here at msnbc world headquarters in new york. here's what is happening. breaking news. it seems like a new round of negotiations is now underway, trying to put an end to the partial government shutdown. both houses of congress are in session. the shutdown is entering now its 1th hour. actually, it is not. the senate is in session. the white house gavelled in -- pardon me.

not the white house. the house gavelled in but then was dismissed. the president said according to his tweet he is going to have lunch in the white house with a quote large group concerning border security. but an aide to democratic senator chuck schumer says the lunch will only be with republicans the senate minority leader was not invited to it. we heard him speaking on the senator floor minutes ago. he is not yielding. >> at midnight last night, roughly 25% of the government shut down because of one person, and one person alone. president trump. we arrived at this moment because president trump has been on a destructive two-week temper tantrum demanding the american taxpayer pony up for an expensive and infeeffective borr wall that the president promised mexico would pay for. >> mitch mcconnell opened by

saying this about why he thinks democrats don't want to give in. >> they brought this about because they are under a lot of pressure, we all know this, from their far left and feel compelled to disagree with the president an almost anything, and certainly this. i am glad that productive discussions are continuing at this hour between my friend the democratic leader, the democratic leader in the house, and the white house. when those negotiations produce a solution that is acceptable to all of those parties, it will receive a vote here on the senate floor. >> not lost in all of this, thousands of homeland security earn approximatel, they are now -- personnel are working without pay. that includes tsa during now one of the busiest travel weekends ahead of the holidays. this is the third shutdown of the year. one lasting nine hours, the other 69 hours. how long will this one last? i spoke with democratic

represent lloyd doingette. he says an agreement to fund the government may not come until later this week. >> unfortunate for the hundreds of thousands of federal employees and their families who are directly affected and by others who might want to take advantage of those federal services. how our country is more secure when we deny a paycheck to a border patrolman or woman is really difficult to see. >> after that interview i spoke with representative ted lieu who reacted to the president now blaming republicans for the shut down. >> we are now in day one of the trump shutdown. it is not a proud day for america. it is a fillure of the republican leadership, they control the house, the senate and the white house. democrats are happy to talk about border security but we are not going to build this stupid vanity wall of donald trump. >> we have six reporters in place to break down the ins and outs of the shutdown including who will get hurt the most

politically by this shutdown. we begin with mike very kara who joins us from capitol hill. the house -- they gavelled in, they were in for about a minute or show before they went into recess. lets talk about the latest on the negotiations there. >> the house is in suspended animation. they are waiting for these behind the scenes negotiations to bear some kind of fruit. unfortunately we have no indication there is any progress at all. i guess the good news is that chuck schumer did confirm in his floor remarks that are there are talks that are ongoing. in the meantime, both sides resorting to their talking points, principally that the president is being led around by the nose by right wing pundits. and similarly, mcconnell trying to make the case that the same is true of pelosi and schumer on the left flank. unfortunately, for mcconnell, the predicate of all of this is the senate already passed a bill with border security funding, did not include the $5.7 billion that the president now seeks to fund that wall or slat wall as he's now calling it. so where are we now?

these negotiations continue, alex. it seems unlikely they will make any progress before monday princebly because the leadership has given all of these members the notice that they will give them 24-hour notice before they are required to vote on i go in. so it looks like this is going to continue at least through the weekend as these talks continue alex. >> i am curious, with regard to the art of compromise. have you, in your reporting with people from both sides of the aisle, have you found a point at which they might be able to say okay we are not going to do the $5.7 billion, not the $1.3 billion. is there a number that's been floated out there at all that both sides could agree upon? >> if you want to scrutinize what they are saying and the rhetoric and coming from the floor it centers on the word wall, wall versus border security. schumer said plainly just a moment ago on the senate floor the president must abandon the

wall plain and simple. he did use the word wall. democrats in the past have been amenable to money for border security. but look, the wall is a symbol. it's $5 billion, or $6 billion out of a $1.4 trillion annual discretionary budget that the congress votes on every single year. $5 billion is a lot of money. but in the context of all the money that's spent by congress it really isn't that much. democrats say they will not vote for this wall, which they consider a symbol of everything that america does not stand for. alex. >> let's head to the white house and nbc's jeff bennett. what is the whougs ite house to of this? >> here's what is new since last hour. we know the president is having lunch with lawmakers to talk about border security. an aide tells garrett haake that democrat were not invited to the

meeting. the white house, as it stands, is working to get us a list of people who they say will be here for this meeting. when this meeting happens, it will be closed press. that means cameras will not be allowed in. there will not be the white house pool of reporters who oftentimes will go into these kinds of events and shout questions to the president. whatever emerges from this meeting we will likely find out either by lawmakers who leak it or by the president tweeting it. you andic moo hit on around important point on the president's tweets. twice he talked about border security. he said at the lunch we are going to talk about issues regarding border security. and then we are we are negotiating with democrats on issues regarding border security. donald trump has tweeted 150 times about the border wall since he was a candidate. up until yesterday. today he is talking only about border security. for anybody who would say well

this is just a silly semantic game, what difference does it make? this is entirely symbolic they would be right. this is entirely symbolic. donald trump is not holding up government funding over some substantive policy issue. this is a purely political issue. he needs this political win to do right by his base. that's where we are. again, we have to see what comes of this lunch. certainly you are going to see both sides talk more about border security as we get to what could potentially be some sort of solution. >> as soon as you go of the a list from the white house as to who is attending that lunch we would love to see if there are any democrats. before i let you go, separately, new fallout on the president's decision to pull out of syria. what can you tell us. this decision follows the resignation of jim mattis. the top democrat leading the coalition fight against isis was expected to leave the administration sometime in february. but mattis iti imattis's resign

precipitated his exiting earlier. he says it is a recent decision by the president came as a shock and was a complete reversal of policy that was articulated to us. it left our coalition partners confused and fighting partners bewildered. i helped to manage the fallot but i could not carry out the instructions and maintain my integrity. mcgurk is out. mattis is out. and we heard mattis's resignation would set off a domino effect. we are seeing that. >> i want to add to what he said specifically two weeks ago, almost portending the future here. he said obviously it would be reckless if we were just to say, well, the physical caliphate is defeated so we can just leave now. i think anyone who has looked at a conflict like this would agree with that.

which is essentially what the president was saying in the tweets earlier today, right? he was saying things would look good in syria. we originally was going to be there three months. that was seven years ago. we never left. then he says we should be able to easily take care of whatever remains. >> right. and you have people who do this workday in and day out who really know all the particulars and intricacies of it saying that's not the case. in these two instances you see these two men here saying that they would rather not be a part of this administration. alex? >> thank you jeff bennett. as always. we will see you again, no doubt. joining me now, philip bum, jach mason, and laura bassett. a welcome to you all. let me gauge your thoughts on what we have seen in the last hour philip from capitol hill. >> i mean it is not terribly surprising. i think senator majority leader mcconnell's speech was interesting because he pushed everything off on to the

democrats and trump which is fair, this is fundamentally donald trump saying i want to spend this money, democrats saying we object. i think it is important that generally speaking more than half of americans oppose building a wall. other than that, most americans also supported reaching a compromise instead of having a shutdown, including republicans. this is an area where donald trump is sort of standing by himself although to reiterate the point made earlier, he does have the backing of conservative media and the backing of his base. >> the president's says border security. there is no reference to the wall. do you believe he has had either a level of enlightenment or broadened his perspective on what we need on our southern border specifically? >> it is hard to say. it is easy to see those words and say he is laying the groundwork to a potential

compromise. that said, if you look at how he reacted to the criticism on the right and the right leaning media it is hard to imagine what exactly he could accept as a compromise. he hasn't sent signals like that. it is possible him using the words border security instead of the wall. and he described the wall as slats, et cetera, as a sign that he wants come up with something that would lead to this partial government shutdown ending. it is hard to parse at this point. >> a, when you look at the president's tweet on friday, mo, to jeff's point, promoting what he called a sleel slat barrier. is this the way of the president trying to finesse out of the border wall promise and do you think the base would accept that. >> i think we need to take a bird as eye view here. trump has no idea what he is doing. this is not an actual policy proposal. he proposed this on the first day he announced his candidacy for president.

he was a reality tv store, he knows nothing about border security and was not being advised by experts telling him a wall would work. it is a random thing he promised his base to win. now he is using this and using a vickly on isis and a random military decision that goes against what advisors have told him because mueller is closing in on him in his investigation. he is a strong man president who uses fear of outside invasions to sort of boost his inside popularity. that's what he is doing with the wall, that's what he is doing with isis and syria. none of it is serious. it is a dumb proposal that he knows isn't going to happen, he knows mexico won't pay for it and everyone needs to see it for the political ploy that it is. >> straight talk there. what about the president's pick to be white house acting chief of staff mick mulvaney. >> the fence doesn't solve the

problem. is it necessary to have one? sure. would it help? sure, but to just say build the damn fence is have that be the solution is absurd and simplistic a view. >> what do you know about mull vinny's views on the border wall right now and how much he might want the make his views known to the president. >> we know he has accepted the job once john kelly departs at the end of this month beginning of next we are. when you take a jop like that, chief of staff, you agree to represent the president. whether or not that has changed some of his own views on the wall, i can't say. but i do know that he is committed obviously right now to advancing the policies of president donald trump. and that includes advancing the desire that the president has made very clear since he was a candidate and since he has been in the white house to have this wall constructed. and in order to have it constructed, to have the money to do so. >> i'm curious philip, what

mulvaney said in that interview right there, particularly the part where he talks about how the end of an immigration discussion is absurd and almost childish for someone running for president to take that simplistic view that it all comes down to a wall? is that reflected in the independence moo of most of the republicans but they just don't want the say it to this president? >> i think that's primarily the case that a wall alone is not the end solution. the reasons that the wall is necessary, the president says, is drug inflow. most come through existing checkpoints. cher smuggled in cars. and most of the people who are here illegally are people who i don't have stayed visas, other mechanisms. a wall itself is indeed a simplistic answer. to the point made by laura it is also a bold symbol, something donald trump could point to and say this is what we have done.

it doesn't solve the problem. if the only mull reason issy said this. john kelly was asked about this issue by congress. he said actually drugs and illegals come through the ports of entry. everyone knows this is the case but it doesn't seem to have an effect on the president. >> laura, the final word. which side do you think seems more likely to compromise in the shutdown stalemate? the president, republicans, or democrats. >> i think democrats are open to working with the president on some kind of border security funding as long as it's not an actual wall. i think the fact in a the president has dropped the word wall from his tweets today actually is kind of significant. it sounds like they might be moving towards that. a government shutdown is stupid. it doesn't help inin. it is expensive, dents the economy and doesn't deliver a political win for anyone. i think everyone is working together to end the shutdown. i don't think it is going to result in a wall. >> jeff andin from, you guys quickly, your thoughts. jeff, go first, who do you think

is most likely to compromise to get this done, the shutdown stopped? >> it hard to see. it depends what the compromise ends up being. i don't think the democrats are going to capitulate and give funding to a wall but if they can find a way to fund border security that's acceptable to the president i think they can come to an agreement. >> you are nodding. >> yes. i think the president wants to get down to mar-a-lago. >> true. >> philip, jeff, laura, good to see you, thanks very much. a new report about the president and the acting attorney general is being called a huge and important story. a huge and important story

you're in the business of helping people. we're in the business of helping you. business loans for eligible card members up to fifty thousand dollars, decided in as little as 60 seconds. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. 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.

new reporting the president has lashed out at mark whitaker at least twice in the past few weeks, both times over revelations surrounding his former lawyer, michael cohen. joining me now, two former federal prosecutors. ladies good the see you both. mimi, you first. there was a cnn report on which we are basing this which skrbs a very frustrated president but it made it clear is president did not direct whitaker to stop the investigation. i am curious about your reaction to this. because even if the president is not directing whitaker, isn't there still a level of

influence, that he is trying to put on the investigation? and could that not be considered obstruction? >> absolutely, alec. whether he actually said the words, you know, stop this investigation, shut it down, is not really important. that doesn't dictate the results here. this to me is -- just based on what we already know a pretty clear raw blatant attempt at obstruction. whether it actually succeeded or not depends in part on what whitaker's response was. did he go and try to talk to or talk to someone in the southern district based on trump's, quote, lashing out. trump didn't need to say the words shut it down. if the president of the united states is expressing, you know, such extreme displeasure that it is described as lashing out about the fact his name, his conduct frankly, has been part

of the southern district investigation, that's really the same thing, without saying those words. and if you think about it in terms of not the president but think about just an ordinary person out there who is being investigated for something, and his coconspirator pleads guilty and gets charged. if that person walked up to the prosecutor on the street who is doing the case and said i don't like my name being mentioned, you know, this makes me mad, you know, that standing alone, they don't need to say back off or drop the charges or stop investigating. that standing alone could likely be part of an obstruction charge. and here it is the president of the united states. it is not only unethical. i think it is leakly criminal. >> i want to see how you see it as well cynthia. do you see the president trying to interfere into a criminal investigation into himself? is that a vie laying of the law? would that not be proof that whitaker is indeed discussing

some elements of the investigation with the president? >> absolutely. will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest? that's what it is, it is him saying repeatedly i don't like this, i done like this to the person who he believes can make the change. it is obstruction. and if whitaker had half an ounce of ethics he would have said mr. president stop, do not talk to me about this. and he would have called mueller on the phone and told him about it or he would have called the southern district on the phone and toll them about it and would have been prepared to testify before the grand jury about it. it is improper. it is obstruction. it also makes him a fact witness and means for reason number 742 that he should not be overseeing this investigation and he should recuse himself. >> do you think, mimi, whitaker could now be considered a direct subject himself in this obstruction investigation? >> yes, but with one qualifier. it is not actually totally clear to me that the obstruction that we are talking about is the same

obstruction that mueller and the special consell's office is looking at. i now that sounds a bit technical but prosecutors would have to think i have it that way. what investigation -- he can be trying to obstruct both, the special counsel's investigation and the southern district. it is not clear he put those two together. if someone is going to investigate this possible obstruction of the southern district investigation, whitaker should not oversee that because he absolutely would be a fact witness. we need to know the details of what was said and how whitaker responded. >> i know it was in the details there. very good distinction there. sintdia with regard to the overall investigation we know that government officials told nbc that special counsel mueller is planning a february wrap of his report and has quote examined whether the president obstructed justice. from everything that you have seen so far, does february seem likely. >> well, the word wrap, no.

there may very well be some form of an interim report. i get that. and i -- because the reporters who have said this are so good, i would hesitate to contradict them or what they found. but there is still a lot to be done. this is why i think it is unlikely there is a wrap. for example, we are waiting for theston and creditco indictments. we haven't found out whether or not mueller is going to go forward with a subpoena for the president or follow-up questions. mueller just won this grand jury subpoena issue which we think haas to do with bachg records from oversees. we don't know if the records were produced yet. there was a hefty fine if they weren't produced immediately. they might have been. we don't know whether he has done anything with those records. he hasn't interviewed don jr. i don't believe he interviewed ivanka. there are so many things that

has to happen. if he is going to do a report in february, okay, if he is, fine, but there won't be a wrap of the investigation. there is too much to do. >> cynthia and mimi, there is so much to do, i know we will talking to you again. let's go back to the day's breaking news. apparent negotiations to try to end the partial government shutdown are underway as we look live at the senate floor. we are now into the 14th hour of the shutdown prompted by the president's call for $5 billion to build a border wall. joining me now congressman brendan boil from pennsylvania. congressman welcome back to the broadcast. let's get into it here. you are there in your home state right now. with whom are you in touch right now? what is the conversation like? does it involve a compromise on the wall. >> thank for having me back. as much as i love being home in philadelphia i believe we should be on the floor of the house of representatives in session doing the people's work.

unfortunately, we have been sent home on a 24-hour callback notice really waiting for this to be negotiated in the senate. that or speaking ryan can just simply call up the bill that was passed a couple days ago unanimous will he on a voice vote in the senate. it is so bizarre why we are here right now. because it is so unnecessary. there was an agreement. unfortunately, then rush limbaugh and ann coulter and others on fox, especially fox and friends, started criticizing the president. and then on thursday morning, president trump -- stop if you heard this before -- flipped on a dime, changed his mind, and decided he would shut down the government mostly because he didn't like the way he was being criticized on the far right. that's why we are here right now. that means 800 thousand federal employees are working and not getting paid just a couple days before christmas. it is a disgrace. >> do you have any guesstimate

as to when you will be called back to have a vote, given that 24-hour notice. >> no. >> not at you will a? >> i don't. >> any hope? >> none whatsoever. anyone who says that they do know i think is exaggerating or delewding themselves. even at this moment from our report we know that the president is having lunch over at the white house. but he is only meeting with hard liners who happen to have exactly his position when it comes to the border wall. that's not what's going to get it done. >> yeah. >> i was struck by the fact -- mitch mcconnell is experienced in reaching other agreements and negotiating dels. he has sort of taken a step back and said look, at this point, having been burned once before, it is up to the president and senator schumer to reach an agreement that would get 60 votes in the senate. unless that happens or unless paul ryan and kevin mccarthy relent and bring back up the bill that they were planning to bring on thursday morning, i

don't see -- i don't see a way out of this any time soon. >> we should say the president has spoken and said -- tweeted and said he is going to have a large group meeting. according to jeff bennett at the white house there are to your point no democrats on that last. he will get a read out and we will see if any democrat made it over to the white house for the lunch. would he know the president tweeted a white house video. in this video he reverts to anti-immigration rhetoric and he is making his case for wall funding. is there trepidation among democrats that this shutdown could hurt them? i mean is there a side that has obviously more leverage here? >> well, the fact that democrats will be taking back over the house for the first time in eight years just in a week and a half means that the numbers will only get stronger for us given that we picked up at least 40 seats depending on what happens in that north carolina situation. so i think that we are in a good position now.

we will be each in a stronger position january 3rd. you know, really, i will go back to what i was saying previously. we wouldn't be in this situation had donald trump just simply stuck to what he had already told senate republican lep he was -- leadership he was going to do. he decided to change his mine because he didn't like being criticized on the far right and on his favorite tv programs. this is an insane way to run the government of what is supposed to be the most powerful country on earth. >> i do want to get to the topic of syria. i know that you and your colleague adam kin zinger you wrote the president and you asked him to reconsider his plan to withdraw u.s. troops from syria. let's listen to what ted lieu told me just in the last hour. >> this should not be a partisan issue. this is an issue of the constitutional, a congressional authorization. i support donald trump withdrawing troops from syria because congress never authorized a deployment of troops to this war zone.

i believe it is a fair point to krirt size the president saying you shouldn't do this by tweet, shouldn't bypass your secretary of defense and not have an enter apgs process. but on the substance, should we be withdrawing troops from a war zone where there was no strategy and no well defined mission that answer would be yes. >> what do you think of that? if you think he is wrong, why is he wrong? >> ted is a good friend of mine. he came into congress together. we agree on 90% of the issues at least. this is one where we fundamentally entfundamental ly disagree. kin zinger and i col-lead -- i m going to be critical of this president and the abrupt decision apparently influenced by erdogan to up and leave syria.

it obviously prompted the resignation of secretary mattis. also we have now the resignation of mcgurk. i was meeting with mcgurk last week, someone who is incredibly experienced in these areas. the fact that we are losing people like mattis and mcgurk at this important point is as disturbing as the abrupt decision to move ourselves from syria and cede that ground to isis. >> congressman brendan boyle, for now from his home state of pennsylvania. we will see when you get called back. thank you so much. numbers now on the shutdown. 420,000 government workers deemed essential employees are expected to work though they won't be paid. among the more than 50,000 tsa agents across the country with the holiday travel season right now reaching its peak. those tsa agents will like looly be paid retroactively. blaine alexander is at reagan international airport in d.c. he has been talking with. so of those federal employees.

let's get a sense of what the latest is there. are they disgruntled? do they know they have a job to keep people saves they travel for the holidays? how are they feeling. >> reporter: i spoke with one tsa agent not too long ago. he even told me look unfortunately he is kind of resigned to the fact that this is becoming almost something that they anticipate, something they have to get used to. he said he has been around for the past few shutdown and he say you just plan for it and keep going. but he did say there are a lot of his fellow agents who are a bit more upset than he is. of course all eyes right now are on capitol hill. i wanted to come out and he show you and introduce you to some of the people who are directly affected. we have been here at reagan national airport all day long. that's where here and around the country thousands of tsa agents are coming to work and they are not getting paid until the shutdown is over. keep in independent moo, as you said, this is one of the busiest travel days of the year. so in addition to all of the long lines, all of the people

that are scanning through comes the likely added stress of being caught up in the middle of this shutdown. so i spoke with some travelers who came in this morning from dallas. they said they could independent could of tell that something was off as they were traveling through the security lines. take a look. the government shutdown is on the minds of a lot of people. you have already had to deal with tsa agents this morning. talk about what you noticed as you were going flew the line. >> you can kind of sense their irritability i guess and just their frustration almost with the shutdown because of how slow things are kinds of going and moving this morning. but they were still diligent at going their job. it's just everything was a little bit slower. yes. >> you can sense a small bit of aggravation, but nothing rude but just a small bit of aggravation. >> so alex, it is not just tsa agents. their more than 400,000 federal employees who are in the same boat, have to report to work but will no of the get paid until

this is over. correctional officers, fbi agents, border patrol agents, all of them watching and waiting on capitol hill. >> and the president's security detail as well. blaine thank you from reagan airport. m agrean airport. >> (pirate girl) ahoy!!!!! gotcha! (girl) nooooooooooooo! (man) nooooo! (vo) quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker,

and is two times more absorbent. bounty, the quicker picker upper. if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make-or-break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure; trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip, or tongue swelling; rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. are you ready?

ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones. (door bell rings) it's ohey. this is amazing. with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, are you okay? even when i was there, i never knew when my symptoms would keep us apart. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira can help get, and keep uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts. so you can experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure.

before treatment, get tested for tb. 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. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, control is possible. we are now in day one of the trump shutdown. it is not a proud day for

america. it is a failure of republican leadership to control the house, the senate, and the white house. and democrats are certainly happy to talk about border security but we are not going to build this stupid vanity wall of donald trump with u.s. taxpayers dollar. >> congressman ted lieu speaking with me in the last hour as congress reconvenes in the midst of this saturday shut down of the federal government. the biggest question in washington is how long will it all go on. joining me now, elena beverley, noele nick pour, the author of branding america and a republican strategist. ladies, welcome to you both. noele what is your gut feeling how long the shutdown will last and what it will take to end? >> i think it is going the last a while unfortunately. i really think what happened here is the fact mainly democrats -- if you will remember, we have got democrats

in the house, they have taken it over because a lot of them ran on running as far away from trump as they could, trying to impeach trump, trying to get him out. why would they be encouraged to really work something in my opinion with trump? and the border, the wall specifically, is a symbol of donald trump. and i think that they will work and do anything but give him the one thing he wants, which is the one thing he has demanded is the wall. >> yeah, but didn't they give it to him earlier this week, noele? i mean it was all supposed to be fine and dandy. everyone agreed. you heard mitch mcconnell talking about a unanimous vote in the senate saying we are going to fund you $1.3 billion and the president said that's not good because of a bunch of right-wing voices, conservative

voices that called him out as being weak or in ann coulter's case, gutless. >> right. you know, those are pretty powerful call-outs by ann coulter and the rest of the gang that are extremely conservative that go along with the donald trump base. so i don't think really think he is catering to that as much as i do he doesn't want to seem weak. he doesn't really want the seem like he is giving in. that has kind of been his m.o., he doesn't want to give an inch. he wants everyone to come to him and deal. independence could of how he was in real estate, alex. >> let's bring in jeff bennett. the president is right now having a lunch, as he described with a large number of people at the white house. we wanted to see who was specifically on the list. jeff bepet can tell us, who is on the also now, jeff? and are there any democrats is the big $64,000 question? >> not a single one, alex.

this is republicans only. let me tick lieu theist will. i will explain who is who for some of the names that are less known. donald trump obviously. the vice president. you have the acting chief of staff, mick mulvaney along with jared kushner the assistant to the president, also his son-in-law. those three, pence, mulvaney, and kushner were the emissaries that the president dispatched to the hill to try to work out a deal. then you have sha hera knight. she heads up the white house office of legislative affairs. she acts as the liaison between the white house and capitol hill. mike lee, len she graham and senator shelby. mark meadows, jim jordan, matt gaetz, andy bigs. members of congress who happen to be members of the house freedom caucus, the ultraconservative group. if president trump says he is negotiating with democrats, he

is certainly not doing it over lunch. what might be happening during this lunch is the president might be throwing out ideas, maybe talking about border security, maybe talking about accepting something less than his $5 billion and seeing how it plays with the group. if the freedom caucus members can get on board then maybe the right base at large, to including the ann coulters and rush limbaughs it moo be able to get on board with that too and then you would have an agreement. cameras weren't allowed into the luchl. we don't exactly know what is happening toer what the end result of that will be. we will have to catch the lawmakers as they head back to the hill. and maybe trump will give us a tweet. even then what he says will have to be backed up by other members in the meeting. >> is it appropriate to look at the list and think it is going to be senator lindsey graham who will perhaps offer the most dissension here? he's the one who may be in charge of bringing in, all right, here's what the democrats

are thinking, here's what it is. he has certainly pushed back on this wall. >> youia. here's the thing, alex. republican lawmakers, noeks like lindsey graham who have been around a while and know how this political game works -- when i say game i am not being glib, i mean it. >> politics. >> when donald trump was in the oval office and said i would be proud to own a shutdown there were republican lawmakers who were just so nervous about that because they knew we would end up in this moment. they said that was an emotional reaction not a tactical reaction and that the president in that moment owned this shutdown. and when the government shuts down you only really decrease your negotiating position. so they are saying that you have to find a way out of this because the longer this goes, the worse it looks for you, mr. president. >> okay. jeff bennett, thank you so much for bringing that list. we were curious about that. we are glad you got your hands on it. appreciated. back with the panel, joel payne joins us as well. elena to you, as the president

said a few week ago, we heard it -- actually it was just last week, that he would own any potential shutdown. now we see the gop leaders are trying to blame the democrats for this impasse. does anyone come out of this the winner? >> well, no. the short answer is no. no one comes out the winner when it comes to a government shutdown. but you are absolutely right in that donald trump said that he was going to own the mantel for the government shutdown. there was a resolution in the senate that donald trump said that he was going to support and then reversed course on thursday morning. so i think we now are in a place where it is very clear that the democrats are going to try to compromise but there will be no compromise on an vanity wall.

as senator schumer said earlier this afternoon, there will be -- and yesterday as well, there will be no wall today, no wall tomorrow, and no wall on january 3rd, when the democrats take the house majority. >> joel payne who do you think has more leverage here? is it democrats or republicans? if you think it is republicans at all, is their time very quickly running out? >> i think democrats have the leverage. here's what i would also say, the idea that the president cares about the issue of immigration or this is a passion project for him. the only passion project for donald trump is donald trump. this is all about 2020. this is all about base politics. he knows this issue whips up his base. he's on a war footing for 2020. this is an opportunity for him to get pem like ann coulter and rush limbaugh radicalized and representized for 2020. in fact he is even radicalizing the senate. you have flake and, coulder who are leaving. corey gartner, susan collins are

vulnerable. he is going to get that senate to be a senate that looks like a donald trump-led senate. not a senate of deal makers and people who would work across the aisle on things like this. you talked about lip see graham being the person in that meeting who will reach across the aisle? you 123450u. >> he just said bring it on in term of the fight two days ago. he is not somebody who wants to make a dool here. >> the president is on a war of the confusing likes to deal, likes to fight. >> do you think the president is saying i am not least bringing this fight to everybody and each if i fail i can then point to the democrats, blame it all on them. but i am still going to get the political capital, still get the support of my base for at least trying. is that somewhere do you think in his ideology and what he is thinking? >> this is all new to everybody. basically you have trump incorporated that pretty much

has taken over the gone. is his style of e in. these are his tactics. this is not politics as usual. this is politics with another spin on it, the donald j. trump spin. j. trump spin. his base is eating it up, alex, they like it. they like when other senators and legislators kind of mimic the traits of trump as you were saying before. so apparently the trump base and the republicans that support donald trump are really liking the fact that he's sticking to his guns. the big question here is how long is the shutdown going to be in play because it's okay right now but if this draws out to be a long shutdown, it's not going to be good for his base i don't think. >> let me ask our two democrats in terms of what you think in terms of the length of the

shotdoshout down? do you think it goes all the way do january 23rd? do you that will turn things around, alaina? >> it's impossible to tell because we're dealing with donald trump, who is not an honest broker when it comes to developing compromises. it's really unclear how far it's going to go. it's possible this could be a political football that goes back and forth for a while. unfortunately it holds federal employees and their families hostage to political shenanigans. >> do you have any hope that the president's family is down at mar-a-lago already and the fact he's going to stay in the white house residence until this gets resolved, that that may be a time frame that -- >> i wouldn't believe any tru trump -- i think the rule here

is the longer it goes the longer it goes. we've already crossed the threshold. now both sides are probably better served being dug-in. i think you're probably right that the odds on a longer shutdown are probably better with each passing minute. >> thank you all so much. we move now to the legal battles that are facing the president. new this week government officials telling nbc news that special counsel robert mueller is planning a february wrap-up of his report. though it's unclear whether the president will face charges, the special counsel has investigated whether the president obstructed justice.

how plausible is the date of february? is there any way to tell whether m mueller has a viable obstruction case? >> i think we've seen a viable case of obstruction in plain sight for a long time. i believe mueller will have much more information than any of us can even imagine. i also don't think that the february report, if it does come out in february, means that the investigation is over. i think that there are so many loose ends right now, so many things that haven't been done yet and so i don't think it will necessarily mean the end of the investigation. >> all right, glen. just a few hours ago you criticized the president on twitter about his decision to withdraw from syria. you said he was unfit to serve and that the move puts the president in, quote, #25th amendment territory. how likely is it that the

president goes through that process? >> i think it's unlikely but with evolving societal norms, just as we revisit supreme court precedent, if we didn't we'd be operating under horrific opinions like plessy versus ferguson's separate but equal. thankfully that was put out of its misery. if we don't reevaluate what we're experiences today by look at how should we view the 25th amendment unfit to serve standards, when somebody tweets out military operations without running it past general mattis, what's next? is he going to tweet out offensive military operations? how is that person fit to serve and lead? i think we have to revisit what the 235th amendment means. >> how about to you, jill? do you think the president has reached that 25th amendment territory? >> i think that whether he has reached it or not is not even in doubt but whether the congress

will do anything is definitely in doubt. the republicans seem completely entrenched. they seem to be just doing whatever he wants without any thought. and it seems to me that there should be some republicans who will get feedback from their constituents saying we're frightened. and i think glen is quite correct. i worked in the pentagon and i know how seriously decisions like this should be made and they're not being. when you don't consult with the experts, you're making a big mistake, you're putting our security at risk and the entire world's security. so i think it's a big mistake and i hope that there will be -- but the 25th amendment is even harder than impeachment because it takes a bigger vote by both houses of congress so that's a problem. >> there is a report by cnn, glen, i want to get your take on. sources said the president did not direct mark whitaker to stop the investigation.

but your take on it. even if the president isn't, quote, directing whitaker, isn't who still trying to influence the investigation by discussing this with them and could e interaction there be considered obstruction? >> absolutely. >> go ahead. >> thank you. i never want to step on jill's lines. >> none of us does. >> we don't look at one piece of the puzzle to determine if a crime has been committed so quickly. when you have the president telling comey to lay off flynn and then firing comey for not doing it and incessantly criticizing sessions for not protecting hmm, truim, and then installing whitaker, who has no right being acting torng aattor general and then complaining about whitaker not tamping down the southern district new york

investigation, that is obstruction of justice full stop. >> jill and glen, despite the seeming brevity of all this, you guys packed it in as you always do. thank you so much. >> in the next hour, congress anthony brown of the armed services committee is going to stop by. and republican senators james langford will be joining the 2 p.m. hour as well. p.m. hour as well. ♪ carla is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast 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.

but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. - [narrator] meet shark's newest robot vacuum. it powerfully cleans from floors to carpets, even pet hair, with ease, and now for cleaning surfaces above the floor, it comes with a built in shark handheld. one dock, two sharks. the shark ion robot cleaning system.