it could be, those that want to go for cheap racial divisions and for easy ways out of pitting people against each other are the ones that really don't love the country. that does it for me. thanks for watching. i'll see you back here next saturday 5:00 p.m. eastern. up next "meet the press" with chuck todd. this sunday after mueller, the impeachment debate. democrats try to get robert mueller to make the case against president trump. >> does that say there was no obstruction? >> no. >> what about total exoneration? did you actually totally exonerate the president? >> no. >> your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? >> it is not. >> while republicans seek to discredit the investigation. >> when people associated with trump lie, you threw the book at them. when christopher steele lied, nothing. >> i find those facts in this entire process un-american. >> now democrats today opening impeachment hearings. >> we won't proceed until we

have what we need to proceed. not one day sooner. >> my personal standpoint, i think we are able to impeach. >> my guests this morning, adam schiff, rick scott of florida and pro-impeachment presidential candidate tom steyer. >> president trump calls a black congressman's district a rat infested mess. why does he think such racially charged rhetoric will work? get ready for their second delate with joe biden promising a less polite performance this week. >> joining me is rich lowry, editor of national review, he lean keeper and terry mcauliffe. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press."

good sunday morning. if democrats squinted hard enough they could say they got what they wanted from robert mueller this week. the special counsel telling the country or confirming that, yes, mr. trump and his campaign welcomed help from the russians and it is wrong. no, mueller did not fully exonerate president trump. yes, the president tried to impede the investigation and was generally untruthful with mueller. no, he was not cleared of obstruction of justice. yes, mr. trump sought to make millions in business dealings with russia during the campaign and, no, the investigation was not a witch hunt. but it is also true that mueller's six hours of testimony repeating or confirming what was already released to the public months ago failed to produce the kind of can't turn your eyes away moment that democrats hope will galvanize public opinion against the president.

wednesday's hearing exposed congress mall republicans as more interested in discrediting mueller's investigation than in confronting russian election interference which as we learned this week one day after mueller was more widespread than we previously knew and is continuing at this very moment. for now the next move again is with the democrats as they debate amongst themselves again whether and when to move ahead with impeachment proceedings. >> we're watching the temperature rise. we're not quite at boiling point, but we're getting close. >> on the question of impeaching president trump, everyone was waiting for mueller. but after his halting and somewhat reluctant performance -- >> well, it's problematic is an understatement. generally that's crew. >> they're now waiting for house speaker nancy pelosi.

the waiting game is nothing new, first for mueller to complete his investigation. we have to see what the mueller says before making any conclusion. >> release the mueller report as soon as possible. >> then for the unredacted version. >> congress must get the full, unredacted report, along with the underlying evidence uncovered by special counsel mueller. >> and then to hear from mueller himself. >> in terms of bob mueller, he's going to have to testify. >> and now a new hurdle from the house judiciary chairman. >> we are filing an application for the grand jury material underlying the mueller report. if our committee is going to recommend articles of impeachment to the house, we must make the strongest possible point. >> while democrats are divided between impeach now progressives and wait and see moderates, republicans are united against mueller. >> he lied three times as pointed out in the report. why didn't you charge him with a

crime? >> when christopher steele lied, nothing. >> donald trump is not above the law. he's not. but he shouldn't be below the law, which is where volume two of this report puts him. >> a day later, a bipartisan senate report detailed those efforts showing targeted by russia in 2016. but that report seems to be where the bipartisan outrage ends. mitch mcdonald again blocked consideration of an election security bill put forward mostly by democrats. >> it is just a highly partisan bill from the same folks. >> that is a far cry from where

mcconnell and others were in 2016 and 2017. >> let me speak for ourselves, the russians are not our friends. >> they need to pay a price. >> it is unacceptable that russia or any other country but russia meddled in our election. that's just period, right there. >> and joining me now from los angeles is democratic congressman adam schiff. he is chairman of the house intelligence committee. welcome back to "meet the press." >> thank you. >> let's start with the hearing this week. having a few days to let them sink in, you have probably reviewed the transcript as well. what is your thinking on them now? >> my theing is that the special counsel made it clear that the trump campaign welcomed russian help, built it into their campaign plan, never reported it and lied about it and that there were multiple acts by the president that constitute obstruction of justice. this was a campaign and a presidential candidate characterized by disloyalty to

country, by greed and by lies. i found his testimony chilling. i also found, as you pointed out, most chilling the fact that the special counsel confirmed the russians have never stopped their interference. they're at it again. he's desperately concerned, as i am as well, that the acceptance of foreign help, the willingness to receive it may become a new normal under this president. and that, as the special counsel said, should set off alarms to americans. >> your half of the hearing seemed to animate mr. mueller a little bit more. he seemed to give a few more -- a little bit more on some of his answers than he did in the first part. and it made some of us wonder would the obstruction charges be easier for americans to understand had they seen the presentation of the crimes first, which of course you were part one of the mueller report, but you came as part two of mueller's testimony. >> yeah. you know, that's a good question. i think there may be a number of

reasons why the testimony in the second hearing came more naturally to the special counsel. you know, this animated his work for decades that is protecting the country. and i think that he is most concerned that we're not rising to the challenge of protecting our elections and our democracy. and so you can see him become most passionate about that. that hearing was about the central focus of his work. that had something to do wit. we also had the benefit of going second where we could hear the kind of questions he would respond to. >> right. >> we understood the dynamic a little better than had we been the first up. >> james comey testified two days after announcing the decision on hillary clinton back in 2016. robert mueller, let's see, the mueller report got submitted some time in the spring. we've changed seasons since. it has now took almost essentially four months. obviously you wish it had been

sooner. could you have done more to make this happen sooner and was it a mistake to let it happen this long? >> i'm not sure what more we could have done. bill barr withhold the mueller report as long as he could. he wanted the narrative baked in as long as possible. this is the same reason why it took so long to get bob mueller, don mcgahn and other witnesses. the mueller report the american people have to recognize, the mueller report is not the evidence. it is a summary of the evidence. maybe i'm just an old prosecutor, but i'd like to see the evidence. i'd like to hear from the witnesses before we make a decision about charging the president. and so i think where we are is probably most accurately described as preliminary to a judicial proceeding, that proceeding being a potential impeachment. but we should see the evidence. we're just starting to. and, yes, it's taken too long, but that has largely been by the design of the testimony. >> was there any part of mueller's testimony you found unsatisfying? >> i wish he had testified in

more narrative fashion, that the words didn't need to be coaxed from him as much as they did. >> you were hoping it would bring it alive, right? >> and i think that it did. but it came alive by short questions and short answers rather than a great deal of description from the witness. but, chuck, i think we knew that going into the hearing. as you might recall, what i was saying before, we shouldn't have too many expectations because we know the sum and substance of his system. but nonetheless, most people have had that filtered by the misleading characterization by people like bill barr. so it was very important to bring him in. >> there was ali lingistic deba on friday. you had said we're in a preliminary stage of an investigative -- all right. is this impeachment or not?

you're not there yet. why? >> for the purposes on the law and constitution, where we are now is described as preliminary to a judicial proceeding. i say that because, you know, what we can of the constitution is, you know, what's the function of how we describe something? and right now the most important thing is to obtain the grand jury material to see the evidence and the standard the court has set is are we preliminary to a potential impeachment. i believe we are. where we should get to, the decision, okay, let's indict the president, let's impeach the president is if we're convinced we can make the case. and here, okay, there is no making the case to the president's personality that is the senate gop. >> right. >> but we should at least be able to make the case to the american people. i'd like to see the evidence so i'm confident that we can do that before we say we're ready to charge the president of the united states. >> as you know, that is

unsatisfactory to some who think you guys have been too slow. andrew sullivan writes this this week in new york magazine. pelosi has set an extraordinary precedent that clear evidence meticulously collected that the president has committed crimes against the constitution does not constitute sufficient grounds for impeachment, even when those crimes were designed to cover up an alliance with a foreign power. if more than that is needed, the impeachment power has effectively been nullified. this gets to the argument that says regardless of what you think the outcome is in the senate that you are setting a bad precedent by not -- if you believe these are impeachment offenses, you are setting a bad precedent if you don't do it. >> well, look, there is great weight to the argument that this is the strongest form of sanctuary we have. if we don't use it, what message does that send to the next generation? i worry about taking an impeachment case to trial, having the president acquitted

and having an adjudication that this conduct is not impeachable. there is not a simple answer here. the jury i'm most worried about, not the senate, is the american people. can we make the case to the american people? and i want to make sure that that's true before we go down this path because it is going to occupy a year of the nation's time, and i want to make sure that's the right decision. >> is there a moment where it's too late calendar-wise? and how close are we? >> here is the thing, chuck. that is in a constitutional sense also justice delayed is justice denied. they are doing everything they can to obstruct the congressional investigation having obstructed justice, so there may get to a point in the fall where we decide, look, he is violating a different provision of the constitution by obstructing the congress in its lawful and constitutional duty. that would not be a crime. that would be a misdemeanor. the founders have a different idea of what misdemeanor means.

i think violating the separation of powers would be such a misdemeanor. so this is why i say the president is doing everything he can to push us into an impeachment. if we can't get adequate answers from the court in time, that in itself will be an impeachable offense. >> well, you didn't really answer it. so you don't want there to be a deadline is what you are saying? is that fair to say? >> there will be a deadline because we will either get the answers that we need or the president's obstruction will be so complete that that itself becomes a grounds for his impeachment. >> okay. chairman schiff, i will leave it there. democrat from california, chairman of the intel committee, thank you for coming on. joining me now is rick scott of florida, who is joining us from napels, florida this morning. >> i want to start with the senate intelligence committee report just released the day after mueller's testimony. and its findings said this, the russian government directed

extensive activity beginning in 2014 and carrying into 2017 in an attempt to intrude at some point all 50 states where the russians either tested vulnerabilities or extracted information. just your initial reaction to this. >> well, it's exactly what you expect. i was just in europe talking to members of parliament and different countries there. they said russians are trying to do the same things there. we have to understand they will try to impact our elections. we've got to be very diligent. when i was governor, i allocated dollars for cyber security, dollars to our supervisor elections at the county level. every state has to do this. last year the senate allocated $30 million. we have passed provisions in the ndaa. i mean, look, the russians are here. they will try to get into our system. >> it seems as if the president doesn't believe that, though. and the president, if you don't have the president willing -- because for instance one of the recommendations in the report is

there has to be deterrence on russia not to do it. the president himself poopoos this. how else are we going to get deterrence on the russians if the president won't stand up to them? >> let's look at the facts. president obama didn't do what he should have done. that's why the russians were able to get into two countries in florida. they didn't get anything done. but the trump administration put a lot of effort into making sure that nothing happened in 2018. to date we have not been told that anything has happened. they weren't able to get into that. the trump administration has put a lot of effort into this. >> you are avoiding the part -- come on. the president mocked in front of a world audience when a reporter asked, did you ask vladimir putin -- did you tell him not to interfere in these elections? >> well, look, i think all of us

would like everybody to be a lot more direct. it is hard to do that, i'm sure, in person. but let's look at the trump administration, what they've done. not their words but their actions. their actions are they have been very aggressive in trying to make sure there is no russian interference from any other country. we all have to understand they are going to do and not just russia, china, iran and other countries will try to impact our elections and we have to be diligent. >> you brought up two countries in there. you know, this report was odd in this respect. only one state allowed itself to be named in what happened to their voter roles. it was the state of illinois. the state of florida is anonymous in here. there is a lot of speculation based on similar reporting that it is likely state two that is referred to in this report as florida. did you learn new information from this report that you did not know as governor at the time? >> well, that report i have not seen. >> why not? >> and i do know that --

>> you haven't read this report yet? it got released on thursday. >> i'm sorry. okay. i've not read that report yet. i have gotten briefings. we know they tried to get into two counties in florida. we know it didn't have any impact on the election. i, as governor, put a lot of effort to make sure they could get into our system. that's why we had our cyber experts. >> you were talking about that you had gotten briefings. did you have direct contact in 2016 or was it through other channels that dhs contacted the state of florida? >> so back in -- we didn't have it directly to me, but back in 2018 during my election, i reached out to homeland security, fbi, doj to make sure that there was nothing that they had. and they told me at the time that they had no information, that there was no infiltration

of our system in florida at the time? >> when did you find out about the 2016 infiltration? did you find out about it in 2016? >> no, no, chuck. i didn't get any of that. and actually, the rule happened this year. so i've gotten briefings. and bottom line is they got into two counties, but they had no impact. they didn't change any voter registration, voter rules. they didn't change any votes. we put a lot of effort when i was governor to make sure that couldn't happen. >> you talk about changing votes. if it's an influence campaign or worse they have taken voter information, it's not influencing the votes. it is the concern that voters won't see their names on the voter roles, that they will be turned away from there. they already got a bunch of information from the state of illinois. how do we prevent this in 2020? james lange ford said it is already too late to do anything about this in 2020. >> i think the secretary of state's offices, everybody needs

to work together to make sure this doesn't happen. we did it when i was governor of florida. we made sure we worked with dhs and doj to make sure this didn't happen. all of us have to understand the russians are here and other countries. they're going to try to influence our election. they're doing the exact same thing in europe. >> i want to move to the president's tweet storm. you spent a lot of time, energy and resources trying to win over nonwhite voters in the state of florida in your elections for governor and the senate. you have learned spanish. you speak spanish. you spent a lot of time reaching out. the president spends a lot of time on his twitter feed trying to racially divide the country. does that undermine efforts of the republican party in the state of florida? >> first off, i think it is important you talk to everybody. whether you are running for election or when you are elected, you represent everybody. on friday i met with a group of chinese americans and i had a rally with venezuelans about what's happened down there. look, i think we have got to do everything we can to bring this

country back together. >> why doesn't the president think that? doing this, it is just stoking racial resentment left and right. he's done it multiple times this month alone. he obviously thinks this is good politics inside the republican party. do you think it's good politics inside the republican party? >> well, chuck, let's look at what he said. all right? and why he did it. congressman cummings sat there and attacked our border patrol agents, all right? this reminds me of what happened back in vietnam. >> but that justified a racial resentment tweet in response? is that presidential leadership? >> well, look, i didn't -- i didn't do the tweet, chuck. i can't talk about why he did what he did. but i'm disappointed in the people like congressman cummings who is attacking border patrol agents who are trying to do their job. they won't secure the border or fix the asylum laws and

democrats say, oh, those border patrol agents don't care. i have been to the border. i have talked to border patrol agents. i know they care about these individuals. but we have got to give them the resources and the ability to do their job. >> it's not lost on me that you were harsher on cummings than the president. you seem hesitant to do this, to criticize the president individually on these things. i understand the politics of it. but do we ever heal if each side goes into their corner? >> when i agree with the president, i'll agree with him. you could ask him why he did the tweet. i can tell you, i disagreed with the president with some things with regard to puerto rico. is he happy about that? of course not. but just like on puerto rico, i will do what i believe is in the best interest of my state. i am disappointed when people are out there attacking border patrol agents. would i like everybody to come together and work together? that's what i'm trying to do in

my state. the country is divided because of a lot of things. >> i will leave it there. governor -- excuse me, senate rick shot. most senators who used to be governors prefer the governor title anyway. but thanks for coming on. when we come back, the democrats dell limb ilemma. our panel is next. ilemma our panel is next. 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 7 and maintained it. oh! under 7? (announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) 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? (announcer) 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®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. ♪ still fresh...

♪ unstopables in-wash scent booster ♪ downy unstopables

welcome back. panel is here. terry mcauliffe. author of "beyond charlottesville" helene cooper. amy walter and rich lowry, editor of national review. rich, i'm going to use your publication do kick off the conversation. jim garrity has -- he has a great set-up for us here. he wrote this, if you choose to impeach recognize that you're certain to fall well short of the two-thirds of the senate and may improve trump's chances of re-election. if democrats choose not to impeach they avoid the risks but

the party's base will absolutely loathe them for it. is jim right? does a conservative leaning magazine have the democratic dilemma right? >> i don't know, you mentioned this, will they risk the wrath of the left. the wrath where, from grass roots voters or twitter? it seems that the wrath is coming from inside a bubble and not the voters. we didn't hear this in 2018. we're not hearing it on the campaign trail in 2019 from democratic voters. you talked to members on the hill they're not getting phone calls, not getting, you know, deluged with phone calls saying, well, you all better impeach or else you have lost us. this seems to be the very much contained in -- within washington, d.c. but it's not spilling out into the broader electorate. >> let's talk to a democrat here. terry, i mean, i'm curious. is there a voter that is sitting there and going, boy, i'm going to -- i'm likely leaning against president trump unless the

democrats start impeachment proceedings? >> absolutely not. >> there's part of the political calculation i don't get. >> in fact, we have our house and the senate up this year in virginia, i don't think one time has the impeachment issue been raised. are we going to spend all of our time talking about impeachment which we know they can't get him in the senate. he could rob a bank and the senate wouldn't convict him. >> you don't worry about the precedent? >> or get back to talking about the issues of the tax cut to the rich. what he's done to health care in this country. the issues of racial division that he has created in this country. i mean, we win when we talk about health care. infrastructure. good quality jobs, those are the core democratic values and we better spend our time talking. that the democrats care about is beating donald trump. so even going to the analysis in that story how do you beat trump? if that means we'll talk about the issues and nonimpeachment that's that that they want. >> are you convinced that it helps or hurts trump?

>> i think it hurts the democrats. i think it's like the schroeder and the cat situation. impeachment is kind of dead, but alive at the same time. >> but the inquiry is alive but the articles are dead. i think -- >> if they start an inquiry at the end of the day there are no articles? i think pelosi's instincts have been right to stop this and stand in the way of it from the beginning. look at the pbs poll last week there's a swath of democratic issues that have majority support. why would they focus on the one thing that doesn't have majority support and has super majority support against it? it would be crazy politically. >> i don't think -- i don't think americans are sitting out there thinking about articles versus inquiry. i think the ordinary american doesn't really understand what exactly the impeachment process is anyway. i think most people particularly most democrats would in the end -- i'm not talking about the left part of the base, but i think in the end would be happy

with anything that for instance gets don mcgahn on the stand. so i think -- i think the whole impeachment argument ends up becoming something that nobody is really tuned in to except the interior of the democratic party. >> all right. let me slightly shift gears a little bit. the president is insisting on trying to insert himself into the show today and yesterday with these attacks on elijah cummings. let me put up some of the tweets. i think the initial one that we had here, what do we have up there, guys? as proven last week during a congressional tour the border is clean, efficient and well run. just very crowded. cumming district -- his wording there from the president is a rat and rodent infested mess and if he spent more time in baltimore he could clean this up. "the baltimore sun" has responded with an editorial that says better to have a few rats than to be one. that's the headline there. we know what the president is doing.

he does not like what the oversight committee is doing. he's upset about the oversight committee and he's created the ultimate distraction for the entire with community which is race. >> this is what he's done since he was a candidate, since he was a president. this is the train he's comfortable on and the train he wants to fight 2020 on. i don't think it works for him. he's still more -- >> he thinks it does. >> he is more unpopular than he is popular despite the fact that he has a good economy. despite the fact that people give him credit for what he's doing on the economy. where he thinks this helps him again, the governor made this point. where do you want to fight as a candidate? the train you're comfortable and the opponents are uncomfortable? but for democrats they know that's health care. the president doesn't want to

fight there. he wants to fight here because not because he thinks he can win on this. but because democrats will make unforced errors and where they move policy wise is too far to the left like we saw in the debates. >> the stoking of racial resentment, i know some on the right -- they'll say this is not what it's about, but the fact pattern does not support that very well. in fact, i think he's left a lot of people out on the limb after the omar stuff given what he did today. is there a point that this becomes a breaking point inside the republican party? >> well, i think what you have to understand about republicans is for almost all of them -- for a lot of them, the charge racism has lost its force because it's been so overused and we remember defending george w. bush and paul ryan from charges of racism.

so this was another bad tweet and what he does though -- you're in his target, he is going to make any charge no matter how personally hateful or low against you. no matter what. and i think you just -- you wish there was more awareness there that he's the president of the united states which includes west baltimore. >> yeah. if he's got a problem with it he ought to want to try to fix it too. terry? >> listen, this is horrible for the country. what donald trump has done to create divisions in our nation today is going to take a long time for us to get over it. let it be with cummings, with the squad, when he started to stop the people from the seven countries from coming to america. u.s. citizens were being detained who had come in from these countries and then of course it was charlottesville. i talked to the president that day. i told him what was happening. we had a thousand armed people from 35 states screaming the most disgusting things i could not say on this program. telling -- going by the synagogues saying we're going to burn you, we're going to burn that synagogue like in auschwitz. how did we get to a place like this in america? and i blame trump not for specific acts but i blame him for the atmosphere and he's continued to double down, to divide these people. people used to wear hoods in this country. they used to do it at night.

now they think they can walk in broad daylight. it had to stop. >> you know, the president clearly wants this conversation to be about race and not about what elijah cummings is doing. >> yeah. he's not happy that cummings is going after his daughter. he's not happy about the -- what the house oversight committee is doing. but i think -- i was really curious about your question to rich which i think was answered by your interview with rick scott just now when you said what is the breaking point for the republican party? i think we have seen there is no breaking point for the republican party. >> it's not this. >> well, certainly -- >> that we know. >> not on race. >> i'm going to pause it here. when we come back will the democratic candidate who's been making the case for impeachment, tom steyer joins me next. the c some breaking news. director of national intelligence dan coats leaving his post in mid-august. the former indiana senator has

passed attacks on the intelligence community. president trump tweeted john rad cliff will be nominated to replace coats. he criticized robert mueller during the house judiciary committee earlier this week. for more watch kcdc tonight at 7:00. night at 7:00 re 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. ♪ do your asthma symptoms ever hold you back? about 50% of people with severe asthma have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma.

fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

- cis choosing to nurtureild and emotionally support children in urgent need. it's not just about opening up your home; it is also about opening up your heart. consider fostering.

welcome back. if you're wondering why tom steyer is known as the impeachment candidate, it's probably because of moments like this. >> that's why i'm asking speaker pelosi to cancel summer vacation and conduct daily public oversight hearings to hold trump accountable for his crimes, corruption and racism. >> but he will tell you he's not running on impeachment, but to restore government to the american people. because of the late entry, he won't be among those who debate in detroit this week, but he's joining me from san francisco. welcome back to "meet the press." >> chuck, nice to be here. >> it is not lost on me that you're actually a constituent of nancy pelosi's. and you have run these ads directly talking to nancy pelosi. on impeachment. yet, as you know, the democrats are not there yet. why do you believe they're making a mistake? >> well, chuck, i'd like to

point out the basic point which is this is the most corrupt president in american history and for almost two years i have said bring the case to the american people. we have over 8 million people need to impeachment has over 8 million people who signed a petition to have him be impeached. i have said it's absolutely important to make it happen fast. and if you look at -- >> not too late? >> we have only had two hearings. we had one, michael cohen and now mueller. and now they're scheduled to be out over six weeks so we'll bo in the middle of september and we have had two hearings so the american people can hear the truth. i'm saying do the right thing and do it now. >> why do you think you have been unable to convince speaker

pelosi to change her mind on in? >> well, i think that's a question you should be asking her, chuck. but i think the way that see this is it will be good politics to tell the truth, protect the constitution and protect the american people. and that is what i have been trying to call for and that's why i have been trying to marshal the american voice with a petition to say this is actually why we have a broken government. it's a very simple fact that we have the most corrupt president in history, has not led to actual action inside washington. but in fact, has led to an awful lot of conversation about political tactics and political impacts. whereas in fact this should have happened long ago. >> i want to get you to react to that side of the argument, that nancy pelosi and other allies of her make. maureen dowd this morning in "the new york times" she writes the following. you can argue that impeachment morally is the right thing to do but you have to recognize that historically and politically it's not the right thing to do. the attempt to impeach trump is the rare cases in which something obviously justified is obviously stupid.

your reaction? >> okay, i couldn't disagree more, chuck. what we're seeing in 2020, what we're going to see and what we saw in 2018 is a basic question which is we have a broken government. how are we going to go to the american people and say this government is going to work again? so the idea that not telling the truth, not dealing with what maureen dowd calls an obvious constitutional and moral truth, avoiding that is somehow going to inspire people to vote. this year, i think this is the key point. 80% of americans think this government has been purchased by corporations and does not work for them. in 2020, the question is going to be how many americans believe in this system enough to show up at the polls? what we saw in 2018 was people keep talking about winning the people in the middle, chuck. what we believe in is going to the vast tens of millions of americans who don't vote because

they don't believe in the system. and say to them, this system can work again for you. that's what i have been trying to do as an outsider. both in terms of impeachment but for ten years to say this system can work again and the only way to do that in my opinion is to tell the hard truths, is to be straightforward and not to be so calculating and careful and tactical, but rather to be trustworthy. look, we have done the largest youth voter mobilization in history. an organization i started in 2018. >> right. >> we asked hundreds of thousands of people under the age of 30 why they didn't vote. and what they said to us every time was the system doesn't work. neither party tells the truth. they don't deal with my issues that's why they don't vote. >> what is it about -- what did you see in the democratic debates the first round of them that told you i need to get in

because what i'm advocating is not being advocated? do you believe that of these 20 candidates you -- i mean, a lot of democrats thought it was a bit head scratching that you decided to change your mind and get in. not believing there's really room for you anymore in this race. what made you get in? what's missing? >> well, actually, chuck it's actually what i have been saying. which is this. the democratic debates have been about policy issues and important, substantial nuances and differences in the policies. but what is not in those debates and what is not in this campaign, not your policy but how the heck is that going to happen in the real world? how the heck are we going to get a green new deal or a substantial health care and this is not a question of what, but a question of how.

we will have to break the corporate stranglehold on the democracy. we have to push the power back to the people. >> can you be credible -- >> i have -- absolutely. >> can you do that by being a billionaire? as you know, elizabeth warren lumps billionaires and corporations into the same buck it. >> you know, chuck, i have been doing this for ten years successfully. for ten years at the state level i have been running propositions against companies, oil companies and tobacco companies and winning and i referred to the largest youth voter mobilization in history. if we're going to reform the system, break this corporate stranglehold i believe it will take an outsider who has done it and done it successfully for ten years not someone from inside the beltway. but someone who will bring fresh energy to that problem and that's who i am. >> tom steyer, you got up early for us this morning, so i appreciate that. you have shown your fresh energy. be safe on the trail. thank you for coming on.

when we come back, you might think that 50 states and washington, d.c. will decide next year's presidential election. but you know what? it may all come down to three states. that's next. est, you only talk about your insurance when you complain about it. (garbled)....it's so painful. good point! that's why esurance is making the whole experience surprisingly painless. so, you never have to talk about it. unless you're their spokesperson. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. ♪ how do you like it, ♪ how do you like it ♪ ♪ more, more, more ♪ how do you like it, how do you like it ♪ all you can eat is back. how do you like that? applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. we really pride ourselves on >> temaking it easy for youass, to get your windshield fixed. >> teacher: let's turn in your science papers. >> tech vo: this teacher always puts her students first. >> student: i did mine on volcanoes. >> teacher: you did?! oh, i can't wait to read it. >> tech vo: so when she had auto glass damage... she chose safelite. with safelite, she could see exactly when we'd be there.

>> teacher: you must be pascal. >> tech: yes ma'am. >> tech vo: saving her time... [honk, honk] >> kids: bye! >> tech vo: ...so she can save the science project. >> kids: whoa! >> kids vo: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪ so that early retirement we planned. it's going ok? great. now i'm spending more time with the kids. i'm introducing them to crab. crab!? they love it. so, you mentioned that that money we set aside. yeah. the kids and i want to build our own crab shack. ♪ ♪ ahhh, you're finally building that outdoor kitchen. yup - with room for the whole gang. ♪ ♪ see how investing with a j.p. morgan advisor can help you. visit your local chase branch. when you start with a better that's no way to treat a dog...

...you can do no wrong. where did you learn that? the internet... yeah? mmm! with no artificial preservatives or added nitrates or nitrites, it's all for the love of hot dogs. we are back. data download time. 20 presidential hopefuls will meet this week. and the democratic front joe biden kicked off the campaign if

philadelphia. michigan, wisconsin and pennsylvania, sound familiar? president trump captured the three states along with the 306 electoral votes in 2016 and he was carried over the finish line by those three states, michigan, wisconsin and pennsylvania. three states that democrats had won in every election going back to 1992. but the margins for trump were as razor thin as they could be. 78,000 votes combined in all three states. in pennsylvania he won by 44,000 votes and in wisconsin, nearly 23,000 votes and in michigan, less than 11,000 votes. and there might be a reason why trump won. turnout in the big urban counties which often produce big margins for democrats did not keep one counties in the rest of those three states. wayne county, michigan, the home of detroit produced 4% fewer votes in 2016 than it did in 2012. while the rest of the state produced 3% more votes. milwaukee produced 12% fewer

votes and the rest of wisconsin saw a much smaller decline in turnout, just two points. in philadelphia, they actually produced 3% more votes in 2016 than they did in 2012. but the rest of the state produced 8% more votes. so the democrats' goal is obvious. pump up turnout in the big cities. can they do it? the republicans know the landscape, won't they try to do the same in rural areas? and could republicans also use social media to encourage urban voters to stay home? perhaps that's what the president is up to now. and just as the russians helped do in 2016. no matter what, get used to rallies not only in large cities but also in ones with date lines like oshkosh, redding and kalamazoo. when we come back, joe biden had a terrible first debate? so why is still lapping the field? so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you?

maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ lick fast like a cookie dough ninja. apply that same speed to the ford hurry up and save sales event. for the first time ever get 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. it all adds up. don't you love math? so get here asap because tasty deals and summer go fast. get in or lose out on 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. we all use our phones differently. i can manage the time they spend on their phone, who they're texting with, all of that. it's a win for all of us. (vo) the network more people rely on, gives you more. like plans families can mix and match,

including the new just kids plan. that's verizon. [ 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. here, hello! starts with -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.

back now for end game. it's a big week for joe biden. i want to put up some polls here from fox news general election matchups. joe biden 10 points and descending order sanders, warren and harris. check out the president's numbers, they don't bunch, by the way. 39/42 whether it's biden, sanders, warren, harris. and much wider when it goes

between harris and biden. but the big picture here is joe biden's standing is basically back to exactly where it was before the first debate. >> that's right. >> why is that? >> most people think he has the best shot of beating donald trump and that's the biggest issue as we go forward. democrats want to beat trump and they will all coalesce. he has to have a good debate. it was not as strong a performance at the first debate. he has to be on the stage when donald trump starts hurling insults back at him and he can punch them back twice as hard. >> how devastating of a performance where he's like i'm out of time and that stuff, how much would that hurt him? >> it would hurt. there are a lot of expectations on this debate. i don't want this debate to be all about the past. where we go from here and from all of the candidates. i want to hear more on k-12, infrastructure, and develop. we have to go forward.

biden has to show he can lead taking this country forward. >> helene, it's july of '19 and there are only five candidates of the 20 who feel like they made it to the next round. there's going to be 15 desperados. what will that be like? >> it will be a free fall. it will be interesting to see how much they come and who they target. whether these people who were polling -- >> one or zero. >> yes, whether they go after biden or whether they go after elizabeth warren, the presumed other big person on the ticket. it's funny we're not talking about bernie sanders as much anymore. what's going on there? >> bernie sanders and elizabeth warren will have their own night. they basically admit, no offense to the other eight, that will be seen as -- does bernie sanders attack elizabeth warren? if he does, how does he do it? we know she's not. she doesn't need to. he kind of does. >> it's interesting because if

you think about who's been debating since the debate and mixing it up, biden, booker, harris, sanders. who's not in this mix? warren. she's done a very good job of staying above the fray. she's all about the policy. she's all about the issues. staying out of it. let the food fight between all of them. >> she caught another break by not being with biden, didn't she? >> absolutely. >> the one candidate who may not attack biden is kamala harris. >> she did great the first time. >> right. why stop for the second. >> so the fox poll you would think nothing happened the last two months but even though that speaks to stasous, there's fluidity in this race and by the time there's snow on the ground in iowa, lusomeone will catch fire. >> it feels like we're already sitting on biden, harris, warren, sanders, buttigieg and

everybody else., sanders, buttid everybody else discounting. >> i was going to say -- it feels like we're already sitting on a biden, harris, warren, sanders, buttigieg and then everybody else. terry, anybody we should not be overlooking other than those five at this point? >> listen, pay attention to the governors. >> they haven't had -- why can't they get traction? governments haven't gotten traction. >> they haven't. they're ceos, they have to clean the roads, balance budgetser, no offense to senators and congress, but governors have to deliver every single day. but you have a barr hearing or a kavanaugh hearing, they're in front of tens of millions of people. when i was governor you were not calling me, chuck, asking me about, you know, my thoughts on i-66 and my road work. >> we would call you about national party leader stuff sometimes, but you're right. >> it doesn't get you the exposure and it's hard. they're the ones that -- they're the ceos. listen, i was the chairman, i started these debates in 2003.

we didn't have them before. i started the party debates to give everybody a shot to get on the stage and make your case and they're all televised and there could be a breakout moment. >> but there was a breakout moment from julian castro if last debate and we haven't heard anything else. >> it helped his fund-raising for a week. >> look at buttigieg, he had a big breakout moment in terms of fund raising. i wonder people look at the south bend mayor, like him, impressive. but as president of the united states -- >> he's in the warren/sanders night. it will be interesting if he can make an impression. thank you for guys for watching. we'll be back next week, i promise. because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." -their béarnaise sauce here is the best in town.

[ soft piano music playing ] mm, uh, what do you do for fun? -not this. ♪ -oh, what am i into? mostly progressive's name your price tool. helps people find coverage options based on their budget. flo has it, i want it, it's a whole thing, and she's right there. -yeah, she's my ride. this date's lame. he has pics of you on his phone. -they're very tasteful. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. e-commerce deliveries to homes did you know you can save money by using dish soap to clean grease on more than dishes?

try dawn ultra. dawn is for more than just dishes. with 3x more grease cleaning power per drop, it tackles tough grease on a variety of surfaces. try dawn ultra. woman: (on phone) discover. hi. do you have a travel card? yep. our miles card. earn unlimited 1.5 miles and we'll match it at the end of your first year. nice! i'm thinking about a scuba diving trip. woman: ooh! (gasp) or not. you okay? yeah, no, i'm good. earn miles. we'll match 'em at the end of your first year. would shakespeare have chosen just "some pens?" methinks a tul pen would serve m'lady well.

thanks. and a unicorn notebook! get everything on your list. this week's doorbuster- school backpacks for $10; $10 in store or online from the advisors at office depot officemax. i'm kasie hunt. we're live every sunday from washington from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. eastern. tonight breaking news, as dan coats is stepping down. plus, it's a bird, it's a plane. why some lawmakers were waiting for superman, robert mueller gave testimony about what his testimony is and is not. now democrats charge ahead as more than 100 call for impeachment. plus, as some lawmakers fume at