"hardball" starts now. impeach, now or never. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. there is breaking news right at this moment. just minutes ago house democrats concluded a conference call about their strategy moving forward in the wake of robert mueller's explosive report. to impeach or not to impeach, that is the question for those lawmakers who must now weigh the bulk of the evidence against the risks of impeachment. if they do impeach, the

republican-controlled senate is unlikely to convict the president and remove him from office, but if they don't impeach, democrats will abdicate a clear constitutional chance to hold this president fully accountable. now nbc news is reporting tonight that during tonight's conference call congresswoman val demings of florida implored her colleagues to act, saying i believe we have enough evidence now. well, democratic leadership, however, seemed to favor more cautious approach. according to politico, speaker nancy pelosi told her colleagues on that call "we aren't going to go faster, we are going to go as fast as the facts take us." this comes after pelosi acknowledged the division amongst her caucus on impeachment in a letter today. arguing the facts can be gained outside the impeachment hearings. that's an argument. we'll see if it's true. this comes after the democratic chairmen of three powerful committees expressed similar caution when confronted with the question of impeachment on the sunday talk shows. >> we may get to that. we may not.

as i said before, it is our job to go -- to go through all the evidence. >> do you think this is impeachable? >> yeah, i do. i do think that this -- if proven, if proven, which hasn't been proven yet, some of this -- if proven, some of this would be impeachable, yes. >> i'm not there yet, but i can foresee that possibly coming. but, again, the fact is is that i think we have to do -- be very careful here. >> impeachment is likely to be unsuccessful. now, it may be that we undertake an impeachment nonetheless. i think what we are going to have to decide as a caucus is what is the best thing for the country? >> well, despite the damning revelations that mueller's report centered on obstruction of justice, the president said he's not concerned about possible impeachment. here is trump at the white house easter egg roll today. >> are you worried about impeachment, mr. president?

>> not even a little bit. >> trump also tweeted this morning that, "only high crimes and misdemeanors can lead to impeachment. there were no crimes by me, so you can't impeach. it was the democrats who committed the crimes." see what happens when you open him up? you don't go on offense, he does. not your republican president. a reuters poll conducted in the wake of the mueller report, trump's approval rating has cropped to the lowest of this year. just 37% of americans say they approve of his performance as president. i'm joined by u.s. congressman ro khanna on california. joyce vance, former federal prosecutor. peter baker, chief white house correspondent for "the new york times" and leigh ann caldwell covers congress for nbc news. leigh ann, give us a sense, how did it go with the speaker saying let's not go with impeachment or the back benchers, who is winning?

>> that's a good way to put it, chris. so there does seem to be a mood shift among house democrats on the issue of impeachment and also on these investigations. since the mueller report has come out. i'm told by two sources who were on the call that everyone was very concerned about the status of the country and the way that the president has been acting. and so there is a shift in the appetite for continuing investigations, but we don't yet see any talk of impeachment from the leadership, and that's where it really matters. the chairman of six important committees went through line by line on what they were investigating and were going to continue to investigate, and they said they were going to use every single tool in their arsenal. they're going to continue to conduct these investigations, but they did not say that they were going to start impeachment proceedings just yet, chris. >> well, did the usual people who are back benchers, the young

members, many of color who came into the congress, you know, aoc and others and presley, did they make statements today on that conference call for impeachment? >> not that i'm aware of. i was told about five or six members did speak up, and there were a couple of members who did say they supported impeachment. you mentioned val demings of florida. she said she's been in law enforcement for 27 years and the facts are evident that impeachment is possible now. she really urged not waiting, just moving forward on it as we speak. then there was another member, representative huffman of california, and he urged democratic leadership to talk about the danger of not impeaching. so he said that the messaging around the democrats shouldn't be do we impeach or not but make the case to the public that it's more important to impeach than to not impeach, chris.

>> thanks for the great reporting. i love on-site reporting. great for you being there and getting the information. let me bring in congressman ro khanna. you were on that call. how is your reading? has pelosi got the reins of our caucus and saying not now and wielding that power against impeachment. is she there? >> she does, but i think her tone has also shifted post the mueller report. she's also now talking about our duty to investigate this. she's talking about the urgency. she's saying let the facts lead where they may and let's have a strong public presentation to the american public. >> yeah, but what's that? >> well, look, even during watergate it took a long time before public opinion changed. >> okay, congressman. you're a politician. i'm watching you. i will say this. now or never. don't tell me some time this summer after they hear from mueller again and they hear from barr again and, oh, don what's his dmaname, mcgraw or mcgahn. you don't think that's going to change what you don't want to do

now? i don't want to dive in the pool. >> i think mueller's testimony could make a difference. >> could? do you think it's probable or plausible. >> we just got the mueller report a week ago. >> you're nice to come in. i think the whole caucus decided not to impeach. if you're not going to do it now, you're not going to do it in three months or six months. the redacted little information is going to change you from nothing to impeach the guy? >> i think it's important for the committees to do their work and issue reports. >> reuters also finds, these are interesting numbers to take home with you tonight. 67% of democrats, regular people, say he should be impeached. 2/3. 75% of democrats. this is coming after the mueller release, quit, you're not worthy to be president. so that's the backdrop i'm looking at. let me go to peter baker on this. that is, of course, the people out there, just the people, but for some reason the political people don't want to go respond to that. your thoughts, peter? >> well, the poll you just cited

says 2/3 of democrats think he ought to be impeached but you need 2/3 of democrats and republicans in the senate to impeach. that means you need 20 republican senators. it's been four, five days since the mueller report came out and you haven't heard one republican suggest they're anywhere close to the idea of supporting impeachment. for speaker pelosi, she's looking at this from a practical point of view. do you go forward with something that doesn't seem to have much chance of success, simply on the idea that they ought to do it because of the matter of principle and risk whatever political backlash there might be? or do you let this be settled at the ballot box and try to beat him, you know, on issues like health care and other questions? that's the argument you're hearing take place amongst the democrats. >> peter, i'm not happy with the idea of partisan cheerleader. if you're right, the politics say the smartest, safest move, like all those democrats who voted for the iraq war, that was the smart move. i'm so sick of the smart move. because inevitability the smart move like in "the godfather" gets you killed.

because the cleverness of being against impeachment. you can impeach with just a majority of the house. you can indict this guy for history. peter, as a journalist, you write the big story. if you're trump, would you rather be impeached than not or in the end is he just playing a game here? he knows it looks like hell in the history book to be impeached. i don't think bill clinton by the second or third paragraph in his obit is going to see impeached along with andrew johnson. nobody likes being smacked by history in that way. trump says come at me. i think the democrats would be smart to impeach him. let the republicans defend this kind of behavior. that's an argument. let me go to joy vance here. joyce, high crimes and misdemeanors is about as clear a phrase as robert mueller's i'm not going to exonerate on obstruction of justice. it seems like not only the special counsel but the founding fathers left us with an uncertain trumpet. what the hell does high crimes and misdemeanors mean?

>> it means whatever congress wants it to mean, chris. so you make this really good point, which is that impeachment is about the same thing as indictment. mueller does an investigation and decides whether to indict or not, but he's looking at very limited topics. he's only looking at whether there was a conspiracy between the campaign and the russian government and whether there was obstruction. congress has a much wider scope here. >> yeah. >> they can decide that just about any element of conduct is a high crime and misdemeanor. so lots of investigation, lots of opportunity to get people on board for a shared set of facts that can be used for decision-making. >> well, while the special counsel robert mueller outlined a strong case that the president obstructed justice in his report, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is today calling on democrats to move on. >> i think it's time to move on. this investigation was about collusion. there was no collusion. no charges brought against the president on anything else.

i think the speaker has actually been discouraging talk of impeachment, but that's really up to the house . if they want to do that, they can. i think the american people would like to move on from this. >> well, now let's listen to mcconnell, the same mcconnell during the impeachment talks about former president bill clinton back in the 1990s. "i am completely and utterly perplexed by those who argue perjury and obstruction of justice are not high crimes and misdemeanors." congressman, i want to ask you about something i asked you the other night, hillary clinton, donald trump, two candidates for president. if they switched position and hillary won the election in the electoral college and it turns out the russians helped her and it turns out she played footsie with republicans -- with the russians, that her people were meeting with them all the time, chelsea was up there meeting in new york in some tower up there talking to the russians, all these people like manafort, all her people were talking to the russians, it turns out she tried to stop the investigation by

firing the fbi director and then tried to fire the special counsel, do you doubt in a million years that the republicans wouldn't have her burning at the stake right now? they would have her out of office so fast. the democrats do not know how to play hard ball. republicans see their opportunity and they take them. >> no doubt the republicans would impeach here -- >> they would have gotten her out of here by now. >> here's the thing -- >> no, really, do you think she would survive in office? >> no, i don't. >> why don't you play as tough as republicans? >> because we care about the country. >> do you think it's good to have trump in the white house? >> i think it's a tough, tough decision, and here's why. there is no doubt that he broke the law in mueller's report. there is no doubt that he was trying to get jeff sessions not to be part of the investigation. he's telling his own white house counsel to try to fire mueller. i mean -- >> in broad daylight he did this. >> it's appalling, the behavior. >> and therefore -- >> and i get the sense of setting a bad precedent. we get it. we have to speak out. we have to make this case.

the other side of this is we have to look at how polarized this country is, how deeply divided the nation is, what's going to bring us together and what's going to help have a positive agenda. i think this is genuinely weighing on nancy pelosi. i'll tell you this, chris -- >> maybe nancy pelosi's job is to get re-elected as speaker, get the house democrat again next year. maybe that's a different question than the presidential re-election of donald trump. maybe that's a different question. >> someone on the call, i'll share this, someone on the call said what are the poll numbers, is impeachment good or not good. nancy pelosi cut him off and said, look, this is not going to be a political decision. we've been called by history. this is a duty we need to make the case. >> she is going to go for impeachment? >> she's going to make the case to the american public and see where it is. but here's the thing, chris. >> back to my question, congressman, can you honestly argue me sitting here live that if they don't do it now, which is april, they're going to do it in the summer some time? when are they going to act? >> i think if there is a compelling case that is made. >> you don't think it's been made?

>> i think -- >> i heard you make it a few minutes ago. >> congress has to make it. congress has to make it to the american public. here's what i'll tell you -- >> i don't want to play this tough. you're a good guy. >> i respect it. >> look how these hearings work. so you get barr up there and he gives you nothing. barr's a smart customer. barr will give you nothing. mueller is going to repeat what he said. it took him two years to write his report. he's not going to say something different. he'll say i cannot exonerate him five times. then what do you got? you'll get something from mcgahn because mcgahn is actually in the report on the record. fire these guys and i wouldn't do it, so i'm gone. we already know that. i just -- what's new, pussycat? after all these hearings, what's going to be more impeachable than what we already got? >> well, i think, one, the public is going do be more educated. people don't watch a 480-page report. they watch tv. there is a difference when you have a public hearing and where public sentiment is.

i will say this about nancy pelosi. look, she's in her late 70s. she's been speaker of the house twice. you don't think she's looking at how history is going to judge her? she's not looking at this in the midterms. it's a deeply difficult issue for the country. >> a smart political move. >> i don't think it's politics. i think it's a question of her obligation to make sure -- >> okay. i'm not knocking politics. it is what it is. despite trump's insistence i have never been happier or more content, new reporting indicates he's more bitter than he suggests. according to "the new york times" the president stewed about the mueller report in florida on friday, dismissed the findings and keeping track of who in his orbit participated in the election. how does that look, peter, looking around for the rats, as he would say? >> the problem is he's trying to count who in his circle participated in the investigation. he has to count almost everybody basically. both of his white house chiefs of staff. his white house counsel. his campaign managers. his own, you know lawyers. i mean, it's hard to find too

many people who were close to president trump who were not interviewed at some point by the investigators. many of them gave over notes. they gave over emails. some of them might not have had a choice because of subpoenas, but, you know, he had access to basically all that they had to give. the president is looking around for scapegoats. he's going to find a lot of possible targets. the one at the top of his list teams to be don mcgahn, his former white house counsel, who told stories pretty damning towards the president in terms of his desire to try to thwart that investigation. >> vince -- joyce, i don't know where vince came from. joyce, thank you. i have to ask you the money question. attorneys operating in washington or in new york city or anywhere else, who is going to get paid more by the hour, mcgahn who tells the truth or mr. barr who is an excellent attorney for the president? who do you want defending you, the honest guy or the somewhat creepy guy who looks like he helped, well, fudge the truth?

>> you know, lawyers are only as good as their reputation, chris. so lawyers, i think, are well-served where they pay attention to representing their clients but doing so within ethical bounds and telling the truth. it's really difficult, i think, to have watched an attorney general, someone who has been in the department before, take the stand at a press conference and lie to the american people and do that knowing that the report he was not telling the truth about would be released a couple of hours later and we would all be able to read it. so it's inexplicable and i don't think that his legacy will be strong as a result of what he's done in the last couple of days. >> well, that's good to believe. i hope i can. thank you very much, congressman ro khanna of california. peter baker, sir. joyce vance -- not vince. thank you so much. leigh ann caldwell, for that on the spot reporting. thank you so much. you make it work here. coming up, the republicans' moral compass.

who is the leader of the party? is it mitt romney or rudy giuliani who says there is nothing wrong with the campaign getting help from the russians? the 2020 battle rages on. mayor pete climbing in the polls compares bernie backers to trump backers. a lot of people understand that. they want a radical alternative. plus, why joe biden is all of a sudden changing his plans for his long-anticipated launch. we thought it was going to be in philly on the rocky steps at the art museum. apparently that's off. much more. stay with us. wednesdays. at outback, they're for steak and beer.

walkabout wednesdays are back! get a sirloin or chicken on the barbie, fries, and a draft beer or coca-cola - all for just $10.99. hurry in! wednesdays are for outback. outback steakhouse. aussie rules. wednesdays are for outback. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. when i needed to create a better visitor experience. improve our workflow. attract new customers. that's when fastsigns recommended fleet graphics. yeah, and now business is rolling in. get started at fastsigns.com.

plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants. ♪

you know reliable support when you have it, and that dependability is what we want to give our customers. at comcast, it's my job to constantly monitor our network. prevent problems, and to help provide the most reliable service possible. my name is tanya, i work in the network operations center for comcast. we are working to make things simple, easy and awesome. welcome back to "hardball." since the attorney general published actually the redacted version of the mueller report last week, republican lawmakers have remained quietly. crickets out there. senator mitt romney's one of the few to speak out, saying "i am sickened at the extent and pervasiveness of dishonest and misdirection by individuals in

the highest office in the land, including the president." that mitt romney. susan collins told maine public radio that the president, "upset by the special counsel's investigation who tried several times through intermediaries to end it. it is an unflattering portrait of the president." that's softer. the president's personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, defended the actions of the president and his associates on the sunday talk shows. let's watch rudy. >> there is nothing wrong with taking information from russians. >> there is nothing wrong with taking information? >> it depends on where it came from. it depends on where it came from. you're assuming that the giving of information is a campaign contribution. >> so it is now okay for political campaigns to work with material stolen by foreign adversaries? >> it depends on stolen material. >> anyway, so who is the voice of the republican party right now, romney or rudy? big question. i'm joined by jamal simmons, democratic strategist and susan del percio. susan, i go back to the most

primitive, high schoolish way to ask this. if it had been hillary doing the exact same damn stuff, taking stuff from the russians, helping the russians help her. i don't know what they would have done. at least thrown her out of office, maybe worse. >> absolutely. they would have had hearings upon hearings and moving for impeachment in no time flat. it is nice to see that mitt romney is saying something. he's not calling for anything, but he's saying something, as only a man with five years left until re-election can do. susan collins in your intro is probably a little softer because she is afraid of a primary, and rudy giuliani is, frankly, off the edges, rims again and just being the president's lawyer and a donald trump sycophant. >> thank you. jamal? because i want to know who is going to speak for the republican party, say when everybody starts to do their revisionism in five or ten years when trump is gone bye-bye and they're trying to make themselves look like they were the most responsible people. will it be the sycophants, the

panderers, the ones who want jobs and need them or is it going to be the occasional person who says, you know what? this guy disgusts me. >> remember when john mccain ran for president it was the mantra country first. these people have decided it's not country first, it's trump first. they're willing to sacrifice whatever it takes in the country in order to help trump. and i don't understand what it is -- what the spell is that he has over them, but history is not going to look kindly. everybody looks back at the clinton impeachment, but if we remember what really happened during the clinton impeachment, democrats all over the place said what clinton did was wrong. bill clinton came out in august and said what i did was wrong. when is donald trump going to take responsibility for what he did? when are the republicans going to hold him accountable? that is the thing -- >> i think you're right. one thing was similar, though, the move on line. move on is a line used by partisans to defend. moveon.org nowadays. >> that was after the president and the democrats took responsibility. joe lieberman went to the floor

of the senate, this is obviously before twitter. >> you really respect what linerman did, really? he was so cute. he attacked bill clinton on moral grounds but not on political grounds. he pulled back. he was exactly the message that clinton wanted to get. bill knew he was guilty morally so he dealt with that. politically lieberman didn't lift a finger. >> let's at least do that. >> the mueller report laid out in great details the president went to obstruct the mueller investigation. the president's congressional colleagues say it's time to move on. during the clinton impeachment hearings they expressed a very different point of view. let's watch. >> you don't even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republi republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role. because impeachment is not about punishment, impeachment is about cleansing the office. >> i rise today to call

attention to a serious and deeply troubling crisis in our country. this is a crisis of confidence, of credibility and of integrity. our nation is indeed at a crossroads. will we pursue the search for truth or will we dodge, weave and evade the truth? >> susan, where did that piety go? the pious nature of those, especially lindsey graham who had the same care cut then, bha the same basis of judgement, bill clinton was no damn good. this guy, crickets. >> i can't defend it. there is nothing to defend. they show no moral courage. they show no commitment to their job. but at the same time, chris, what you just heard is what the democrats should be saying about donald trump now. they shouldn't worry about politics. i was on your show a few weeks ago or months ago talking about how the republicans need to stand up and follow the constitution and vote against the president's national emergency.

the democrats now have to do what they're constitutionally responsible for and hold this president accountable. >> you know, one of the best novels about courtrooms was "presumed innocent." the writer says you have to point your finger in the courtroom at the bad guy and say he did it or she did it. you got to do it. democrats seem to be pulling back from that. they don't want to point that finger and say this president's no damn good. >> you know, people are happy -- >> not when it comes to impeachment. >> people are having these very tortured arguments in the democratic party about the right political thing to do. you had elijah cummings on in the earlier clip. what he said after the clip you showed is this is our watch. this is our watch. history is going to look back at us and make some determination. so i think at some point the democrats are going to have to decide this. you know, i worked for -- >> wait a minute. let me get back to my point. i'll ask the same question. if they don't do it now to begin the proceedings on impeachment, will they ever do it? >> here's the question.

can you start having -- ro khanna said this when he was out here. the congressman. can you have hearings with people sitting in front of congress with their handheld high and saying what they said to mueller, but saying it on camera so americans are witnessing it and being educated about what happened. not reading a 400-page report, but being educated. that moves the ball forward to be able to take it out. >> that's an argument. do you believe it? >> i think that it could happen, yes. >> it could? >> here's the question that democrats have to answer because here's the worst alternate history. what happens if you don't impeach donald trump and he gets re-elected? that is a very tough moment. you made a decision not to impeach him and yet he still gets re-elected. what do you do then? >> let me ask you, susan, about how do you treat a bully. he's going to walk away, i bullied those people. pelosi's the smart one not to go after me. i won. >> what's good government is good politics. that's not the case right now. that's not what the democrats are doing.

they should. because if they took this to impeachment hearings right now they could have it off their plate by november or december and they would have 11 months to fight on the issues they want to be talking about. but they need to do it now and get it over with. this will otherwise be a slow drip and they're not going to start impeachment processes in six months, eight months. it's just not going to happen. they should do it now. >> you know your politics. i believe in that completely. i think timing is everything is now is the time or don't say you're going to do it later. president trump was asked if it bothered him that according to the mueller report so many of his aides refused to execute his orders. here's what he had to say about that. >> are you worried that your staff is ignoring your orders, as the mueller report portrays? >> nobody disobeys my orders. >> that bothered him. he didn't like the word out that people don't do what he tells them to do. >> of course he doesn't like that. in his mind, just like the republicans in the senate, it's trump first. if you aren't doing what trump wants, he doesn't want you there. donald trump is telling federal

officials it's okay if they break the law because he will give them pardons. how is that okay? >> from susan, great to come on. i got to ask you a little republican insider thing. what are the chances that trump's going to face a woman on the other ticket? i think they're good. i think there will be a woman on the ticket. the democrats have someone of color, perhaps, but maybe someone of color is a woman. a lot of options here, at least one big one, that's kamala harris. if they do that, doesn't trump have to match them? doesn't he have to put a woman on the ticket or risk losing republican women? it's a big if. i think he has to pick nikki haley and dump mike pence. that's my theory. he's ruthless enough to do it and show he knows how to win. put nikki on the ticket. neocon, dynamite politician and a woman as his successor and the next president. your thoughts? >> certainly i can see that being a wise choice. don't forget, nikki haley has at times spoken up against donald trump. that's a big "x" against her

with him. no, he's never going to find another lap dog like pence. so i think he would rather have that and someone who is just constantly supporting him and telling him how wonderful he is and sitting silently by and watching the country fall apart than have someone who is a real leader because he would -- she would be the comparison everyone would be looking to. what does nikki haley think? he would hate being upstaged by her. >> you might be right on the psychology. i think it would be the dynamite political move. frightening in the suburbs for the democrats. i don't know why i'm giving advice to trump. gentleman small simmons, susan del percio. thank you. up next, president trump tells supporters he would love to face off against bernie. i think he respects bernie's brains and political acumen. what he reportedly says about sanders behind the scenes might surprise you. more coming up after this. re co. as not safe drivers! ah! that was a stunt driver. that's why esurance has this drivesense® app.

the safer you drive, the more you save. don't worry, i'm not using my phone and talking to a camera while driving... i'm being towed. by the way, i'm actually a safe driver. i'm just pretending to be a not safe driver. cool. bye dennis quaid! when insurance is affordable, it's surprisingly painless.

we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh. i switched. we switched. i switched to chevy. i switched to chevy. we switched to chevy. we switched for value. for family. for power. it was time to upgrade. i switched from ram to chevy. see why people are switching to chevy. we love our chevy. i love my malibu. my colorado. my camaro. my traverse.

why did we switch? just look at it. ♪ with peak season berries, uniqcreamy avocado. and a dressing fit for a goddess. come taste what a salad should be. and with panera catering, there's more to go around. panera. food as it should be. like.. pnc easy lock, so you can easily lock your credit card when its maximum limit differs from its vertical limit. and clover flex, for when you need to take credit cards when no one carries cash. or requesting a call to help get a new credit card- one that hasn't followed the family goldfish. pnc - make today the day.

welcome back to "hardball." the already crowded field of democratic presidential candidates is getting more crowded this week. former vice president joe biden's expected to announce his presidential bid as soon as wednesday. two days from now. on friday, the fi"philadelphia inquirer" reported that biden was going to announce in charlottesville, virginia before playing to pittsburgh and philadelphia. i can confirm those plans have changed. today massachusetts congressman seth moulton said he's running.

he plans to make national security his top issue. meanwhile, bernie sanders supporters didn't like something that pete buttigieg said last friday when talking about he'd address income inequality. let's watch. >> i think the sense of anger and disaffection that comes from seeing that the numbers are fine, like unemployment's low, like all that, like you said, gdp's growing and yet a lot of neighborhoods and families are living like this recovery never even happened. they're stuck. it just kind of turns you against the system in general and you're more likely to want to vote to blow up the system. which could lead you to somebody like bernie or trump, which is how we got where we are. >> sanders' co-chair, congressman ro khanna from california called it intellectually dishonest to compare bernie to trump. he's a partisan for bernie. a new source says an unexpected source may agree with buttigieg and has surprising thoughts about bernie sanders. that's coming up next. biopharmaceutical researchers.

driven each day to pursue life-changing cures... in a country built on fostering innovation. here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... and a new therapy that gives the blind a working gene so they can see again. because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that.

tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management. steak & ribs starting at $14.99, with your choice of sauce or dry rub. and keep the ribs coming with our 3-point rib bloom and new aussie twisted ribs, starting at $9.99. hurry! these deals won't last.

my point is that people have been motivated to want to blow up the establishment, and, you know, bernie sanders and donald trump represent radically different ways of doing that. so even though they led different voters in very different directions, i do think it's meaningful that anti-establishment candidates, the more dramatically anti-establishment the better, be it from the left or the right, have been able to get so much support in recent years. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was mayor pete buttigieg today doubling down on remarks he made, i believe, drawing parallels between bernie sanders' backers and president trump's backers. publicly trump expressed confidence in his chances against sanders. a new report suggests behind closed doors he's not believing sanders' -- he's believing them, according to "the daily beast," the president is of two minds. he sees the senator as a

vulnerable opponent, he's offered begrudging respect for his political acumen. president trump will sometimes inpromptedly bring up sanders' own working class support and that there is potential for the senator to win over trump supporters with his populist appeal. joined by jennifer palmieri and jason johnson, editor for theroot.com. jennifer, your thoughts. i never know what game trump's playing. i never know what any politician is playing. times they build people up because they want them as their opponent. what do you think? >> right. i think that's right. particularly with trump you can't be sure because i think unlike other politicians he plays the game about what might get reflected in the process and how he can use that to his benefit. so -- but i can tell you i have my own experience with senator sanders as a primary opponent. he is a very effective candidate in many respects. you know, he has -- he's very consistent in the message that

he delivers. he believes very, you know, very much to his core what he's saying and he's been saying the same thing for 40 years. he's definitely struck a chord -- >> i love that. that's the little shot. >> no, it's true. >> it is a true -- >> it's true. he has -- he has -- i mean, this -- and i think this is why -- maybe this is what trump respects about him. this is why you can't throw bernie sanders off in a q & a or in an interview, right? because he believes what he believes and he's believed it for a long time and he's not going to change his mind because someone's, you know, trying to get him in a gotcha question. so he's very focused in that way. i don't know that everybody likes what he's saying and i don't know that he'll win the democratic primary, but he is -- i understand the -- that why he is effective and why he has such committed supporters. but, you know, for mayor buttigieg, it's a lesson not to talk about the motivations of other people's supporters, right? that is where you get into

trouble. so it's always a mistake to try to care for -- for another candidate to characterize how another -- one of their opponents' supporters feel about them. >> jason, your thoughts about this doppelganger between the guy on the left -- i wouldn't even call trump on the right. i don't know what he's on. i wouldn't call it the right. he's on something. >> first off i'll go to the straight numbers. depending on whim pollster and political scientist you speak to, 13 to 17% of bernie voters who did vote for trump. it's not crazy to make comparisons. >> that's the antipathy speaking from the primary fight in many cases. >> it was, but also people who wanted an outsider. as much as i think buttigieg stumbled and still doubling down, that's not an entirely crazy thing to look at. >> kennedy people back when i was in politics voting for trump because they're mad at carter who beat him in the primaries. >> hillary people voting for john mccain. here's the key. i also think, and this is smart on the part of mayor pete's behalf, look, you've got to go for the king.

if he's actually going to sustain himself as a real contending candidate, he can't hide behind joe biden and not attack joe biden, not attack bernie sanders. i actually think it is a smart strategy for him. he if wants to portray himself as the midwestern outsider, you got to go after sanders. >> one poll shows why sanders supporters could be taking on the south bend mayor. the university of new hampshire, granite state poll, a good poll, i think, showed sanders leading the pack with 30 because he's in the neighborhood. joe biden with 18 because everybody knows him. buttigieg with 15%. jennifer, i'm not saying he's going to beat bernie up there in new hampshire, but he might be the out of towner that gives him the best fight. >> he also. you know, it's april. i mean, it's april. it's eight to ten months, right, away before anybody starts to vote and i think that, you know, but i disagree about -- what jason just said about this being a smart thing for buttigieg. buttigieg didn't go after bernie, right?

he went after bernie's supporters. and that is -- that's not a good move. and i think part of what buttigieg's appeal thus far has been -- for people who really pay a lot of attention to politics, like those of us speaking and those of us watching, were interested in the political analysis. buttigieg is really good at political analysis. that's not great for candidates, right? candidates want to be talking to voters, not making good political analysis. so i think, you know, he's a very talented candidate, but it's yet to be seen how -- if that's going to last and if we're still going to be talking about him in the same way when people start voting next year. >> can i say one thing that will upset people. true numbers. the only people who connect with people up in new hampshire, which is a really political state, jennifer, as you guys know. joe biden, bernie sanders and buttigieg, that's it. once you get the cut lines, running in the high teens and up to 20. everybody is down in the slop. there is nothing there. warren, known up there. she's from massachusetts. 5%. kamala, 4.

cory, 3. kirsten gillibrand, 1. nothing. why? >> some of this is just name recognition. >> they're on television every night, these people. >> well, they're not on television the way that buttigieg is on television. they're not known the way bernie sanders is known. >> on and off. cory's been on and off. >> they're not going to connect the same way with though voters. >> okay. we got to go. some people are working, some people aren't. jennifer knows this business. thank you for coming on. jennifer palmieri, jason johnson. up next, the latest from sri. sri lanka, the death toll has risen to almost 300 people with hundreds more wounded in the horrific easter sunday terror attacks on the catholic church. stick with us. oh! oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven

and maintained it. oh! under seven? 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 today about once-weekly ozempic®. walkabout wednesdays are back! get a sirloin or chicken on the barbie, fries, and a draft beer or coca-cola - all for just $10.99. hurry in! wednesdays are for outback. outback steakhouse. aussie rules. staining be done... for outback. behr presents: outdone yourself. and stay done through every season. behr semi-transparent stain. find it exclusively at the home depot. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one.

flonase. openturning 50 opens theuard. door to a lot of new things... like now your doctor may be talking to you about screening for colon cancer. luckily there's me, cologuard. the noninvasive test you use at home. it all starts when your doctor orders me. then it's as easy as get, go, gone. you get me when i'm delivered... right to your front door and in the privacy of your own home. there's no prep or special diet needed. you just go to the bathroom, to collect your sample. after that, i'm gone, shipped to the lab for dna testing that finds colon cancer and precancer. 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. maybe i'll be at your door soon! ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. welcome back to "hardball." curfew's in effect in sri lanka right now following the easter sunday attacks that killed at least 290 people and injured at least 500 others. the coordinated bombings targeted churches, catholic churches and luxury hotels in three different cities. this morning another bomb exploded in the country's capital. as a bomb disposal team was trying to defuse it. for more, let's go to nbc news chief global affairs correspondent bill neely who is in sri lanka. >> reporter: good evening, chris, from the capital under curfew.

the sri lankan government says it knows who carried out these attacks. it was seven local men, the suicide bombers, from a sri lankan islamist group who had foreign help. now, they say that this couldn't have been carried out, this attack, without foreign funding, planning and expertise, and that does seem to be logical because while this group that they've identified is an islamist group who has promoted the isis ideology for a long time. it has absolutely no history of terrorist attacks like this. remember, this was a sophisticated attack that would have taken months of planning. u.s. intelligence officials tell nbc news that isis may have inspired these attacks but that there is no evidence that isis or al qaeda, no evidence yet anyway, had any direct involvement in these attacks. so the question is, who are

these foreign terrorist groups who helped the locals? why did these attacks take place at this time? and crucially, chris, why weren't they stopped? because the government has now admitted that it was warned about the attacks. a government minister, who is also chief of staff of the president, told me today that they had warnings three weeks ago from two foreign intelligence agencies that a terrorist group was going to use suicide bombers to attack christian churches and tourist hotels. now, he said to me that they passed these warnings on to security agencies. i asked why hotels and churches weren't protected. he said, look, we never protect hotels because they have their own security, and we didn't protect churches because there are just too many churches, he said. i pointed out that there are only four or five prominent churches here in colombo. he said we just weren't

expecting attacks on this scale, so big and so soon. so the government is apologizing for its intelligence failures, but that really is cold comfort to the relatives of nearly 300 people who died. we now know that four americans were among those dead, along with dozens of other foreign nationals. now, the aim of these attacks was clearly not just to kill and maim as many people as possible, but also to destabilize the country, to sow divisions in this country and to wreck one of this country's main industries, the tourist industry. they get 2 1/2 million visitors a year here, 1 million jobs depend on it. it's absolutely crucial to sri lanka. so if you -- if you want to disrupt this country, that's how you do it. now, all of that speaks to something beyond simply local guys. these are the hallmarks of isis. and of al qaeda. but so far no group has claimed responsibility.

there is now a state of emergency in this country and it is a city and a country in shock. chris, i have to tell you, in fear. >> wow. thank you, bill neely, from nbc news. up next, it's earth day today, 2019, and the president of the united states doesn't act like there is a climate change factor in the world today. you're watching "hardball." one part steak. one part ribs. two parts incredible. steak & ribs starting at $14.99, with your choice of sauce or dry rub. and keep the ribs coming with our 3-point rib bloom

and new aussie twisted ribs, starting at $9.99. hurry! these deals won't last.

well, today is earth day, which this year comes a day after easter and the monday following the start of passover. and one of the common natures of religion is that all speak to mankind and therefore life on earth because it's the only place where mankind exists. well, given this, you would think we should all take a primary interest in threats to earth, as it is. let's all agree the place for mankind can survive, the only place, but not donald trump. trump has a history of denying climate change. in his earth day message today, he does not even mention it or the role scientists say mankind is contributing to it. he makes no mention of the world suffering what scientists in his own administration point to, the flooding, the wildfires, the diseases caused by higher temperatures. you see, trump believes that taking action on climate change works against his belief in free markets. to trump, caring about climate change is to take the side of college professors against real estate developers like him, to take the side of the elite against the captains of commerce

and industry. here he is on "60 minutes" last fall challenging the near universal scientific judgement that map kind is accelerating climate change. >> yeah, but what about the scientists who say it's worse than ever? >> you'd have to show me the scientists because they have a very big political agenda, leslie. >> well, trump's refusing to say what he believes, of course, knowing that to openly challenge science would make him seem like one of the ludites in "planet of the apes." listen to trump back in 2016 brag about being a very big person on conservation, about all the environmental awards that he's won. >> i know much about climate change. i've received many environmental awards. >> do you know that i've won numerous environmental awards? i'm a believer in the environment. >> you know how many environmental awards trump has won? none. did you ever think otherwise?

how many trees in new york central park would be left standing if it were up to him? how much sunlight would there be in that park if trump's tractors were allowed in? today, earth day trump said what he had to say about climate change, he said nothing. that's all for "hardball" right now. thanks for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. tonight on "all in" -- >> nancy said we're not looking to impeach you. i said, that's good, nancy. that's good. >> democrats debate impeachment. >> we may get to that. we may not. >> as speaker pelosi holds an all hands on deck meeting. >> i'm not there yet, but i can foresee that possibly coming. tonight, what we know about the new democratic strategy with congresswoman ra rashida tlaib. >> we're going to go in there and prosecute the [ bleep ]. prosecutable crimes