still has to segregate the concerns and make him an african-american artist. >> here's the score. on one side pre asap rocky. and then we have instituting the death penalty. >> that makes a lot of sense in the same week. you guys are great. it does it for this hour. i was here for nicole. i'll be here on monday for nicole. "mtp daily" starts with chuck todd right now. ♪ if it's friday, more democrats call for an impeachment inquiry as the judiciary committee chairman claims, in effect, that an inquiry is already underway. plus, russia, if you're listening, as democrats ring their hands over the impeachment question after mueller's

testimony, has the republican party washed its hans on the issue of protecting the american democracy? and biden bounces back. new numbers show he's clearly a frontrunner in the democratic race. first debate, what first debate? if it's friday, welcome to "meet the press daily." good evening. i'm chuck todd here in washington. we've got a big show for you here tonight. more democrats are calling for impeachment. but speaker pelosi made it clear she still is not one of them. she was defiant rejecting claims she's trying to run out the clock on the idea of starting an inquiry all as the judiciary committee nadler danced around the issue during a press conference. but one of his democratic colleagues at the press conference called it an impeachment investigation. we are going to speak with that very member in just a moment. put we are going to begin with the whole reason why democrats are ringing their hands on this impeachment question in the first place because the republicans have made it clear they are going to acrit this

president no matter what. there's nearly no outrage these days over russia's sweeping and systemic attack on our democracy or the president welcoming those attacks, even inviting them to happen again or the president trying to obstruct the investigation into those attacks. it is a staggering reversal from the rhetoric we saw, and it was just rhetoric at the time, but it was still rhetoric that we saw from republican leaders and members of the rank and file when at that time they made it seem as if the republican party was going to take the interference question seriously. >> they need to pay a price. i don't care what their motives were. we are going to give president trump an opportunity to make russia pay a price for interfering in our election so it will deter others in the

future. >> it is absolutely unacceptable that russia or any other country but russia meddle in our elections. >> let me just speak for myself. the russians are not our friends. >> one of the biggest problems over the past year is the president referring to anything russian as a hoax. it wasn't. russia did try to intervene in our elections. >> now, i think the newest quote that we showed you there was from january of 2018. now compare those reactions to what we heard from republicans when they questioned former special counsel bob mueller this week on his report that documented russian interference. >> there is collusion in plain sight. collusion between russia and the democratic party. >> when did you first learn of peter struck's animus toward donald trump? >> maybe a better course of action is to figure out how the false accusations started. that's exactly what bill barr's doing. thank goodness for that. >> is the inspector general

report correct that the text messages from peter struck and lisa page's phones were not retained after they left the special counsel's office? >> i want to find out if russia interfered with our election by providing false information through sources to christopher steele about a trump conspiracy that you determined didn't exist. >> let's be honest here. this begs a very uncomfortable question. is the reason why republicans, at least the elected ones, are no longer outraged or at least the president is because russia helped the republicans win? joining me now is someone who knows a thing or two, it former south carolina. it cost him his seat in congress and he is now considering challenging president trump for the gop nomination in 2020, largely on the issue of basically trying to create a debate inside the republican party of what the heck does conservative mean. and we can delve into that. but i want to start with this

issue of -- >> i'd love to -- >> i know you would. and i hope we get to see a debate between you and the president on this issue. i really do. i think it's important for the republican party to see that debate. but explain to me why we went from a republican party in congress that in 2017 rhetorically seemed concerned about the russian interference to the republican party of 2019 that says, and i'm washing my hands here, we're out, whatever trump says goes. >> the short answer is one of base line politics, which is that, you know, parties circle the wagons. and the party has circled the wagon around president trump since he's been in office over these last two years. he has a forceful personality and the sun, moon, and stars seem to orbit around him, at least within republican office-level holder politics. so we are where we are based on politics. that's a simple answer.

>> it does seem to be alarming that, you know, this week we had the mueller testimony, we had this senate intelligence report. but we had another incident this week that to me should actually raise more alarm bells. and that is the president seems to be standing alone in the republican party. even today on wanting to punish turkey, a nato member, for essentially going to russia for military help. and here the united states would like to sanction turkey. and president trump is begging them not to. look, i'm not saying there's a direct line here. but how does these dots not get put together in and at least raise an alarm bell or two? >> well, i don't know that they don't. there are a lot of conversations out there. but i think that right now you have this equilibrium -- disequilibrium in terms of the debate format. and so if you take, for instance, the mueller testimony of the other day, democrats had,

in essence, to charge the hill and they had to try and prove obstruction or conspiracy of some sort which is a tougher rhetorical debate to get your arms around, particularly if you have a witness that's not going to lead you in that direction. they just wanted to question process. so i called a friend on the way over here, and i said give me your take of the mueller report and hearing the other day. his point was what it told me was that mueller was not really in charge. and it raised for me a whole list of different conspiracy questions as to who's really in charge. so, i think it's just a disequilibrium in terms of debate, and republicans in some ways have the high ground in being able to, in essence, hold off the impeachment charge or the bigger question of collusion and obstruction. >> i guess, though, it seems to be that -- it's more of the actions. i go back to you sitting there, okay, maybe we don't know if it

was conspiracy here or conspiracy there. but there are things that are facts. the russian government broke into the dnc. those emails got leaked out -- you know, i don't get why there is -- >> i'm just giving you the response -- >> no, i understand that. >> that a republican stalwart to get a sort of temperature reading on the way over here. >> i guess the other way sort of me -- you and i both know how this town works sometimes. president trump, imagine if he just said, you know what, boy, mitch mcconnell, whatever, send me those bills, i'll sign them. he'd get bipartisan praise. this would be an easy lay-up for him. but he doesn't want to do it. so you can't help but ask yourself why doesn't he want to sign these bipartisan-supported bills that would actually put in new safeguards to prevent cyber intrusions? >> well, there may be more

policy legitimacy on that one in that if you look at the 2018 bill that i think had another traunch of about $300 million or so that hasn't been spent. in some states there are real shortfalls and they need extra cash. but this is a good example of the right arm not knowing what the left arm is doing. we saw with a $3 billion bill that moved us from paper ballot to electronic ballot. now folks are saying we need to move back toward paper. i think there is some warranted concern on republican side saying what are we doing here. >> well, all right. and that transitions me to another part of your -- of what could be your candidacy. i know you haven't made a decision. why should any viewer right now believe any republican that ever tells them they care about the debt and deficit? >> they got a good point. you got me on that one because i think republicans have lost

unbelievable if not all credibility on the debt deficit and spending issue, which is to say we need to have a conversation witut what we believe on that front because there's been incredible erosion into the republican party in being a financial stalwart. >> do you worry that there is no republican party room for an ideologic debate because it's not the republican party anymore, it's trump's party? >> uh, i think that's a legitimate question. but here's what i know. i've literally over the time of my time in office, whether in the governorship or in congress on two different stints, i've had thousands upon thousands of conversations with people at the grassroots level, and these people haven't going to way. they're still there. to john boehner's point, i don't know if the republican party is somewhere off there sleeping, but those people still do exist at the grassroots level.

it is unfathomable to me even if they're not served by elected officeholders that those believes they talked about over all those years that i've been involved in politics that they're not there. >> well, i think one of the other problems is voters don't care about the deficit enough. i think that's another thing people are finding out. voters don't care if you spend other people's money. >> yeah, but, you know, people right before they're diagnosed with cancer, don't care that much about going to the doctor either. but all of a sudden when they get the real word from the doctor that says, wait a minute, you may be feeling okay right now, but there is a profound problem within you that you've got to deal with. i think whether it's the president or other elected officeholders in d.c. have totally done a disservice to the american public by not honestly diagnosing what's going on within our nation's finances.

>> congressman sanford, you now know long-term thinking is something that doesn't exist here in washington d.c. thanks for coming on and sharing the views. when will you make an announcement? >> i said i'm going to give it a look in terms of deciding go versus no go. >> all right. we'll touch base on labor day. now on the topic of russia's attacks on our democracy, who better to talk to than one of the victims. john padesta was targeted personally in the russian interference campaign. he is founder and director of the center for american progress. mr. padesta, thanks for coming on. good to talk to you. >> good to see you, chuck. >> let me just ask a personal question. on watching the mueller testimony and reading the mueller report, how satisfied do you feel as if the government has done enough investigating on what happened? >> well, look. i think mueller did a professional job, and i think he

demonstrated that in the hearings. when you think about it, what he laid out was the fact that there was a sustained major attack by the russian federation and vladimir putin against the united states' democracy that donald trump welcomed it, that his campaign encouraged it, that there were certainly a number of contacts between the campaign, more than 272 contacts. and then donald trump tried to cover that up with what most people would look at as obstruction. and i think when you look at all of that, you have to ask yourself how can we be where we are where the republicans thought that was a good day for them that, mueller's testimony showing the unpaid attempts to encourage the russians to do

more. mitch mcconnell's decision to block election integrity legislation on the senate floor, not even give it a vote. i mean, it's a sad day for the united states. >> you're outlining some circumstantial actions that i don't understand that they don't raise at least yellow flags. the turkey decision, the not even wanting what would be -- you and i both know how this town works, an easy lay-up of bipartisan legislation that he would sign that he would get all this, you know, maybe phony praise for a day but from leaders on the hill. but he doesn't even want to do that. >> well, i think there's a reason for that, which is i think he thinks it helped him in 2016 and he's hoping it'll help him again in 2020. you know, at the g20, he yucked it up with vladimir putin sort of mock-scolded him about not interfering with the election. but i think they're hoping for a repeat that they don't want to do anything that would impede

russia's attempts to put their thumb on the scale and really kind of undermand not just the results of the election but americans' views about the integrity of the democratic process. >> there's another report that came out this week that i think would've gotten a lot more attention had they put it out the day before mueller's testimony than putting it out the day after mueller's testimony, but we can debate that later. that is part one of the senate intelligence investigation into russian interference. this is an investigation i know you sat down for an interview i don't know how much telephone you've gotten through, but what you've seen, what do you make of their investigation so far and their results? >> well, was sobering i think because it showed that we knew that the russians had penetrated a certain state of electoral bases and electoral ins tugs. now we know they went after 50 states. they were thinking about putting election monitors out in the field for god knows what reason.

a lot of it's redacted, even surprisingly even the recommendations. >> so much of it, it's overly redacted. >> i'm not sure how states are supposed to implement their recommendations if they're classified. but put that aside. i think they really demonstrated the russians had a full on assault. we don't know what they did, whether they altered any results, the senate committee certainly said they couldn't prove that they actually altered the results. >> that's correct. >> but it gives more, i think, push for more protection of our election systems, and yet what you have is mitch mcconnell blocking in i think your colleague joe skarborough who dumped a moscow mitch was well taken in doing that. they don't seem to care. and the only conclusion i think one can draw is they're hoping it happens all over again. >> i'm curious -- look,

hindsight is very much 2020. but as you red that investigation and saw the picture that the senate intel committee was able to paint in those earlier days of 14, 15, 16, and 2016 and 2015, you know, obviously more should've or could've been done. what is one thing you think should've been done in 2016 that wasn't? >> well, look, i think that one of the things that was a problem in 2016, obviously the security around the election was obviously at issue. the russian interference really came to the fore in june right before the democratic convention when we understand that the dnc service had been hacked. but i think one thing that, if you look backwards, because this all took place and the government's knowledge of what

the russians were up to took place in classified channels, i think that they were unable really to put before the american people what the real challenge to the american democracy was. they were unable to kind of brief the people who really needed to know including at the state level in the campaigns, et cetera. and i think that's got to change. there's got to be a way when the u.s. government knows as much as it did in the summer of 2016 for them to be able to put that up in front of the american public. >> you know, this senate report is so sobering. 14 states basically have -- can't guarantee they have any sort of backup system going into 2020. either parts of the state because of its county level or the state completely. i have to tell you in a very close election, based on what the senate intelligence committee found, a candidate is going to challenge, and they're going to have some grounds to question some of the way the results perhaps just because we don't have any fail-saves here.

>> well, that's why it's so critical that we move forward with this election protection legislation and that states adopt paper ballot backup systems and that we have audits after the election. we saw that in november and december of 2016 when certain states really there was no way really to go back and take a fair look at whether the election results had been manipulated. that shouldn't happen again in 2020. we know so much more today. and we have the tools and the ability to do it. we just need to spend the money to make sure that those machines are protected and the systems are done in a way that they can be accurately counted. >> and one more thing. political will on both sides of the aisle, not just one. >> well, you can't have one party resisting change because they think it benefits them to be on the side of a foreign adversary. >> and all you do is ininside

more foreign adversaries. i really appreciate you coming on, sharing your views. i know it's weird because this is so personal for you, but i appreciate it. thanks very much. up ahead, inquiring about impeachment inquiries as democrats make a move to get mueller's secret documents. plus, we heard loud warnings this week and the deafening silence from nearly all elected republicans. our experts will weigh in on all of today's and this week's developments. that's next. ing circles ♪ for miles and miles. ♪ being lost ain't never really been my style. ♪ but i told ya... yo, jer! we gotta get to the show. ♪ i was looking for a sign. get on the bus. ♪ i need something to believe in. ♪ throw my hands up to the ceiling. ♪ oh sky won't you give me a sign. ♪ tell me will the world one day ever be mine? jeep wrangler. freedom to do it all.

but dad, you've got allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. are you in good hands? [ referee whistle sounds ] ♪ sport dr[ cheering ]s when you need the fuel to be your nephew's number one fan. holiday inn express. we're there. so you can be too.

hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams.

you're saying there's no difference between what you're doing now and impeachment inquiry, right? >> in effect. >> okay. welcome back. that was how judiciary committee jerry nadler today after announcing his panel is asking a federal judge to unseal grand jury evidence from special counsel robert mueller's investigation and that articles of impeachment are under

consideration. so nadler's self-described came just after house speaker nancy pelosi denied that she was trying to run up the clock on impeachment. >> we won't proceed when we have what we need to proceed, not one day sooner. and everybody has the liberty and the luxury to espouse their own position and to criticize me for trying to go down the path in the most determined positive way. >> meanwhile, the number of democrats supporting opening an impeachment inquiry is ticking up. it is now at 97, but that is still not at half the democratic caucus. let's bring in some of our experts, bill crystal, juanna summers, howard. juanna, let me start with you. there is an actual difference between what they're calling an impeachment investigation and an inquiry. it's the difference between being treated like a grand jury and having the powers of a grand jury versus not. so there is a real difference here. what do you make of the need by

nadler to change the rhetorical difference? >> i think this is really interesting, particularly as you note the timing coming on the heels of nancy pelosi saying as she has been saying for weeks and weeks now that she's going down this fact pattern that she's going to continue to do this fact finding process and investigate. i think that that's a little bit of throwing some catnip to the impeachment hungry folks. when i travel the country talking to these democrat candidates, i am struck by the number of people who want to know why congress isn't taking this step yet. i think nadler is hoping to quiet the folks. >> do we all think that the challenge that nadler may receive from the left has absolutely something to do with this? >> their politics have to be a part of that calculus. >> howard, this feels like -- i think we're going to end up in a place where we'll never see an article of impeachment, but we will see the inquiry. look, i think the next six weeks will tell us.

>> right after mueller finished, i was tempted to say but didn't quite say that i think this is about it for impeachment because they didn't get the boost that they wanted out of that thing. but the more i talk to democrats in the days since and even just now, i was going to my home bases western pennsylvania to talk to my democratic sources out there. even the ones who know all about those purple swing districts in western p.a., i didn't sense that they were saying, oh, no, don't you dare do this. they're almost -- personally they think and substantively they think that this president should be impeached. there is that. substance does matter. politically, they're saying it wouldn't kill us. would it help us in those swing districts, those real swing districts? not necessarily. but they didn't say to me it'll

kill us, which makes me think that to some extent the pro-impeachment people are pushing a little bit against an open door in the fact that jerry nadler has a primary challenger, that's happening all over new york, by the way, and that's real. >> i think one of the interesting quotes i read today came from andrew sullivan. he's very frustrated that democrats haven't started an inquiry. he goes, and he was talking about the debate between aoc and pelosi. it's as if we have to choose between craving cowards and refreshing radicals who know how to lose it. it was an interesting way that he framed it. but this goes to there is a mushiness here by the leadership that if the shoes were on the other foot, is there any doubt at this table or anywhere that the republicans would've started -- no matter how unpopular impeachment was. republicans in the reverse position would've already begun the inquiry. >> the inquiry formerly known as impeachment. and it's like can't call it that

but it's sort of that. >> it's the inquiry to see if we'll have impeachment. >> some purple district somebody is going to have a heart attack. i don't believe that for a minute. >> and the problem is they didn't -- look, they haven't learned anything new and they're not going to learn much new. what was what it was that nancy pelosi said, we're proceeding to learn what we need to learn what we need to know to proceed. the day after mueller's report was released, they knew what they needed to know to proceed. i think they should've proceeded to an impeachment inquiry if they didn't think it was sufficient, it's not going to turn out to be sufficient based on anything they're learning. they can subpoena anything they wanted. they can have don mcgahn testify. no one has challenged anything in the mueller report. no one has challenged a single quotation, a single description of an event. either that's impeachable or it's not.

i think it was a big mistake not to go ahead and at least have the inquiry and then disirksd okay, maybe you don't quite hit impeachment. they got the worst of both worlds now. they've got a lot of people upset. but they're not really building a case either. >> there is this weird fear want j au uana that they seem to have. worry birthday what this is going to look like by november 2020. >> i think that's right. i think to some degree there's this big fear out there when i talk to democratic strategists if they go down this road. i think that risk is kind of what is -- what's animating a lot of these folk who's aren't necessarily going down the full boar path. they're worried that it gives the president this ability to walk around and to say, you know, you guys tried this and it didn't work. i think that is -- >> so if they don't try it, you

didn't even have the nerve to try it. >> i think right now they are setting themselves up for bob mueller delivered a report that didn't do anything to upset me. >> i think you were setting trump up to declare that he's vindicated. >> what's the use of having the power if you don't use it, number one, and i think to some extent the clinton/obama legacy of trang lating against a power republican establishment is slowing the democrats down here and the leadership down. they don't understand how things have changed. and what's the use of keeping the house if you throw away the rule of law? >> this is -- look. why are we here, though? it's because of what i said. we have a republican party that said, nope, it's all about

partisanship. here's again if you want to look at this politically, create the wedge, force more votes, republicans are going to be siding with putin and trump. in two years those votes with putin and trump are going to -- might look terrible. >> they might look bad six months later. >> they might look bad in six days. >> i do think the downside is very limited politically. people have wildly ov overinterpreted the meaning. and held both houses of congress. so it wasn't like, ooh, that was the worst thing that ever happened. they shouldn't do it for political reasons. and being so transparently calculating about what we don't want to move to it because a purple district, that is not appropriate. >> i do always believe that the clintons oversold the idea that the republican impeachment failed because they wanted to feel vindicated and it's created i think a false memory of '98. >> absolutely. and one of the things that i've been kind of interested in to

see, or i guess it's a hypothetical is what were to happen if we had a similar situation where the american public gets a window. >> you know what we didn't have, everybody says the mueller report was brought to life. even their questions never even attempted to. you know we never got the most damning thing in the mueller report or when the timelines are start to put together. not once did we get a timeline. not once did we get a timeline by any of the members because that is what connects dots for people. >> that's because this whole process is backwards from what happened in earlier times in watergate and even with bill clinton. you had in those times the special counsel, the independent investigator, whatever you call him, came at the end. and you had the hearings that set things up at the beginning. i don't think that sam irvin or the people involved with bill clinton necessarily knew what

they were going to find when they started. >> the nixon administration participated in some of the. actually answered some subpoenas. >> with the overlay of election interference in that bipartisan report, i think it helps clear the way for the impeachment stuff to follow. >> i was just going to say they didn't set a new bar if they defy a court order, and i don't put it past this administration to test the theory of the case. anyway, bill, juana, howard, that was lively. coming up, we've got judiciary committee member jamie raskin here to talk about the democrats' latest moves on impeachment and hopefully react to what he just heard. >> i would say we are in an impeachment investigation. and as to the results of the investigation, it could lead to articles of impeachment or it could lead to something else. is just a button. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination.

most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer. and here we have another fburst pipe in denmark. if you look close... jamie, are there any interesting photos from your trip? ouch, okay. huh, boring, boring, you don't need to see that. oh, here we go. can you believe my client steig had never heard of a home and auto bundle or that renters could bundle? wait, you're a lawyer? only licensed in stockholm. what is happening? jamie: anyway, game show, kumite, cinderella story. you know karate? no, alan, i practice muay thai, completely different skillset. i'm not really a, i thought wall street guy.ns. what's the hesitation? eh, it just feels too complicated, you know? well sure, at first, but jj can help you with that. jj, will you break it down for this gentleman? hey, ian. you know, at td ameritrade, we can walk you

through your options trades step by step until you're comfortable. i could be up for that. that's taking options trading from wall st. to main st. hey guys, wanna play some pool? eh, i'm not really a pool guy. what's the hesitation? it's just complicated. step-by-step options trading support from td ameritrade the business of road trips... ...adventure... ...and reconnecting. modernized comfort inn's and suites have been refreshed because our business is you. get the lowest price guaranteed on all choice hotels when you book direct at choicehotels.com. 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.

tonight in 2020 vision, one month after his poor debate performance and less than one week before the next debate, biden is back to being the clear democratic frontrunner. according to a fox news poll, the former vice president is leading his nearest competitor. biden and bernie are the only 2020 democrats. he's up 27 points up there, 39% to 12% there. for harris being number there. we'll see what happens with

those poll numbers in next week's debate. but that shows you how is he resilient biden. up next speaking of debates, we are digging into the democratic divide over impeachment. judiciary committee member congressman jamie raskin joins me next. background checks on guns. but congress won't act because the nra and gun manufacturers have purchased our government. that's just plain wrong. we know how to solve many of the challenges facing us. a majority of americans agree on the solutions. but corporate money is standing in the way. i'm tom steyer. i approve this message. because our democracy should work for the people. and this is me now! i got liberty mutual. they customized my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. then i won the lottery, got hair plugs, and started working out. and so can you!

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ right now, congress is working to end surprise medical billing. that's when patients are hit with medical bills they thought would be covered by insurance. but what congress is considering would cut money that vulnerabe patients rely on the most. that means seniors, children, and americans relying on medicaid would be hurt. it's already too hard

for people to get basic medical care with hospitals closing and a shortage of er doctors. tell congress we can end surprise billing without shredding the safety net. paid for by physicians for fair coverage.

as democrats debate whether or not to open a formal impeachment inquiry, some members of the judiciary committee today is said that whatever you want to call, they are currently investigating an impeachment investigation is underway. one of those people is my next guest. he's on both the judiciary and oversight committees, a dual threat as they say. he is an expert in constitutional law. congressman, nice to see you, sir. all right. you changed the rhetoric here. there is a distinction, though, between a formal inquiry and not. why do you feel the need to use different language here? >> well, chuck, the constitution federal law, the rules of the house representatives don't

specify what an impeachment probe is or an inquiry or an investigation, and so on. and i think that what we heard from special counsel mueller when we read about in his report was overwhelming evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors, specifically ten episodes of obstruction of justice, witness tampering, concealing evidence, encouraging people to lie, and so on. and then the shocking historical event of a presidential candidate in his campaign essentially throwing the doors open and enthusiastically welcoming foreign intervention in our presidential campaign. so, it's hard to know what else to call it other than an investigation into high crimes and misdemeanors. i think we are in the middle of it right now. we are going to court to try to get the underlying grand jury materials. we are trying to get don mcgahn to come in and testify. and then there are people like me, and i'm speaking personally here, who want to expand the investigation to look at a whole bunch of other things. >> well, on a technical point there, you talked about the

lawsuit that's being filed to sort of force the justice department to allow you guys to see the redacted materials, the grand jury materials. correct me if i'm wrong, but if you essentially made the judiciary committee a grand jury, which is what a formal impeachment inquiry would allow you, wouldn't that mean you wouldn't even need to file a lawsuit? >> well, no, because the department of justice and the president are not turning these materials over. remember -- >> but at that point you're a grand jury. so you do have -- right? doesn't that give you -- there's no more permission to ask. they have to turn it over. >> well, you're right from the standpoint of the founding fathers, but not from the standpoint of the people who actually control the documents. now, remember, when ken starr issued his report against clinton, they showed up with a uhaul truck and brought out boxes and boxes of material. that is not what happened here. attorney general barr has been doing everything in his power to withhold evidence, to cover

evidence up and to deny us the complete report and underlying materials. whatever you want to call, we've got to go to court together. >> let me pause this a minute. can you explain because i think it would be god for viewers to hear this. what material from robert mueller's investigation has the judiciary committee received? just tell me all the material that you have received from his investigation. >> well, let's see. to the best of my knowledge, we got basically what the public has seen. >> that's it? >> in the report. a few un-redacted portions that we were allowed to go over to see. i'm not allowed to review the contents of them. but let me just say that nothing would be anything worth anybody taking their weekend to go down to the department. >> the full un-redacted mueller report? >> yes. oh, absolutely. and this is, this demonstrates the absurdity of the executive branch argument. now, remember donald trump is

essentially ordering noncompliance with ten or 12 congressional investigations. we're talking about refusing subpoenas, that's where we are with don mcgahn, that's where we are with kelly an conway. it means refusing to turn over materials. we determined that there were 25 people who were denied top security clearance by the professional staff in the white house personnel office, and then they were overruled by the president whereby political underlings. but we can't get any information about it. >> that goes right to the heart of our national security. they are giving away top security clearance to people who are potentially a threat to our national security. but they're not turning over information about that. it's the same thing in terms of information about the border, and so on. it's been a very serious problem with this administration. so that's why we've got to go to court to get it. >> when you question mueller, you were on the topic of witness

tampering. were you satisfied with his responses? >> well, yeah. i think that mueller confirmed everything we were saying, which is that the president did everything in his power after the fbi searched michael cohen's house to call him up to reassure him, say hang in there, buddy, you know, hang tough. he had several people call to say we love you, you're very high up in the president's list, you know the president's got your back, and so on. and then when michael cohen couldn't take it anymore and he wanted to stop lying for the president and he couldn't take lying to congress and he said i'm going to tell the truth, i'm going to spill my guts and he did. at that point they began to threaten and intimidate him. they started putting out information about michael cohen's father-in-law. they said he was involved with organized crime. if the president has information about somebody committing crimes, he should turn it over to the fbi and law enforcement. he shouldn't use it as a bargaining ship or as a threat or a point of leverage over

people who might testify against him. that's what mob bosses do. thats not what presidents of the united states do. >> do you expect at all to want to bring robert mueller back or perhaps robert mueller and andrew weiss man and some of these other folks to do an investigation in how they conducted their investigation? meaning, like, we didn't really get an answer as to, you know, was it a mistake not to subpoena him, things like that. >> i think that we should thank robert mueller for his service to america as a patriot, as a decorated war hero during vietnam and through his service of special counsel. if we need any other information we should ask other people on the special counsel staff to come in. >> do you think -- you don't need any more from mueller? >> no. i don't know, the guy spent six or seven hours with us. and, look, the real thing is that, remember, we appear to have been hung up on the mueller investigation only because attorney general bar tried to

pull the wool over everybody's eyes and misstate the contents. report. we've got a much broader field of inquiry that we need to get to. the foreign em olments clause says the president cannot accept presents from emoluments. towers and the golf courses. we've got a lot of area to cover here. >> all right, congressman jamie raskin, you're right, it can be a lot larger than just mueller. jamie raskin, thank you. i appreciate it. i'm run up against my ad clock here. >> thanks for having me, chuck. whatever happened to draining the swamp? we are going to talk about the "american swamp" next. oing to te "american swamp" next.

prevagen is the number one pharmacist recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. what sore muscles? what with advpounding head? .. advil is... relief that's fast. strength that lasts. you'll ask... what pain? with advil. while managing your type 2 diabetes- why think about your heart? lower a1c helps, but type 2 diabetes still increases my risk of a fatal cardiovascular event. and that's why there's jardiance- the first type 2 diabetes pill that offers

a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit for adults who also have known heart disease. it can significantly reduce my risk of dying from a cardiovascular event. and it lowers my a1c, with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, now what do you think? while my a1c is important, there's so much more to think about. ask your doctor about jardiance today. for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks.

stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. explore cost support options. ♪work so hard give it everything you got♪ ♪strength of a lioness tough as a knot♪ ♪rocking the stage and we're never gonna stop♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... just in case you forgot♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... ♪no no no sweat... ♪ for miles and miles. running circles ♪ being lost ain't never really been my style. ♪ but i told ya... yo, jer! we gotta get to the show. ♪ i was looking for a sign.

get on the bus. ♪ i need something to believe in. ♪ throw my hands up to the ceiling. ♪ oh sky won't you give me a sign. ♪ tell me will the world one day ever be mine? jeep wrangler. freedom to do it all. we are going to washington, d.c., and we are going to drain the swamp. >> welcome back. that swamp that president trump proposed to drain is the topic of a new documentary series. it's about the political dysfunction. the first part premieres this sunday. katy tur and jacob soboroff explore how big money impacts every kind of election, not just here in washington but all over. take a look. >> during the 2018 midterms

katie and i saw firsthand how campaign spending records why smattered with a total of $5.7 billion spent. but it's not just the jaw dropping sums that got our attention. it's where that money came from. >> i recognize. >> americans for prosperity. >> that's the koch. >> nextgen climate, tom steyer. >> planned parenthood. >> the more you look, the swampyer it gets. a murk can i mix of powerful corporations, special interest groups, and a handful of staggeringly wealthy individuals are buying our elections. and it's all perfectly legal. >> you can go through all of this and name every single person who works in that building and show how much money is spent on them by outside groups. it makes you wonder whose interests do they have in mind, the money that was spent on them, the people who spent the money, the corporations or the voters who put them into that office. >> joining me now are you my

friends and colleagues and the pair behind this new series, our own katy tur and jacob soboroff. money and politics. it's been decried for three generations. and yet, we're still in this swamp, if you will, of money. we can't seem to swim out of it. >> the it only got worse after citizens united. more and more money flowed into the elections. the 2018 election was the most money ever spent in a midterm election, billions of dollars, chuck. as i say in that clip, that money could be spent in much better places. so we were trying to figure out, is there a way to get rid of that money? is there a light at the end of the tunnel that doesn't necessarily flow from the top down in congress. we found in montana there's a way to get out of the mess. jacob spoke to the governor of montana talking about the disclose act, talking about

campaign finance limits out there and the supreme court just upheld those two things. >> chuck what, we learned is it doesn't have to be the way that it is. you see it in montana. but so often, it's hard to wrap your head around, what does it mean to have so much dark money in politics. it's not just about electing politicians which i guess i didn't fully comprehend. it affects people on an everyday basis. in arizona, the sunniest state in the union, virtually nobody uses solar power in their home. dark money was dumped into that state by koch brothers related entitie entities, that is put forward to put commission erson the state level that made natural gas and other forms of energy in arizona. you got to pay to have solar power on your home in arizona today. >> jacob, ready for this? you are ver bait tip almost, that's the story in florida. >> it gives you thechys to think

about. it could make all of our lives better and mut money in your pockets, which you could spend on health care or children or family members or whatever in order to have a better life. >> it's the perfect example of the government not working for you, not allowing to you make money off the sun, not allowing to help the environment. what they're doing is trying to undercut to you put money in their own pockets. >> katie and jacob, i have a feeling this would be a fun documentary series, as well. thank you both. >> thanks. >> don't miss the first episode of this four-part series "american swamp." this sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern only on msnbc. we'll be right back. eastern only on msnbc. we'll be right back. oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice.

so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪ [ referee whistle sounds ] ♪ sport dr[ cheering ]s when you need the fuel to be your nephew's number one fan. holiday inn express. we're there. so you can be too.

most people think a button is just a button. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination. most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer. here, hello! starts for uwith -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy!

glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today. that's all we have for tonight. we'll be back monday and if it's sunday, it's "meet the press" on your local nbc station, exclusive interviews that i have this week, adam schiff, intel committee chair, senator rick

scott and presidential candidate tom steyer. the beat right now starts with yasmine in for ari. >> we'll be watching sunday, for sure. after mueller, democrats say they're already in impeachment investigation. a democrat now calling for impeachment joining us. also, mitch mccobble under fire for block election security bills. . as russian meddles in elections right now. i'm going to be joined by two senators who went inside a migrant detention center in el paso today. we'll start with an escalation in the obstruction investigation into president trump. thous judiciary chairman nadler saying "an impeachment investigation is under way," cite asking impeachment as his legal argument in a petition filed today to get secret mueller grand jury material. watch this. >> today, we are filing an application for the grand jury material underlying the mueller report. that information is critically important for our abili