ask your rheumatologist about humira. [woman 7] go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action. now it's up to the senate and it's really up to the democrats. we're going to have a shutdown. there's nothing we can do about that, because we need the democrats to give us their votes. call it a democrat shutdown. call it whatever you want. >> and welcome back. it i'm steve kornacki. trump versus pelosi, versus schumer. no signs who will win nearly nine hours into this shutdown. my panel is back with me. so, yeah. the president there is reiterating a lot of what he actually said in that oval office meeting in that meeting with pelosi and schumer saying i need democratic votes in the

senate. i need them. in that same meeting he turned to chuck schumer and said, yeah, chuck. i'll own this shutdown if you want and now the president not so eager to have his name attached to it. >> saying everything except accepting the blame as leader of the country. also, why is he yelling? he's there by himself. i think -- this is going to be political theater. right? even if it goes into the new year, there's going to be this exchange back and forth on who's to blame. the democrats are to blame because he didn't give me their votes. as if you didn't have to come to the table and negotiate and give something in terms of negotiation. if he's great at negotiations, why did this fail? right? so, again, he is confronted with his lies that he's the best negotiat negotiator, the best business strategist, and here we are at the table and you can't get something as simple as a continuing resolution passed, or keep your word on a deal that

you previously had before. >> yeah. >> there's a simple solution here to figure out who's to blame. go to maury povich. get chuck schumer, nancy pelosi, mitch mcconnell in the room and find out who the father of the shutdown is. >> the third one in the last year. think back. so many through the years. so many we have forgotten too. there are a few that stand out. the famous one is clinton and gingrich back in the 1990s, 1995. kind of the famous one that left a mark on our politic. so many of these seem like big deals in the moment and a couple days later, there's a compromise. it's over, forgotten. does anybody have a sense going into this? does this feel like it's going to be, which category this will fall into? >> i think it's forgotten, because it's happening around christmastime. people are tuning out. look at everything else that happened this week. i mean, we were talking about flynn's sentencing three days can ago. mattis resigning, market

crashing. so many things are moving now. i just don't see the public -- it's like you said. third time this year. until you reminded me of that i totally forgot. >> if it's patched up monday or tuesday or whatever, i think it clearly falls in the forgotten category. is there a scenario here where the calendar is flipping into february 2019 and saying, democrat house is digging in its heels on the wall and trump is still insisting -- this impasse lives for weeks or months? >> whether or not it's forgotten is a different story. until we know the end-all game. gingrich wound up with balanced budgets. a good thing from a republican perspective. look at earlier this year, nobody remembers because it was really nothing, but this shutdown. once january 3rd hits, democrats have you a the leverage. they will have the ability to pass whatever they want and then have to, be able to dare the president to veto -- >> that gives him leverage now. wouldn't it? ten days out?

>> we still have ten daps sday republicans to get through the last gasp of the wall. each sand in the hourglass ticking away it's getting harder and harder and harder and trump's going to sweat more and more. into january, democrats have a responsible to actually make government function and try to come up way compromise. they will hit a point once becoming majority they will start to own the shutdown, too. >> beth, do we know what could democrats -- what could they offer here that they could sell to their base and say -- >> they had a great offer earlier this year. we'll give you wall funding if you codify daca. allowing the young people who came into the current and children, brought in illegally by parents could stay and apply for citizenship ultimately. a great deal. democrats would have signed off on that. >> one of the other shutdowns. wasn't it? >> yeah. >> ended up calling it the schumer shutdown. >> trump looked like he would accept it and then apparently talked out of it and said, no,

no, no. my base isn't going to like that. that was the best deal he could get and even more money than this $5 billion. why that went away is incomparable. >> is the political psychology, the calculation of the democratic base, changed as a result of this election? >> sure. >> the thing you're talking about. >> yeah. >> what could democrats now turn around to their base and say, this is what it took to get the government open again. but this, we didn't give in too much to trump here? >> try to get daca back on the table. a very important issue to a lot of people in the democratic base, and something ready, was basically handed to trump and it could have been solved. he actually is somebody, expressed some admiration and sympathy for daca people anyway. it's not like it would be a huge, huge lift for him sort of personally. he sees the value in it. the fact he blew that away, democrats aren't bringing that back now. it's not worth it to them to say, we gave up something in order to get this. they could and they should try,

but ultimately because they've got all the card right now they can't. they have to show their power. bring daca back up in a way that it's generated by them and not through something that was by trump. >> i keep thinking back to the oval office meeting. so many things to talk about there, but so many reveals, i think, just about the bake psic bottom line posture. you saw pelosi and schumer visibly recoil at the word wall being used. no wall. not giving you a wall. strikes me. a real sensitivity on their part as democratic leaders that their base will not be happy with any deal trump were walk around and say we've reopened the government and i've got -- maybe didn't get my $5 billion but got my $2.5 billion. anything he can sell to his base as i got the wall, democratic base will say we were sold out on this. >> at this point, democrats can hold both jokers and just wait. they have all the cards and the

ability to, again, soon as the new year hits, demonstrate they have the ability to govern by putting -- by not only passing and reopening the government again. i mean, the shutdown is at the expense of workers, but in the new year, they're able to pass it. make sure that people get paid retroactively and continue to put thing on the table and then, again, they showed the high ground that they're able to govern in spite of this president. >> take a quick break here. evan is taking a quick break and will be back next hour. coming up, nbc news reporting we may be nearing the end of the russia investigation, with the special counsel's report heading right into the hands of president trump's outspoken acting attorney general. what will that mean to mueller's findings? (burke) parking splat. and we covered it.

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 ♪

so shark invented duo clean. while deep cleaning carpets, the added soft brush roll picks up large particles, gives floors a polished look, and fearlessly devours piles. duo clean technology, corded and cord-free. welcome back to "up." the rush yeah investigation may soon be reaching its conclusion. nbc news reports that special counsel robert mueller is expected to submit a confidential report to the attorney general as early as mid february. mueller's report will first go to the head of the justice department that is currently the acting attorney general matt whitaker who publicly criticized the russia investigation.

we are joined now by nick ackerman. nick, this is an interesting question. if a report is filed in the middle of february, will the public get to read that report? >> if it's a report. i'm not convinced it's a report and i'm not convinced it's going to happen so quickly. mueller's main goal is to see if there are charges and indict. if there is a report, there is no guarantee the public will get to see that and certainly not right away. the question will be i think if a report comes out and it's limited just to trump, to the president of the united states, that has to be approved by the owner general before it goes over to the house of representatives for referral for impeachment. >> so the key question -- one of the key questions then becomes who is going to be the attorney general at that point. if we're talking potentially

based on this reporting, maybe later, you have the clock ticking on that 210 days that whitaker can be in there. you are barr now potentially being sent up to be in there. the difference between a whitaker and a barr when it comes to this report? >> it could be significant. first of all, whitaker has made very strong statements about what he thinks about the special counsel's investigation. but then again, you've got barr. they all fit into the same pattern, thal trut trump picks e that have said things that basically jurn basically undermine the whole idea of the special counsel, the idea that a president can be investigated a investigated and prosecuted. so trump has been veriel careful in who he's selected. even with barr, that memo that he wrote, it was clearly a job application and it was to put him in that same category.

even kavanaugh, who was appointed as his supreme court nominee that was brought out who had never been on a list before suddenly becomes the nominee because trump realizes he has said all kinds of things about the president not being subject to investigation or prosecution. so that is the pattern we are seeing. i suppose the out outlet mueller may have is to submit to the district of columbia and that may be the escape valve on all of this. >> nick ackerman, thanks for stopping by for a few minutes and thank you to my panel for this hour. >> hold on, hold on, we've got one more thing to talk about. >> oh. >> anybody who is looking for a last minute christmas gift, i have a great one to suggest, the red and the blue, steve kornacki's book is on sale, it's gotten great reviews. it's time to go out and buy "the

red and the blue" for whoever needs a new christmas present. >> i did not tell you to do that, but please, have a cookie on the house. you get the whole tray for that. that is so kind of you. and, yeah, go out and buy the book. approaching hour number nine in the government shutdown. be right back. the government shutdown. be right back. the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history

of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.

the united explorer card makes things easy. traveling lighter. taking a shortcut. woooo! taking a breather. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com.