that does it for me. thanks for watching. i'll see you back here tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. eastern for a new live edition of "politics nation", up next, "deadline white house" with my colleague and friend nicole wallace. aloha, everyone, it is 4:00 in new york city, i'm john heileman, president trump could have spent this morning basking in the glow of the sentence handed down to his former campaign chairman, paul manafort, a sentence so lenient that it gives new meaning to soft on crime. trump sees the cycle and turned it back to a topic you would think he would want to avoid, his former fixer michael cohen. tweeting about cohen's testimony on capitol hill nine days ago. here's that tweet. >> bad lawyer and fraudster

michael cohen, said under sworn testimony that he never asked for a pardon. his lawyers totally contradicted him. he lied. additionally he directly asked me for a pardon. i said no. he lied again. he also badly wanted to work at the white house. he lied. not only could that tweet be considered an act of retaliation against cohen, a witness who is actively cooperating against trump, it's a brand new admission trump had a conversation about a pardon, at a time when cohen was lying on trump's behalf. we have been hearing rumors about pardon talks between witnesses but this is the first time we have been hearing that trump may have been personally involved in those discussions. needless to say, trump's tweet has opened him up to more questions about whether he dangled pardons in front of many other of the convicted felons who were in his inner circle. that's a topic we know is underscrutiny by three separate investigative bodies. robert mueller counsel, the southern district of new york

and the house intelligence committee. as if that wasn't enough potential peril on the pardon front, trump also just today appeared to leave the door ajar to guess what, a pardon for paul manafort. >> i feel very badly for paul manafort. i think it's been a very very tough time for him, but if you notice, both his lawyer, a highly respected man, and a very highly respected judge, the judge said there was no collusion with russia. this had nothing to do with collusion. there was no collusion. it's a collusion hoax, it's a collusion witch hunt. the only one discussing it is you. i haven't discussed it. >> that's new. a collusion witch hoax. that is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends, phil rucker, matthew miller, former chief spokesperson for the justice department, former deputy assistant attorney general and u.s. attorney, harry

litman, and nbc news political reporter, guys great to see you. wish you were here at the desk. i want to start with you harry litman and ask you this question. it sometimes to me that donald trump with his tweet may have opened himself up to, hard to believe, additional new legal exposure. am i right or am i wrong? >> you're right. he is the worst client of all time. every time he opens his mouth, it's more problems for him. he's here. a witness, it makes all the sense in the world and the sdny congress might ask, really, mr. president, where were you, what did you say to michael cohen is this the only time you spoke about pardons. because of his position as president he's been able to elude asking questions. perhaps he does it here. you have to imagine that ned flood and all trump lawyers are cringing once again to hear him basically admitting, yes, we had

this conversation, come and ask me about it. >> matt miller, i ask you, i think, you know, you're more of a scholar of presidential and legal matters than i am but it seems to me it's possible that donald trump in two plus years in the white house has mentioned the word pardon in public more than all of our previous presidents combined. what is that about? >> i think it's very clearly about sending a message to witnesses and defendants and others who might -- who are facing this difficult choice about whether to cooperate with investigators and tell everything they know, potentially implicating the president or implicating the president's family or other people close to the president or whether to sit and not talk to them and hold out until the end of a trial or a guilty plea knowing that at some day, the president might be there for them. i think that's why he has sent that message in private as you alluded to. it's been reported that his previous attorney john dowd had conversations with the attorneys for mike flynn and paul manafort. why maybe he had this discussion

reque with michael cohen. it's why he said it so much. his line about we are the only ones talking about is not true. he has tweeted about it, brought it up in other interviews, it's been a constant topic of conversation oftentimes brought up by him as it was in the tweet today. >> heidi, there's reporting, "the new york times" talks about how trump's lawyers have offered pardons or discussed pardons with paul manafort and michael flynn previously. i mean, again, this pardon talk is just, i mean, it's been a constant feature, and obviously on some level it's because of the fact there's more legal jeopardy and people around trump who have been in legal trouble than any president in history. as we get a sense of how much this has become a fabric of the discussion, especially in relation to some of the people that are convicted felons or soon to be convicted felons, what do we make of all of that, and where that discussion is

headed and what we should make of it? >> well, i would say that the backdrop to all of this, if i take you back to the very beginning of the speculation as to what would happen to paul manafort was that there were only two possible explanations to explain his behavior and why he wasn't being more cooperative. even to this day, the special counsel's office says that he was not offering very much information so the two possible explanations would be that, one, he was expecting a pardon, or two, whatever would happen to him, if he actually did sing, if he actually did talk because of his connections to the russians would be worse than what is going to happen to him in terms of his sentencing. so the pardons and the prospect of pardons has been part of the fabric from the very beginning and not just because of paul manafort but because of the message it might send to many other potential cooperating witnesses in terms of michael flynn. the investigations now are going

into a phase, though, john, where they're going to be getting information off the hill from many other people who are cooperating and i just met this morning with some aides from one of those committees and they say that actually they're getting a lot of cooperation from witnesses who have already provided that information to mueller. so even if we don't see that information in terms of a final report from mueller, it is being extracted now by these democratic oversight committees on the hill. >> so phil, i want to ask you, i want to focus on one particular thing about this cohen tweet, which is the kind of out of the blueness of it, and you know, it was nine days ago that michael cohen testified on capitol hill, and obviously he has been back and cohen's never really out of the news, but what is it you think on the basis of your reporting and intuition that would cause trump on this particular morning to decide to go after, to raised michael cohen specter again. >> yeah, john, well, the reasons i think is all week we have seen

various allegations presented by cohen's lawyers, and explanations by trump's lawyers, including rudy giuliani in the media about the extent of these pardon conversations, what exactly they were. earlier this week, michael cohen was on capitol hill in closed door testimony talking about these conversations. according to our reporting, he was telling congressional investigators that he had had numerous conversations about a pardon that had been dangled before him by trump's legal representatives including rudy giuliani, and so it's been in the ether though we're removed from cohen's testimony, and the president felt like he wanted to weigh in. what the panel has underscored what trump tweeted is very different than what cohen is alleging on capitol hill. trump is tweeting that he himself had a conversation with cohen about a pardon and cohen asked him for a pardon and he said no. now, this is a president who has never been known to be especially precise in his recollections or his narration of events, so i don't know if

that was the truth, but it was an extraordinary tweet. >> no, and harry, it does raise this issue, right, which is, again, the personal nature that phil alludes to, the notion that trump himself was involved in these discussions. it seems to me that one of the things you would do. you said he's the worst client in the world but if you wanted to maintain a certain amount of plausib plausible deniability, you could say i don't know what my lawyers are doing, they may have talked about pardons with these folks, i personally the president of the united states would never get involved in this. trump today seems to have stripped away any plausible deniability on his part. it makes absolutely no sense why the president would want to insert himself personally in this discussion. >> yeah, 100%, why today, you know, that path lies madness, he gets an itch, he has to scratch it. it's 3:00 a.m., and he just does but right, it's not in his self-interest except of course we have been pillaring him as a client, deservedly, but, you know we're in the political realm.

does putting it out there now for some reason give a little jolt to the base that he felt he needed and is that the method in his madness possibly. >> i want to focus a little bit on manafort here you guys, there has been a ton of discussion since the sentence was handed down last night about how lat o lenient and flagrant it was and the two tooiers of justice. rudy giuliani had a quote, i feel terrible about the way manafort has been treated. i think it's not american to keep a man in solitary confinement, try to crack him. he's not a terrorist. he's not an organized criminal. he's a white collar criminal. nothing to me screams more the two americas here or the two tiered nature of american justice that we could have a conversation in which someone who is guilty of the kind of crimes that paul manafort was convicted of to say it's not a serious crime. he's not a terrorist and

therefore he's a jaywalker, what do you make of the sentence itself and cast your mind forward to next week when a new judge is going to be looking at paul manafort's other crimes and has the possibility of adding ten more years on to his cumulative sentence. >> first time you say about rouge, kind of trite what a hypocrite he's become, but it's important here because one of the ways rudy giuliani made his name as a prosecutor was prosecuting people for white collar crimes, insider trading and other cases on wall street. that's what made him famous, walking into wall street trading floors with handcuffs. they are serious crimes, and the only people in the country who seem to think paul manafort was treated to harshly, not too leniently are the president and his legal team. i think the problem with this sentence, two-fold, one, if you just look at the nature of his crimes, setting aside what everybody else gets, the nature of his crimes, the sentencing

guidelines, the ten-year crime spree that he embarked on, and the serious guilty verdicts returned by that jury on eight counts, obviously i think he should have been given a much more serious, not the full 19 to 24 years, but something along 10, 12 years would have been justified but then when you compare it to everyone else, it really does drive home this problem, which isn't new, not unique to paul manafort. wealthy powerful white defendants convicted of white collar crimes, aren't treated the same as poor defendants, black and brown defendants, guilty of violent crimes and nonviolence crimes like drug distribution. >> to follow up further on what i asked mat, the question of what happens next, manafort is open to the potential of being prosecuted by new york state in addition to being prosecuted for the crimes he has been prosecuted for and you have amy berman jackson, the judge who's

going to rule on his sentencing next week. if you're judge berman jackson, what are you thinking about what just happened, and does it play any role in how you can about the sentence that you decide to hand down next week? >> yeah, that is an interesting and tricky question. mueller's sentencing memorandum drops a footnote that answers that question yes. points to a provision in the sentencing guidelines and suggests that she can go up to ten years based on his overall conduct, in other words adverting to the eastern district of virginia conduct. i would have thought, though, that she she would have tried to keep it independent, and would be. she's a tough sentencer, but would be looking at something like seven or eight years. i do want to point out, it was an egregious departure, the system not done with paul manafort and probably never will be. there is not just this coming up, also as you say the possibility of new york, three other states, including rhode island and illinois could

potentially indict him, and i think are beginning to look at that hard because of this sentence. he's by no means out of the woods. >> phil, one of the things that president trump seized on today, as the most predictable thing in the world, besides the sunrising in the east is the notion that trump would seize on the notion that the judge said there was no collusion. it's not really what the judge said. talk a little bit about that. i know no collusion is going to be ringing in your ears probably until the day you day, given the number of times trump said it. talk about the mischaracterization of the facts. >> it's been ringing in our ears for a couple of years now. that was a gross mischaracterization of what judge ellis said yesterday. what he said was that paul manafort was in that courtroom for crimes that do not have to do with the investigation of collusion between the trump campaign and russia so the manafort crimes were separate from the trump collusion/russia investigation. he did not at all arrive at a judgment about russian collusion and did not give the president a

clean bill of health as the president, you know, claimed on the south lawn of the white house today. >> heidi, i want to read a tweet from adam schiff, the chairman of the house intelligence committee. the statement by paul manafort's lawyer after an already lenient sentence repeating the president's mantra of no collusion was no accident. it was a delivered appeal for a pardon, one injustice must not follow another: so he's basically saying, first of all, the judge didn't say no collusion, the lawyer said no collusion, and that was intended as an appeal for a pardon. talk a little bit about what you think adam schiff's game is here, and how this action should shift to capitol hill on the manafort front. >> right, so based on our reporting, the intelligence committee actually is getting a lot of information in coordination with other committees, like the financial services committee, if they eventually get trump's tax returns, they'll get a lot more information from that. but they are going hard at the issue of collusion.

that is exactly what they're going to be examining, and unlike in the senate committee where you did have some, you know, a little bit of a partisan break down there, on the house side, there's going to be many more witnesses now coming in, including allen weisselberg that they've already got cooperating and based on my reporting speaking with judiciary sources this morning, they are by fur kati -- bifurcating and taking it slow. they don't want it to be seen as overreach, going after the president, willy nilly, partisanly there is going to be an obstruction element on this. and the intention, the collusion part of this still has moany moe characters to play out. to repeat myself from the first part, even if the mueller investigation never becomes public, this will all ultimately become public through intelligence committee. i thought it was notable that

for instance, one of the characters that schiff wants to bring before his committee is felix saider, very close to the trump family and very close to the russian mafia. it's notable that schiff wanted to bring him initially in public, which means they have already got their hands on a lot of information that they want to bring to the american people. >> that was scheduled for next week and has been delayed until later in march. heidi, thank you so much for your time. harry litman for your good looks and genius when you're on the show. when we come back, break out your west wing departure bingo cards, bill shine is out after less than a report. new reporting reveals how the fox news alum managed to wind up on trump's bad side in the beat of an eye. also a mole inside the white house who leaked the dirt on jared and ivanka's security

clearance to investigators in congress, and he's not even in the race yet but the hits against joe biden are already coming. i spoke to one prominent democrat who's saying thanks but no thanks. we'll see that video a little bit later so stay with us. we've got a lot coming. stay wi. we've got a lot coming we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪ ♪ do you ♪ love me? ♪ ♪ i can really move ♪ ♪ do you love me? ♪ i'm in the groove ♪ now do you love me? ♪ do you love me now that i can dance? ♪ applebee's 3 course meal. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

we all make excuses for the things we don't want to do. but when it comes to colon cancer screening... i'm not doin' that. i eat plenty of kale. ahem, as i was saying... ...with cologuard, you don't need an excuse... all that prep? no thanks. that drink tastes horrible! but...there's no prep with cologuard... i can't take the time off work. who has two days? and i feel fine - no symptoms! everybody, listen! all you need is a trip to the bathroom. if you're 50 or older and at average risk, cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab! this is your year! own it! cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer, ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. conventional wisdom says you can't make a 400 horsepower sedan,

that's also environmentally conscious. we don't follow conventional wisdom. ♪ ♪ i can customize each line for each family member? yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need and still save hundreds of dollars. do you guys sell, other dogs?

now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. get $250 back when you pre-order a new samsung galaxy. click, call, or visit a store today. the revolving door of white house communications director just keeps on spinning. trump's 5th communications director is out. bill shine, he's resigning after serving in the position for just eight months, which by trump's standards is, approximately 22

scaramuccis, the longest anyone has held this position under trump. he solidified the preponderatsi ties. mr. shines presence in the white house was seen as how emblematic trump has aligned himself with fox, and embracing lines of argument that advanced on behalf of his policies and presidency. as "the washington post" reports, quote in recent months, trump has complained about his media coverage and blamed shine for not making if more positive according to current and former administration officials. joining me now on the set is former obama campaign manager and deputy white house chief of staff jim messina and jennifer reuben, msnbc contributor, matt miller and phil rucker are still with us. phil, i want to start with you, i believe the last thing i read is from a piece you wrote. >> that's right. >> tell us about why now the moment arrived for bill shine's

exit? >> yeah, john, well, it was a pretty abrupt announcement today but not all together surprising. we know just from our reporting the last several months that trump and shine have not been seeing eye to eye entirely. in part because the president expected that by bringing in bill shine, the former fox news president, he was going to somehow improve his media coverage that the news narrative about the trump presidency would somehow evolve into a much greater place for trump and that just didn't happen. shine doesn't have a magic wand. he came in to do this job but at the end of the day, the president is the president, and the news media like ourselves, we're just covering what the president does. he grew frustrated with shine. they were not sort of natural, you know, there wasn't a lot of natural chemistry there, and i think at the end of the day, they decided to go separate ways and shine, it's important to point out is staying in the orbit. he's going to be an adviser to

the reelection campaign, of course no longer in the white house. >> in another world, a normal world, the world you and i used to inhabit, it was not an unconventional thing, a couple of years into an administration. you start to turn your eyes toward reelection. there would be some people who were white house officials who would leave the white house and work on the campaign. i believe that happened in your white house right around this time. why should we not think that this is just, you know, getting ready for reelection as opposed to kind of the way it's being portrayed is shine got fired and this job on the campaign is a space saving gesture. >> the campaign is the place where they go to dump the bodies. you get fired from the white house. they put you on the reelection campaign, and i don't blame this guy. i have never met bill shine. they're lasting a hundred days for a very good reason, every morning the president of the united states wakes up and blows up their communications plan when he gets on twitter. that job is impossible.

no one can stay there because you have an erratic leader at the top, and they can put a new person in the job, we're about to get our fourth chief of staff, five communications directors, more lawyers than you and i can count and because the rot begins at the top. >> i ask you jennifer, one of the things, but let me read a little bit from this piece in the new yorker, you were quoted in it, and this piece rung a lot of bells this weekend, now with shine going out, it seems incredibly well timed or one of the things that precipitated the departure. a source close to trump says that the president has been complaining that shine hasn't been aggressive enough. late last year trump told the source shine promised me press coverage would get better but it's gotten worse. trump thought he was getting roger ailes but instead he got roger ailes gopher. talk about this a little bit, and the shine perplex. >> yes, well, shine of course was the person who was the clean up guy. he went around and cleaned up the messes from roger ailes, from bill o'reilly, from all of

them. you know, he is not the guy who makes the pretty pictures, he's the guy who manages the talent who helped trump get elected. so perhaps trump didn't exactly wha get what he wanted but as jim said no one is going to get him what he wants, trump is trump and he's going to go do his own thing. i think it's very possible that the article kind of was the tipping point for trump. if there's one thing trump hates it's to be portrayed as someone's pawn, and he hates that kind of stuff, so that could well have been the final straw. >> it strikes me as sort of scandalous, i'll stick with you, one of the things jane wrote about in this piece, bill shine was more personally involved with covering up the record of roger ailes with respect to sexual harassment in the workplace than any other single person that i know of, and it's amazing to me that he glided into this job with almost no comment about that, did not

become a matter of public controversy that bill shine was going to the white house given some of the dark parts he had done at fox news. he was involved in some of the dirtiest stuff. >> he went to work for a guy who paid off two women with slush money, a lineup of 19 women during the campaign who made allegations of harassment. this is a guy who stuck by rob porter, the white house staff secretary after it had been revealed, really horrible pictures of battery on his wife. and he was the guy of course who went out and endorsed roi moore. the president is a walking disaster in this area, and so everyone sort of like pales by comparison. this is part of the trump phenomenon. he has brought us all down to this base level so this no longer rings alarm bells and practically anyone can walk in the door. trump walked in the door, why not him.

>> trump doesn't like to be seen as a stooj or puppet, and the notion he's being pushed around or controlled by outside forces annoys him. this story pointed out the extent to which trump is in constant communication with sean hannity, there's the bill shine element to the story, and yet today we have trump on twitter tweeting thank you at fox and friends, great show. so it doesn't seem as though, trump may have gotten sick of bill shine but that story and the controversy around it does not seem to have turned donald trump against fox news. >> i don't know that we're ever going to see trump turn against fox news as long as, you know, the talent on fox continues to praise his presidency, and his agenda. in many ways, shine was the nexus, he was the glue that brought the white house and fox together. it was shine who helped arrange for sean hannity to do these interviews is at all of the big international summits and to be alongside the president as he toured the border down in texas

a week or two ago, a month or two ago, rather, so shine played that role, but somebody else is going to step in and play that role going forward. it's not like there's going to be a breach between trump and his favorite network. >> we all know that trump really own talks fox news but it's striking to see the graphic. let's put this up, the numbers on the interviews, network interviews with donald trump, fox news, 44. abc news, cbs news, 10. >> the president had certain net works he liked better than others but those numbers are st stunning. >> it is unbelievable and what's going to happen eventually is we're going to get into a reelection campaign. if you add up the viewership, he's now not communicating to a whole bunch of voters who are sitting there trying to make up their mind. it's not like they're going to forget it. great, now we want to be your spokesperson. there's one other point. the white house has had one

press conference in 2019, and so their press operation is fox news, the way they communicate is through fox news and it's now an extension of the white house. >> and donald trump has 38% ir reducible core, incredibly high floor, and incredibly low ceiling. >> he's only talking to his base. >> that is an incredibly interesting conversation. after this break, we have to do a commercial here. the leaks are coming from inside the white house. not just inside the house, inside the white house. the objection the congressional scrutiny may have been in vain. that's coming up next. n vain that's coming up next. -oh, n-no. -look, [sighs] i get it. some new guy comes in helping your mom bundle and save with progressive, but hey, we're all in this together. right, champ?

-i'm getting more nuggets. -how about some carrots? you don't want to ruin your dinner. -you're not my dad! -that's fair. overstepped.

we had a little bit of a gut punch for the white house. the administration drew a line in the sand refusing the request for documents related to the

saga of jared kushner's security clearance. as it turns out the committee may have had those documents all along. axios is reporting that someone inside the white house had already leaked them to congress. not only is the leak going to be problematic for team trump. they're evidently reckoning with the leaker as well, one who has moved by scoops to journalists and handing scoops to congress. why it matters, quote, the trump administration's problems with leaks will now benefit congress making it harder for the white house to withhold information from democratic investigators. joining us now at the table with my other two friends, reverend al sharpton, the host of politics nation here on msnbc. good to see you. >> good to see you. >> phil, i want to start by asking you this question, if the house committee already had these documents, why are they asking for them? >> well, you know, i don't know. it might be that they're trying to get more documents, additional documentation on the same topic. it might be that they're trying to formalize their request

because they obtained the documents not through sort of the front door of the white house. >> right. >> i'm not sure. one thing we should keep in mind is this seems to be only the beginning of the house democrats investigations into ivanka trump and jared kushner, there are discussions underway about launching proe launching probes into a number of other ways, including if ivanka trump enriched herself and her company using her position as a government employee. >> what's more problematic, the fact that the documents were leaked and what's in them or the fact that the white house has a mole willing to cough up the documents to democratic investigators. >> the thing that always separates an investigation that produces damaging revelations, maybe e-mails that show misconduct or inappropriate language, and the ones that are truly explosive, the ones that become front page news and lead to resignations and departures, the difference is whistle blowers, it's when you have a

whistle blower that can come forward and tell congressional investigators where to look, what questions they ought to be asking and second of all, to take away one of the white houses most powerful weapons, which is the ability to delay turning over documents and to fight it in court. if they can get the documents from a whistle blower, it takes away the about to drag out for months and years, and gets right to the heart of the manner, and the final thing it gives you is sometimes a face to put in a congressional hearing, and it's extremely damaging for an administration. >> a lot of nodding heads, everyone is about to jump out of their skins. jennifer go. >> everything he said, yes, i would also say this, there are a lot of people who have had a pent up desire to tell what they have to say. they have not had a democratic congress, and now they have one. they have someone to give the information to. so again, the most important thing that has happened in this administration was the change in congress. i think one of the other issues

that we're going to see here is, you know, these two were not such popular children in the white house. they were given huge, vast, you know, areas of expertise for which they had no experience. they absolutely, from what we have seen, used these opportunities to further themselves. there are a lot of people who i am sure resent this, and they are more than happy to chitchat, and the notion that the democrats should be afraid of going after the children, the children are there because of nepotism, because of conflicts of interest, of course you have to go after them. guys, come on, grow a spine. >> you have something to say. >> phil gave you two good reasons, let me give you the third, the former guy who tried to plug the leaks in the white house. >> i remember that. >> you used to do that occasionally. >> we'll have a whole show about that. they don't want to say who gave it to them, right, especially this document, to matt's point, this document only five or six people would have been able to see. this is a really exclusive document and it's going to be pretty obvious who gave it to

congress. i'm sure congress is like let's go get it the official channel so it's these things are leakin houston, you have a problem. >> i want to come back to the point, jennifer goes to the question of can you go too far, and the question of the kids. i want to read from this "washington post" piece of which rucker is one of the coauthors. house democrats are torn, an area of inquiry that would inflame tensions with trump. highlight the concern among some democrats about the political optics of questioning trump's adult children, even as they b cyst the president -- insist the president's family members especially those serving in government should not be immune from accountability. jennifer said no one should have hesitancy about this, your sense is in fact among democrats there is some degree of division and

dissension over exactly how far to push. talk about that. it's how hard andss over a how to do it, what's that time line like. do you subpoena them, do you call them forward to testify. do you start slowly. they're just aware of the optics. these are not children. they're not teenagers. they're not naive and involved in politics. they are working in government at the highest levels and overseeing in the case of jared kushner, our country's national security, and foreign affairs, and so they're very much, you know, subject to congressional oversight. >> reverend al, i want to ask you this question, and read a quote from nancy pelosi that agrees pretty much jennifer reuben, nancy pelosi agree, something must be right. whomever falls into that net falls into that net. they are advisers to the president. they have security clearances, this is not their children at home. >> and i think that was critical here. you're talking about people that were giving a security

clearance. you can't have it both ways. you can't play that i'm daddy's little daughter and my husband, but i've got all of this kind of security clearance, all this kind of of influence. you're either one or the other. but i think that what caused a lot of nervousness around the white house, when you hear about somebody leaking is they don't know what else they leaked and what may be the questioning if they're called before congress, and if you have people at the highest level as was said only four or five would know it. you don't know what else they have, and you know what kind of deals that these people have the capacity to cut. so i would be very concerned if i was them to know people at a higher level are getting them things. we know what we think they may have on security stuff. you don't know what else has been leaked about jared kushner and ivanka's possible dealings. >> i will say the democrats, this is going to be a recurring theme going forward, that democrats are arguing and

worried about every question if they're going to overreach on specific things. there is one area i don't think they should worry about. phil rucker, thank you so much for being on the show as always. you are awesome. after the break we'll have a discussion of waiting for joe biden to challenge donald trump, is out the door and around the corner, the former vice president could change everything with a snap of his fingers. how likely is that man to run according to him, next. to run according to him, next my name is austin, i am a two-time brain cancer conqueror.

there are some days when i have my, my downs and then i have to rely on my mom to come pick me up from work. we need to be connected on a regular basis. sometimes i get hundreds of texts from her and i'm like stop. i owe everything to her, she's my world. i love you mom. i love you too. (vo) there for you when it matters most. unlimited on the best network now comes with apple music on us. get a free galaxy s10e when you buy the new galaxy s10. only on verizon.

you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. a wealth of information. a wealth of perspective. ♪ a wealth of opportunities. that's the clarity you get from fidelity wealth management. straightforward advice, tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management. to help you grow and protect your wealth. if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels.

don't stoop to their level. draw the line with the roundup sure shot wand. it extends with a protective shield and targets weeds more precisely. it lets you kill what's bad right down to the root while guarding the good. roundup sure shot wand. got weeds in your grass too? try roundup for lawns. kills weeds, not the lawn. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years. the field of democratic contenders for 2020 is among the largest and most diverse that we have ever seen. this week we saw more people come out and say they won't run than those who say they will. one prominent democrat who weighed in on the crowded field is new york city mayor bill de blasio. he weighed in with me when i sat down with him this week. take a look at this. >> this week, your predecessor

michael bloomberg decides not to run. you could argue there's not a single human being in the democratic party who has done more on climate and guns than mike. . and yet despite all of that, he with his money and political brains around him, all those people, they all look to the state of the democratic party right now and said, he has no chance to be the nominee. so first of all, do you think that's right? >> 110%. >> he had no chance? >> no chance. >> because we're a progressive party more and more that is desperately troubled by the wealth and power concentrated in the hands of 1%. and we know that has to change and it has to change quickly, so how on earth are you going to nominate one of the eight richest men in the world. that is not someone who's going to change that reality. >> a plutocrat is not going to win. . so he made the right decision. >> absolutely. >> is joe biden a progressive or a moderate? >> joe biden, first of all, a very impressive public servant,

but, i certainly consider him a moderate. >> so can't be the nominee? >> i don't think this party is going to choose a moderate. i don't think this party should choose a moderate. if a moderate runs and wins, this very dangerous status quo will continue. we have an income and equality crisis that is dangerous and destabling. >> but you have a lot of respect for joe biden as a public servant. >> 100%. >> we could say he would not win the de blasio enforcement. he's a moderate. >> look, i have a lot of respect to him, but if you say what does this party need right now, it doesn't need a moderate. what does this country need, it doesn't need a moderate. and he's a moderate. >> so bill de blasio who himself is thinking about running for president, heading to south carolina this weekend, he's been in iowa. who knows how real that is, but he's the very liberal mayor of the biggest city in america, and has had a successful run here.

he's going to have a role. his endorsement is going to matter. he said joe biden should never get nominated. he says joe biden probably shouldn't run either because this party is so far to the left now that there's no way that joe biden could get nominated is that right? >> no, i understand the argument but it's not true. 60% of the democrats say the most important issue is who can beat donald trump. donald trump is a unifying factor. you remember in 2004, we danced with howard dean, and john edwards and kerry can beat bush and we're going to kerry. the second thing is there's no major front runner in this race biden included but the thought that we're going to go to the most progressive candidate is probably not true. the other thing is as you have covered, seven states have gone from caucuses to open primaries in the 2020 election, which is going to open it up to a much bigger group of people including independents and republicans in a democratic primary and likely go to electing or nominating a more electable candidate in the general election.

>> you ran in 2004. you were pretty progressive candidate if i remember correctly, more in line with the mainstream where the party is now than it was in 2004, do you think that a joe biden running primarily in the way that jim suggests which not going to be on the far left of the party, he's not going to be the progressive mainstream but he's going to run largely on i'm going to take out donald trump. is he going to make a big difference? >> i think i agree that the party has moved toward the left, but i think the overwhelming majority of people that are going to vote in these primaries are going to want someone that can beat donald trump, and i think that, you know, i talked to a lot of my progressive friends and i'm considered progressive, that you can eliminate a lot of people in this. many of the progressive candidates do not energize black voters and do not energize brown voters. if you look at some of the results, they lose the black vote. according to the map and the calendar, you go from iowa to

new hampshire to south carolina, south carolina is not a state that's going to be looking for the most progressive. it's a state with a lot of black voters and your super left guy can die there if they don't know how to deal with issues like that that joe biden does know how to deal that. i'm not saying he wins south carolina, but i'm saying that you better look at map if you're on your way to winning the nomination. >> this morning, on this air, on morning joe, you had john hickenlooper, a self-e vowed moderate, multimillionaire, entrepreneurial success story, taking out the turf which is not the progressive lane but asked on the air this morning whether he was a capitalist could not come out and say i'm a capitalist. again, apparently afraid that saying you're a capitalist in the democratic party is the kiss of death. what does that say about where things are? >> it says he's a bad candidate. there are good moderate candidates, bad moderate

candidates, good progressive, bad progressive. elizabeth warren has said i'm a capitalist, and this is what we have to do for capitalism to have a decent humane society. i don't think i don't think hicken hooper is the guy to carry the message if you can't get through an interview on his second day out of the box. i would echo something that the reverend said. the democratic party, although we hear about the move to the left and the progressives, when you look at the clear data, almost half of them consider themselves to be conservatives or moderates, it's not like the entire party has become bernie sanders overnight. as the reverend said, you also have to include the people that desperately want to win and are telling people i don't have to have my top favorite, except someone that is good enough to win. i would also add this. say that joe biden is a moderate, it really strikes me

as peculiar. they act like the obama administration was some moderate or republican light operation. >> i'll tell you that bill deblasio and more say that the obama administration was not progressive enough and bill clinton's conservative. we'll come back after this quick break. is quick break. if ywhen you brush or floss, you don't have to choose between healthy gums and strong teeth.

complete protection from parodontax has 8 designed benefits for healthy gums and strong teeth. complete protection from parodontax. ♪ limu emu hmm. exactly. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? oh. well, we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance, because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. [ loud crash ] yeah. he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ when cravings hit, hit back. choose glucerna, with slow release carbs to help manage blood sugar, and start making everyday progress. glucerna.

but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.

it is international women's day, so i think it's important we talk about another element of the race, but is identity. we have a lot of strong women who are running. elizabeth warren is here talking about many tech giants, how much do you think being a woman in democratic race in 2020 is itself a huge advantage? >> it is a huge deal, right? the democratic party would like to nominate a woman. 58% of democratic primary voters are women in these battleground states, so it's a big advantage. >> i agree. i think that you should probably have a woman on the ticket, if not the nominee. i think we have come to the time in history where people seriously want to see a woman at that level of president, at least vice president. >> one positive, one negative, the negative is there is a lot of democrats totally spooked by the hillary loss and we have to get a white man. that was the frenzy over shared

brown. it's ridiculous. on the positive side, women by the general public are looked upon as safer bets. they don't do some of the stuff that these guys have been caught doing. they behave themselves in public and in private, and in some sense, it gives a little bit more gravitas, at least i don't have to worry about that at it take warrior. -- takeaway. >> matt miller, one of the pieces of news this week we heard is that your old boss, eric holder, decided not to run. are you disappointed he's not running? >> i think he would have been a great president, but there is a a lot good candidates. he decided it's a big hill to climb and a big burden to ask of your family. and ultimately decided it wasn't the right time for him to do it, but i think he's going to be stay pretty active in politics. i think he is running this redistricting coalition and i think we will see him pop up at some point. >> real quick, a little bird told me that beto o'rourke will announce next week.

beto o'rourke going to be a significant player, yes or no? >> absolutely. >> i think he is, but he has to broaden his base. he cannot stay where he is. >> beto o'rourke? >> yes, he will be, but he needs substance and gravitas. >> you guys are fantastic. when you say speed round at this table, people know what it means. we have one more break, we'll take that break right now and be back after that. 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? and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? 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? ♪ oh, oh, oh, 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®! ♪ ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else?

we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. sorry, is that too loud?oud. ♪ you don't need any more hormones in your house. that's why you chose kraft natural cheese. made with fresh milk without the added hormone rbst. it's cheese as it should be. if you want to know why people you have to start by asking... could listening to audible help you find the secret to a stronger relationship? sometimes it doesn't take anything at all for us... just say "alexa, give me my free audible book," and your first pick is on us. so we improved everything.g. we used 50% fewer ingredients. added one-handed pumps. and beat the top safety standards.

johnson's® choose gentle. my thanks to reverend al sharpton, nicolle, i know you matt miller in washington, d.c. that does it for this hour. nicolle wallace will be back here for deadly white house at 4:00 p.m. trump gets it wrong. let's play "hardball."