get started today at customink.com. who we are as people and making everybody feel welcome. ordering custom ink t-shirts has been a really smart decision for our business. - [narrator] custom ink has hundreds of products and free shipping. upload your logo or start your design today at customink.com. > welcome to "kasie dc." i'm kasie hunt. we're live every sunday from washington from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. eastern. tonight, states plan to sue as the president readies for a legal battle over his declaration of a national emergency. plus, accused of lack of candor by federal officials, andrew mccabe has a lot to say on national television. and my interview with democrat julian castro on his

campaign for president. we start with good news, major league baseball squads reporting to spring training this week, yes, including my orioles. meanwhile back here in washington, a dispute over policy became a dispute over constitutional power as president trump declared a national emergency at the southern border. and now a number of states are preparing to file lawsuits, while the chairman of the house judiciary committee announced an immediate investigation. advocacy groups like public citizen are already out with lawsuits. so that's what's coming. but how did we get here? shortly after congress unveiled a deal to give $1.3 billion for just 55 miles of border fencing, the president announced he would find the rest of the money himself. that decision followed reports he was willing to blow up the congressional border deal on thursday just before the votes took place. "the washington post" writes, quote, by mid-afternoon, however, trump was back on board, agreeing to sign the legislation with the caveat he

would also declare a national emergency in an attempt to use existing governor funds to pay for wall construction. it was an option that republican leaders had urged him to avoid. but they eventually accepted it as necessary to escape the corner in which trump and his party were trapped. mcconnell promised trump he would encourage others to support the emergency in a bid to get the president to sign. and here's the majority leader talking about the prospect of an emergency declaration in sound bites that came just ten days apart. >> did you privately urge the president not to declare a national emergency? >> we have not had the procedure before because the national emergencies that have been issued in the past have not been contentious. i'm pretty sure this one would be. i've just had an opportunity to speak weapon president trump,

and i would say to all of my colleagues, he's indicated he's prepared to sign the bill. he will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time. i indicated to him i'm going to support the national emergency declaration. >> and with that i'd like to welcome in my panel cnbc editor at large john harwood. washington bureau chief for vice news, shanna thomas. dnc communications director and republican strategist and msnbc political analyst rick tyler. thank you all for being here this evening. john, we knew on thursday this was a very, very anxious day for republicans on the hill. you could see it in their faces. i was surprised they weren't literally biting their nails based on what we were hearing. turns out it was worse that day the post report came out and said the president was this close to absolutely walking away. how does the republican party grapple with this decision now?

because so many of them are already on the record saying, no way are we going to back this. >> mitch mcconnell was on the record saying it was a bad idea. look, i think from a republican point of view, they are trying to manage this president, and it was sort of sad to see mitch mcconnell go to the floor like that and embrace a declaration that he criticized before it hand. but i think he came to the conclusion that was the only way he could prevent the president of the united states from driving the government toward another shutdown he might not be able to prevent with a veto override. i think republicans are trying to manage the situation. i talked to a couple of republican members of congress over the weekend, and one of them said look, it's going to be struck down by the courts, we

all know that. let's just move on. so i think they're not willing to protect the separation of powers in this instance because the price of that -- standing up ahead of time and challenging the president might be a situation that would be even worse from their perspective. >> but for members of your still-current parent, i feel like i should add that -- >> i believe in redemption. >> that may not happen. the courts may not strike this down. what position are we in here? >> and for trump, and only trump, it was the best last worst choice. when reagan wanted to reform social security he was getting hammered but worked out a deal with tip o'neill and declared american victory. that's how it's supposed to work. bill clinton couldn't get hillary care passed and he moved on. george w. bush couldn't get privatization of social security passed, and he moved on and took the defeat. trump can't take the defeat so he needed a way out. i think the republicans recognized by declaring it a

national emergency, which is this is not, let's be clear, i don't think this is what the legislation was intended for. i urge congress to go back and tighten it up. it is not a national emergency. but now trump can say he got his victory. let me mention this, when a candidate loses their core identifier as who they are as a candidate, as a person, it's over. and trump is a deal maker who never backs down, right? that's gone now. nancy pelosi's proved it three times. first on the state of the union, pulling that out from under him. >> and i know what i will ask now. >> and the the third. he found another way out and negotiating is not part of his skill set. >> politically he gets to take this saying i am trying to get a wall built for all of my constituents who want a wall built. he will get stopped in the courts probably but we have about a thousand lawsuits that will be filed or have been filed. he will say look at the liberals from california or somewhere else are trying to impede me for what i want to do. it's not a bad 2020 issue for him. it's also not a bad 2020 issue for democrats as well.

>> i disagree a little bit. donald trump is at 39% approval rating. right know he can't get elected. you have to be at least 49% in order to get elected. right now he made a move to satisfy his base. you have to be at least 49% in order to get elected. right now he made a move to satisfy his base. and so what's going to happen now is that the majority of the people don't agree with this, he don't agree with the national emergency, they don't agree with the border wall and instead of coming together and unite us and let's focus on ways to reform our health care system or issues people care about, kitchen table issues, he's put something on the table that will now divide us all. i think he's in big trouble if what he's worried right now is his base. >> are you worried about democrats potentially going too far? there was one point during negotiations they were talking about the number of beds i.c.e.

could use in a given day and they quickly retreated from that, because it was clearly hard to message -- some of the president's advisers said they did paint democrats soft on security. my own reporting quibbles with that. but from your perspective, where is the line for democrats who have to face a primary and then face trump in re-election. >> i think it proves we are willing to have that conversation and have that conversation at the table when it comes to that. but the majority of americans stand with us on all of these issues and that's why we won overwhelmingly in the midterm elections. right now we are on the side of the american people when it comes to all of these issues, just look at trump's approval rating. >> kasie, you want to go back to your question about republicans going foo tar.

in the end democrats and republicans came together on this compromise. the president ran in 2016 -- >> good point. >> -- by trying to create an illusion he could accomplish fantastic things on the wall and trade that other presidents were too incompetent to do. i interviewed him on that subject at that time and i said what are you going to do when people see you're in office and it's a lot harder and you're not the wizard of oz. he said you watch, i'm going to do it. democrats and republicans together, like toto, have pulled back that curtain and people can see that he's not achieving these great things. and that forces him into ever-grating contortions. we saw that in the news conference the other day. >> contorsion is a good word. >> i have built the wall. i have gotten more money than i know what to do with. i never needed the emergency. it was not a confidence-inspiring performance, let's put it that way. and people see it.

there's a significant portion of the country, his base, they may not even believe what he's saying himself but they go along with it because they think he's on their side. most of the country can see that it's not working and that's why -- >> he's also broken the record for largest defendants, largest spending, largest federal government we ever had. he can announce all of those things but those -- he doesn't have -- to john's point like on trade, he has one trade deal with the south koreans. as far as i can tell, the one accomplishment it got done was american customers can't buy korean pickup trucks. and everything else is the same. nafta's not in place, the usm kraxt -- >> both of those deals were very incremental achievements. >> and it hasn't been ratified by the u.s., mexico or canadian parliament and is not likely to be. >> so "the washington post" writes today about this, quote, these endeavors underscore the except to which trump ands a allies are attempting to make 2020 a repeat of 2016 centered on a portrayal of the nation as undersiege from criminal immigrants and other dark forces and reliant upon a die-hard base of older whites in rural areas. finish the wall is really finish what we started. it's about the trump presidency more than anything said one

white house official. it's telling voters to stick with us, finish what we started as the democrats pursue the green new deal or medicare for all. shawna, how do you see the landscape in 2020 as different from 2016 in this strategy? clearly it was one that worked against hillary clinton but also right in the wake of president obama. >> well, i think one thing you have to realize is that especially 2020 also involves all of the republicans who have to republican for re-election. you had people like max thornberry of texas, ranking member is now of the house armed services committee, who basically before this hand was like please, president trump, please, please, don't go this national emergency route because i don't want to have to tell my constituents military construction money is being shifted from msg construction to a wall. he's actually created a weird 2020 problem for some republicans possibly. but i think less when it comes to the presidential election, the members of congress who are running this time, the senators, these democratic senators, he's basically set up a situation where they have something very, very clear to run against. and if everyone is right and his base is not enough -- if you're right and his base is not enough to actually win him the election, then all -- anyone who actually wins your nomination out of the 20, 25, 30, 35 or who

actually going to run -- >> shawna, you're stressing me out. >> this is actually a really good issue for them. >> absolutely. but also i think i'm from texas, and a lot of my friends and family members are republican. they didn't think donald trump would actually move forward with the border wall. and they opposed this. so i think what is happening right now is that a number of republicans who are middle of the road don't -- aren't with him this time around. why do you think beto o'rourke did so well in texas? trump isn't where he was in 2016. where they have something very, very clear to run against. and if everyone is right and his base is not enough -- if you're right and his base is not enough to actually win him the election, then all -- anyone who actually wins your nomination out of the 20, 25, 30, 35 or who actually going to run -- >> shawna, you're stressing me out. >> this is actually a really good issue for them. >> absolutely. but also i think i'm from texas, and a lot of my friends and family members are republican. they didn't think donald trump would actually move forward with the border wall. and they opposed this. so i think what is happening right now is that a number of republicans who are middle of the road don't -- aren't with him this time around. why do you think beto o'rourke did so well in texas?

trump isn't where he was in 2016. with democrats you're seeing great enthusiasm, if there are 20 people who run, everyone that comes out, you're seeing great enthusiasm with grass roots fund-raising. they're raising millions of dollars, which is huge for the democratic party. >> rick, do you view it that way? what will it take for the democrats here? >> that's a good question. new hampshire, iowa -- iowa, new hampshire in order, nevada, south carolina, grass roots states. joe biden is a great grass roots campaigner. but on march 3rd you have big money states, one is california, one is massachusetts, one is virginia and you can start naming people favored there. oklahoma is actually on the same day. massachusetts and oklahoma favors elizabeth warren, california for kamala harris. she may do well actually in

south carolina. terry mcauliffe could do very well in virginia and beto o'rouke on march 3rd also. all of those people can raise a lot, a lot of money. we will see if some grass roots candidate can emerge before march 3rd. >> my head is spinning. we have much more to come tonight. former fbi acting director andy mccabe is opening up about the russia probe in a book due out next week. "the washington post" greg miller got his hand on a copy and joins me next. >> later, brand-new reporting tonight from the last congressional race still undecided. we'll finally get an answer this week to whether there has to be a whole new election. and new analysis about how many absentee ballots were sent out and never returned.

does your customers connecting to the wifi ever slow down your business? yes, it does slow things down. aggravating. it's a nightmare. so our gig-speed network is fast. and we go beyond fast by making it easy to create separate networks for your business and your customers and even control how much bandwidth each of those gets. so your business won't miss a beat. this is a big game changer. this is the new wave, and whoever doesn't get on, i think they would be left behind. just one more way we go beyond at&t. right now get fast, reliable internet and add wifi pro for a low price. comcast business. beyond fast.

another mueller friday, as mueller prosecutors win a new ruling to gag roger stone. in the case of paul manafort asking for a sentence of 19 to 24 years. sarah huckabee sanders has been interviewed by the mueller team. bill barr showed up for his first day as attorney general. >> he's now in charge of overseeing the investigation. >> enjoy your life. bill, good luck. >> it was, as can you see, a busy week of news surrounding the mueller probe. and all of that is to say nothing from the revelations of the "60 minutes" interview with former acting director andrew mccabe, including his game the deputy general spoke to him about the 25th amendment following the firing of james comey. >> the discussion of the 25th amendment was simply rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other cabinet officials might support such an effort. >> rosenstein was actually openly talking about whether there was a majority of the cabinet who would vote to remove the president? >> that's correct. counting votes or possible votes.

the deputy attorney general was definitely very concerned about the president, about his capacity, and about his intent at that point in time. >> how did he bring up the idea of the 25th amendment to you? >> honestly, i don't remember. >> the justice department is pushing back on mccabe's claim, writing in a statement, quote, as the deputy attorney general previously has stated, based on his personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th amendment nor was the deputy attorney general in a position to consider invoking the 25th amendment. this morning senator lindsey graham said he wants to get to the bottom of who's telling the truth. >> who's telling the truth, what actually hand? we're a democracy. people who enforce the law can't

take it into their own hands and was this an attempted bureaucratic coup? i don't know who's telling the truth. i know rosenstein's vehemently denied it but we're going to get to the bottom of it. >> joining the conversation is "the washington post" national security correspondent greg miller, who obtained a copy of the book ahead of its release. first of all, having looked at the book, who do you believe, mccabe or rosenstein? they seem to be telling opposite stories? >> i think it's clear not only from mccabe but other reporting there was a conversation about the 25th amendment and this is something rosenstein raised. mccabe describes rosenstein's behavior in that moment is consistent with others described it to me. >> walk us through that. >> he was really -- after he ends up supplying the memo that is used to fire jim comey, rosenstein is aghast. he doesn't see this coming and reacts in a very emotional way. in the book mccabe describes these emotional conversations

with rosenstein where he's asking do you think it would be okay for me to call jim comey and ask about setting a motion of special counsel? and others have had similar encounters with him. he clearly was really deeply troubled by how all of this was being pinned on him and how quickly things were snowballing. and i think it's pretty -- i think it's believable he raised this idea of using the 25th amendment. >> what's your sense from your reporting about how rosenstein evolve odd on that question? what they're saying now is he dealt with the president and all is fine? >> yes, i think that rosenstein, like a lot of figures at the justice department and at the bureau have veered between being just stricken by what they see in the president when they encounter him or meet with him and then trying to find ways to accommodate him or coexist with him. and rosenstein has been in the coexisting mode ever since the sort of survival of this initial rocky patch with the president. >> but rosenstein has also

expressed much greater confidence in public in his own position in this circumstance, which is consistent with what greg's talking about being knocked back, shocked by what happened early in the administration, but you notice that periodically over last several months he's been making statements. i'm not going to be intimidated by anybody. the justice department's going to do its job. that strikes me as someone who regained his balance and decided that he was going to act in a way he thought was necessary to protect his both reputation and the justice department's reputation, and i think that is consistent with what greg's reporting has found about his reaction to events early in the administration. >> shawna, rosenstein is leaving now, leaving us in the hands of bill barr. how do you think that impacts this whole scenario? >> i don't think -- for a little

while, we're not going to see what rosenstein's point of view is but i imagine rod rosenstein also wants to write a book, much like andrew mccabe. why wouldn't you? and then we will find out what really hand behind the scenes with that. this is the statement that you read before the department of justice has to put out, whether you believe it or not, they have to continue to support the president of the united states and that makes total sense. but rod rosenstein will either confirm andrew mccabe or he won't. >> how much credence do you give to the justice department's ig report? and how much doubt does that cast on mccabe's credibility? the one who said he may or did lie? >> it's around important thing to look at because it really did cast some doubt on his integrity coming out of this job. and his version of events, of course, in the book is at odds with the ig report on this matter. and in the book he basically tries to say, i was caught off guard and in this confusing conversation i didn't answer the right way, the ig report points to four specific incidents when

he fails to answer that question clearly on his contacts or his involvement in bureau contacts with the press. >> and he's at odds with jim comey as well. >> and all of this interestingly is stuff he buries in the book. there's nothing in the book about his sort of disagreement with comey on this issue or the real fundamental tension and ongoing tension he has with rod rosenstein. he depicts rosenstein as borderline unhinged in the aftermath of the comey firing but does not deeper. >> if rod rosenstein wants to write a book, he probably has a lot to write it. rick miller, thank you very much, rick tyler, shawna and john harwood, thank you for being here tonight. coming up, julian castro is standing by. democrats try to stand out in a growing field.

"kasie dc" back after this. (voice) you know what you're doing right now? (danny) impressing the heck out of me. also, giving a shih tzu an updo. pet care ain't easy. 12 hours? 20 dogs? where's your belly rubs? after a day of chasing dogs you shouldn't have to chase down payments. (vo) send invoices and accept payments to get paid twice as fast. (danny) you deserve a treat.

and by treat i mean cash. bacon-wrapped cash. josie...it's time to get yours! (vo) quickbooks. backing you.

in honor of my dad, who was alzheimer's. i decided to make shirts for the walk with custom ink, and they just came out perfect. - [announcer] check out our huge selection of custom apparel for every occasion. you'll even get free shipping. get started today at customink.com.

like campaign season. over the weekend 2020 democratic presidential hopefuls were all across the country making their pitches to voters in some of the early voting states. joining me now from san antonio is former secretary of housing and urban development and current 2020 democratic presidential candidate julian castro. their, thank you for being on the program tonight. >> great to be with you, kasie. >> i want to talk through some policy issues with you, starting with the border. there was a split among democrats on the funding deal that provided some new fencing

on the border. your brother, among those who voted no on that conference report. senator amy klobuchar, bernie sanders both voting yes over in the senate. where do you think the heart of the democratic party is? >> i don't think that most folks support more border fencing or certainly not a border wall. as you know, kasie, there are already 654 miles of fencing along a border that is 1,094 miles long and to the except somebody believes there may have been fencing needed somewhere, i think that's already been done. so i'm glad that you had a number of democrats that did not support this. i would also say we should take a step back for a second and recognize that this is a fake emergency that the president has called. a couple weeks ago his own intelligence officers submitted their report about threats to our country, national security threats, and mexico and the southern border hardly made a

blip on that radar screen. we have much more pressing issues in terms of threats or potential threats to our country than this. and it was very telling to me that the first thing that this president did when he got up there and started answering questions was said that he didn't need to do this. the fact is he just couldn't negotiate well with congress to get what he wanted, and he believes that he needs this wall to get re-elected, and so that's what he did. the next day, even though we're supposed to have this national emergency, he went down to florida to play golf. so it's a fake emergency. >> do you think that there is a problem of any kind with illegal immigration in this country? >> well, i think the united states, like any other nation in the world, always has to have secure borders, and the fact is today our border -- our southern border is more secure probably than it ever has been. the level of apprehensions of people coming across the southern border is at a low we haven't seen, number we haven't seen since 1971. we know most of the folks who come here end up being undocumented don't come through the southern border, they actually overstay their visa. or come here in some other way. the president is not actually

addressing the real issue here. of course, we have to have borders that are secure, but the better way to do this is, for instance, to invest in our ports of entry. i'll give you a great example of that. two weeks ago in arizona we had the largest bust of fentanyl ever trying to come across the border, 254 pounds. that didn't come through the desert, the middle of the desert or some remote place. a wall wouldn't have done anything about that. it came through one of our ports of entry with where trucks come through. we need to spend more on personnel and technology at our ports of entry. >> some of your colleagues in the democratic party suggested abolishing i.c.e. is the way to go. do you believe in abolishing i.c.e.? >> well, the way i say this is if somebody means we're not going to have enforcement, of course, we're always going to have enforcement. if what you mean is should we do the enforcement differently from we've been doing, i agree with

that. >> do you think it's to the point where this -- does this agency have so many problems it can't be fixed, it needs to be restarted from scratch? >> i think it needs to be reconstructed. they need to reconstitute that division. there were 19 people that worked in i.c.e. about a year ago, maybe nine months ago, that wrote a letter saying i.c.e. is not working. this is not just some political talking point or people with a partisan view. people who work in that department, that was unprecedented for 19 people to come forward that work in the division of the federal government. i led one of our cabinet agencies but those 19 people said look, we can tell you that i.c.e. is not working. so we need to do something different. i agree with that. i think we do need to

reconstitute i.c.e. and for people that are out there that are thinking, well, how is that -- is that somehow radical? the answer to that is no, we're always going to have enforcement but we need that enforcement to be effective. we also need that enforcement to respect human beings and i don't think we've gotten either effectiveness or respect of human beings that you should see from that division. >> let's switch gears and talk about health care, which is another topic that has already been at the forefront of this democratic presidential primary. you have endorsed medicare for all. do you believe that there is a role for private insurance, or do you think everyone should be on the medicare for all plan? >> well, i believe that everybody who wants to be on medicare ought to be able to get medicare. what i don't believe is that the profit motive should fundamentally drive whether somebody is able to get health

care when they need it. different countries do this differently. so to answer your question directly, i do think if somebody wants to have a supplemental plan or private plan, that they should be able to do that. however, nobody in this country should go without health care because they don't have the resources, they don't have the money to afford it. we have too many people that can't get good health care right now because they don't have the money for it and that's wrong. especially in the wealthiest country in the world. >> what do you think is a realistic way to make that policy a reality? how would you pay for medicare for all? >> i think we're going to have to do that in a number of ways during the course of this campaign. i look forward to proposing my own way to do that. as you know, kasie, there are a number of different ways that are proposed by think tanks, folks in congress. i look forward during the course of this campaign to propose my own way to pay for medicare for

all. >> would you consider a tax on the wealthy as elizabeth warren and some others in the party have outlined? >> oh, no doubt. no doubt. i'm convinced like i think a lot of americans are, whether they're conservative or liberal, that basically for the last 40 years what's been happening is that folks at the top have been -- the tax burden has been getting lighter and lighter on them and for folks in the lower middle class especially, the burden is getting heavier and their ability to get ahead in this country is getting harder and harder. i do think we need to look at ways that healthy corporations and wealthy individuals can pay their fair share, so absolutely i would. and again, i've taken a look at, of course, some of the other plans that have been proposed. i think at the end of the day we're going to have to do a combination of those things, and i'm going to have my own plan during the course of this

campaign, but it will include asking people at the top and corporations to pay their fair share. >> on foreign policy, some democrats have also questioned potential u.s. intervention in venezuela, and this administration's opposition to the maduro regime. where do you stand on whether or not the u.s. should be involved? what should the except of our involvement in venezuela be? >> i would take a step back and say that the united states has many people out -- as many people out there watching knows has a long, complicated fraught relationship with my countries in south america. in fact, some of strong-men leaders have used the united states as a kind of foil to gain popular support in their own country. the last thing that the united states should do is to step into the business of another country at a very fragile moment. i'm glad that maduro is not there. or that maduro, it looks like, may well end up losing the authority that he had.

i'm glad to see that the people of venezuela are rising up and there was a protest just the other day that had more than 200,000 people there. but what happens in venezuela has to be determined by the venezuelans, not by the united states. what maduro was doing, essentially jailing political opponents, having a sham election, essentially cradling the economy there, people losing 15, 20 pounds, people starving, that's wrong. so i'm glad to see change there. but that change has to be led by the venezuelans, not, i don't think, by the united states. oftentimes if we push too hard, we actually get a response back from the people in those countries that counteracts what we would want in those countries. >> julian castro, thank you so much for a substantive interview, sir. on a lighter note i was pleased to learn that you and your brother saw the last "star wars"

firm together. i appreciate having a fellow "star wars" aficionado on the show. >> good to be with you. >> thank you. maine governor paul lepage was a close ally of the president. when we come back, we're going to get a new scoop out this weekend about the amount of state money his administration used as a trump hotel.

a report published today in the portland press herald alleges former maine governor paul lepage and his staff spent nearly $22,000 in taxpayer money

at the trump international hotel in washington, d.c. over a two-year period. that's according to receipts and documents obtained by the paper. the spending was first flagged by an employee in the state controller's office back in june 2017. an e-mail to a superior reads, quote, the governor and some of his staff are staying in washington, d.c. pretty frequently at the trump international hotel and the room cost is way more than the allowed amount. it goes on, quote, he's not attending a conference of any type but is meeting with the president, testifying, meeting with lawmakers and others, et cetera. so the normal exemptions to state spending limits do not apply. the spending included reportedly 40-plus room with the most expensive costing $1,100 per night. we've reach oud tout lepage and his team but have not heard back. joining me now, staff writer from the portland press herald, kevin miller. kevin, thank you so much for being on tonight. >> thank you for having me. >> let's talk first about this story you all broke.

this was taxpayer money, right, and this seems to be, according to your reporting, the suggestion that essentially lepage was trying to curry favor with the president by staying at his hotel. what are the potential consequences of that? >> well, no one necessarily is saying the governor was trying to curry favor with the president but we're merely pointing out the governor is spending quite a bit of time in washington, d.c. and during those trips to d.c., he frequently used the trump hotel as his base for operating out of. as for the potential ramifications of that, there's actually a federal lawsuit pending right now which is looking at whether the president is illegally profiting from his hotel there in d.c. >> so let's explore that a little bit more. that lawsuit would suggest he perhaps has violated the emollients clause. how would the governor of maine play into that? >> the clause is the president cannot earn any kind of an

income from foreign, state or government dignitaries. so the question now is that the court will be looking at is whether these payments to the trump hotel, the trump hotel is owned by the trump organization, which is run by the president's children, whether these payments to the hotel constitute some sort of payment to the president, which would violate the emollients cause to the kosstution. >> constitution. >> what about lepage, does he potentially face any ramifications from your reporting? >> we're not suggesting anything in our reporting that he's done anything illegal. from our perspectives, it's more

the optics of it. in maine president trump is a controversial figure, like he is pretty much everywhere else around the country. hillary clinton won this state by about 3 percentage points in 2016. and there are certainly a lot of taxpayers who would be offended -- who are offended by the fact our governor is choosing to patronize a hotel that provides profits to the president and to his family. so like i said, we're not saying there's anything illegal going on from the governor's standpoint, but it does go to this question of whether the hotel, the fact that the hotel is owned by the president's family, whether that is some sort of violation of the ee moll uants clause. >> kevin miller, thank you very much for your reporting. when we continue, we have brand-new reporting on the last congressional race still under way. that's right, north carolina nine is still not decided amid accusations of fraud. and now nbc news has new reporting just out about how

many absentee ballots were sent out and never returned. don't go anywhere.

three months after election day there is still one congressional race undecided. a hearing that starts tomorrow will determine the fate of that election in north carolina's ninth congressional district that remains empty amid that the political operative harvested mail-in ballots. it will begin before the state board of elections that could lead to an entirely new election. joining me now from north carolina, great to see you as always, you have reporting on the number of absentee ballots that never came back? >> yeah, kasie, at the center of this entire dispute is absentee ballots and one person, mccray,

hired by republican mark harris, to run this get out the vote campaign during the general election. on the eve of this hearing, nbc news has new reporting regarding these absentee ballots, our journalist, jeremiah, found there were 3500 people who requested absentee ballots, who never turned them in and never showed up to vote. the reason that's significant is because mark harris, the republican, is right now the unofficial leader in the race by just 900 votes. when there's 3500 ballots in question, that could be a big deal. of course, that's just one piece of this larger puzzle and we will find out hopefully a lot more tomorrow, when the state

board of election opens this long await hearing, kasie. >> what should we expect at the hearing tomorrow? how will it unfold and how long will it take? what should we expect to learn? >> it should be about two to three days is what they're expecting. the state board is going to reveal what they have found in their months long investigation into the 2018 general election. we also have the harris campaign in the democrat, the mccreedy campaign, who will call dozens of witnesses as well, including mccray dowlis, the person in the center of this investigation, who is going to be called to testify, and he is the one running the absentee ballots. what the harris campaign is saying, the republican, telling the board, look, let's certify this race. we did not know about how mccray dowlis ran his get out the vote

effort and the mccreedy campaign will say, this race is tainted and they need to call for a new election. we will find out at the end of this hearing, which will be tuesday or wednesday, if the board is going to certify this election or if they're going to hold a new election. >> leigh ann caldwell, thanks for your reporting and good luck the next couple of days. >> thank you.

audible members know listening has the power to change us make us better parents, better leaders, better people. and there's no better place to listen than audible. with audible you get a credit good for any audiobook and exclusive fitness and wellness programs. and now, you'll also get two audible originals: titles exclusively produced for audible. automatically roll your credits over to the next month if you don't use them, and if you don't like a book just swap it for free. enjoy 100% ad free listening in the car, on your phone or any connected device. and when you switch a device pick up right where you left off. with our commitment free guarantee, there's never been a better time to start listening to audible. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories,

the best place to listen. to start your free 30-day trial, text listen5 to 500500 today. ♪ amid mounting challenges, the white house is defending president trump's emergency declaration to build a wall along the southern border. this as democrats and republicans voice their concerns. plus, european leaders ledley angela merkel confront american first policy and the administration's policy of treating allies. and a counterintelligence probe into the president. one reason being trump's own words.