it's 4:00 in new york. and there's breaking news in the impeachment inquiry just in the last hour. democrats now preparing for house vote on a resolution that will set up the next public phase of the impeachment inquiry, a vote that's expected this thursday. that news comes as the white house continues to argue that the inquiry lacks the necessary authorization for a valid impeachment proceeding. and follows last week's theatrics on capitol hill from republicans clamoring for more transparency. house speaker nancy pelosi announcing the vote in a statement addressing the trump administration's stonewalling campaign directly. she writes this. quote, we are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the trump administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas or continue obstructing the house of representatives. the announcement comes at a consequential moment in the impeachment inquiry, one that may ultimately determine whether the public will ever hear from

the man who described the president's chief of staff and personal lawyer as engaging in a, quote, drug deal when it came to u.s./ukrainian relations and complained to aides that rudy giuliani was a, quote, hand grenade that was going to blow everybody up with his rogue foreign policy. the "new york times" reports from the high-stakes legal dispute about cupperman, that's bolton's deputy and potentially bolton himself's testimony with this reporting. quote, from the man who described the president's chief of staff -- i'm sorry, this is something we've already read. let me get right to the reporters, though, covering this breaking story. robert costa, what is the significance of this vote in congress? how does it sort of take away one of the republicans' talking points against the process itself, which seems to be what they have landed on in 30 days, not a single dispute of the facts in the whistle-blower complaint or any of the testimony we are hearing from capitol hill. >> this democratic impeachment process is moving forward like a

ship, and many republicans are very unhappy about it because it's being done in private. but what speaker pelosi is doing with this decision is pushing back against republican criticism and say hold on a minute, we are going to hold a vote to formalize this process. if you're complaining about the process, we will formalize it. and she is also saying to them if you read the resolution and the reporting that she eventually quite soon will make this a public inquiry. and there will be witnesses with their hands in the air testifying about president trump's conduct. so all this republican talk about process, it will fade away as the democrats continue to say we are going to take these steps. >> we are also joined by mike schmidt, washington correspondent from the "new york times." you have some reporting about the legal standoff, if you will, that may make this new process, should it become more public, even more explosive. explain that. >> yeah. on friday night, the cupperman, the former deputy national security adviser filed a lawsuit against the president and

congress, essentially asking the judge to figure out whether he could testify to congress. now this may sound sort of legalese, but the most important thing that this gets at is that as this investigation moves towards the people closest to the president, the president has expanded powers to try and stop them from speaking with congress. he can invoke different types of privileges and immunities. and what has happened, what we think is going to happen going forward is that as these house investigators move closer to the president and try and get details about what he was saying behind closed doors to these aides, they will run into more problems like this. >> as the teleprompter fades, so do the introductions. jonathan lemire from the "associated press" also here. as mike schmidt's reporting suggests, they are invoking stronger legal tools to protect the people who had more face-to-face interactions and in a normal white house i know this isn't one of those. but in a normal white house other than a white house chief

of staff, there isn't anyone who has more face time with a president than his own national security adviser. we did some research on friday in the history of this country sort of short but sorted impeachments there has never been a national security adviser who has testified either in a closed door deposition or in a public hearing if that's the phase we are entering, before. >> it's another example of what an extraordinary moment this is for the american presidency that we are in uncharted territory. they are trying to limit this. they are trying to do what they can in terms of damage control. they've had some success to this point. but to bob's point a moment ago, this is a new phase here. this is the speaker i think has largely been lauded for how they proceeded with this so far. they have certainly received the testimony that has been reported, the opening statements that we've all read, some very damaging information about the president and his conduct. >> and not one word of that damaging testimony has been

disputed by anyone inside the white house or any of their allies in congress. >> they have laid a foundation here that the democrats have that the republicans have not been able to dispute. they have been reduced to fighting on process. they did the stunt last week where they stormed the hearing and delayed the testimony for five hours. complaining even of the location that it's in the basement as if that's some untoward location. that's just where the skiff is. and that may play well for a moment on certain cable channels, but it's not going to change the equation much. and now speaker pelosi is answering those charges though, is saying that we are going to move forward, we are going to have the formal resolution. now we are going to start doing things in public. and, yes, any time the cameras come into the room, things will slow down. the politics will still very much be there, but this takes away a republican argument about transparency and the american people will see it with their own eyes. >> betsy. >> part. reason that the litigation from

charles cupperman's team that mike thschmidt reported on. chuck cooper is sort of a scion. he represented jeff sessions, the former attorney general through the mueller probe investigation. he's been working for conservatives and republicans in incredibly high-stakes and complicated legal circumstances for quite some time. it's very reasonable to assume that cupperman's thinking will be the same as bolton's thinking. so if a judge rules that cupperman doesn't have to comply with the subpoena from congress, bolton is likely, we don't know for sure, but it's a safe bet that he will use that same lodgic to defend himself against testifying which would of course be really frustrating for democrats. >> but the other side and let me put this to you, bob costa and mike schmidt. this seems to be designed to take any decision making part out of john bolton's hands.

he has built a career as a highly regarded figure on the right it. >> would be very difficult to paint john bolton's testimony as any part of any sort of deep state plot to remove donald trump. >> and people are making choices. white house counsel pat cipollone with his letter has been trying to prevent testimony and to urge trump administration officials to not head to capitol hill. yet ambassador after ambassador, official after official are deciding to testify on their own. it's their decision to comply with congress despite what the white house is saying. and bolton can make his own decision in the coming weeks and months about how he wants to be remembered and what he wants to say. >> mike schmidt, your reporting today with your colleague nick fanos makes the point that if republicans are going to be swung over especially on the senate side to support donald trump's conviction and removal, they're going to need testimony from people like john bolton.

>> yeah. that's what this all comes down to. it comes down to the republicans in the senate and how much they can be moved against the president. it's pretty clear the house is going to impeach the president. the democrats, you know, are moving with that great momentum in that direction and, you know, they've hit a little bit of a speed bump here but looks like we'll move forward of that. when do they want to put their pencils down and hand it over to the senate for the actual trial. and how strong will that case be. what will they be saying in, you know, what will be able to be said about the president as the senators sit there as the jurors in a trial against the president. >> i want your thoughts on this, and then i want to turn to one of the witnesses who i think republicans in the trump white house thought would offer some sort of defense of donald trump, gordon sondland, the political appointee, e.u. ambassador, who over the weekend it was reported has testified that there absolutely was a quid pro quo. >> yeah. i think he was an important witness for the democrats. i think -- look, it does seem like charles cupper man is

obviously not going to testify. i think it's fair to conclude that john bolton isn't going to either. they could have come up and testified the same way that other witnesses who the white house objected to do. and i suspect that the time frame the court puts into place will stretch beyond when the house will eventually vote on articles of impeachment it. >> means we won't get their testimony. but this inquiry has already been probably the most successful fact-finding mission of presidential misconduct in any in congressional history. we have gotten any more evidence than watergate. this investigation has been going on for a little over a month. essentially every theory of the case has already been proven that he withheld aid. yes, would be nicer to have someone who is an adviser to the president who talked to him directly. but i think it's less important to find the witness that will convince republican senators because, look, they all know he did it. they are not waiting to be convinced. and witnesses that will convince the american public. so i think it's important that

what we are seeing the democrats now is lay out that they will soon be turning to public hearings. if we see people like bill taylor come up and testify and gordon sondland come up and testify and they give publicly the kind of explosive testimony they have given privately. and you're right, gordon sondland's attorney made it very clear over the weekend that he was not going to be the fall guy for donald trump. if they give that testimony publicly, maybe that's the thing that moves public opinion and that's what has an impact on the senate. >> jonathan lemire, it's an interesting point, and i've got this embarrassment of riches. all of you guys cover this and know this better than anyone. let's tick through the evidence and the confessions. the evidence that we have has been provided by donald trump in the transcript. the confessions include on-air confessions from the president's personal lawyer rudy giuliani on not even on fox news, on cnn, saying damn right i asked them to investigate the bidens. and you've got at least two dip

plats and fiona hill who have testified to the direct line to the president in asking for the investigations into the bidens. >> right. there is an abundance of material, as matt just said. the democrats would like more. any prosecutor or congressional hearing committee would. but they have enough to move forward. bill taylor's particularly compelling, not only did he have contemporaneous notes and describe in vivid detail of what happened, the shadow foreign policy being run by giuliani and his effort to go to the secretary of state pompeo but also put a human face on it to describe the real world consequences of withholding the military aid to ukraine and how ukrainians could die at the hands of russian-backed forces because of it. and i think that moving forward, that will resonate. they will add more details. it will be, yes, republican senators will hear it. but more that it is the public who will pressure those senators or even if this proceeding does

not end up in his removal, those will be remembered come the ballot box next november. >> it's resonating so far with house democrats. the challenge now is will it resonate with americans, broadly speaking? will it resonate with senate republicans? and the white house doesn't seem to have a clear strategy in countering the facts. but they do have a strategy in terms of sending rudy giuliani or others out there to talk about the process and muddying the waters on intent. the president's intent has to be clear in the evidence, in the argument for some of these republicans that come across the line. that's the challenge. when i'm at the capitol, can the democrats paint a picture that the president truly intended to abuse power? >> where's the open question though on that? the president has said in the transcript i need a favor though. and the public seems to be -- i think public support is at 55%. >> you saw robert mueller struggle -- >> 55% of the general public never supported even an inquiry. i think the latest quinnipiac

number is 55% not just of the process but for his removal. i am stunned that the polling on his removal is as high as it is 12 months before an election. >> and it has increased dramatically quickly. >> it was in the mid- to high 30s at the end of the mueller investigation and basically stayed there all through the summer despite everything democrats were doing. i think you make a very good point about intent. i think the transcript has one way of showing that. and then back to gordon sondland whose attorney made clear over the weekend that sondland believed the president was asking for a quid pro quo. he was making clear if you do not publicly announce this investigation into burisma, which was code for joe biden, and i think sondland knew it was code for joe biden despite his protestations to the contrary, you are not going to get a meeting with me and you are not going to get the security assistance that you needed. having a witness like sondland is key. there is another witness who is supposed to come up on tuchltd, tim morrison, someone who works

inside the white house who presumably can add more light. if he shows up over a dozen times in bill taylor's testimony, if he actually does show up and testify on thursday, that's another witness who presumably can provide specific information about what the president himself did. >> mike schmidt, on gordon sondland, he's not john bolton, he's not mick mulvaney. he wasn't in the oval office every day. but his own testimony includes the recounting and i think from documents we have seen from kurt volker's subpoena and appearance and from ambassador taylor's appearance on capitol hill, suggests that gordon sondland was in touch with donald trump and put these questions to him directly about what he wanted in exchange for a presidential meeting with the new leader of ukraine. what is the significance of this reporting? >> that illustrates the point here about the people closest to the president. we are talking about gordon sondland because he was in direct contact with the president. he was able to recount some of

that to congress. and that's the point about the other folks that the house would like to talk to and that they are closing in on. it would be harder for the house to get to them. but it is that testimony that really moves the ball forward, that really sort of allows the democrats to make a larger argument that would put pressure on the senate republicans. and, look, it's going to be very, very difficult for them, and all they really have right now in terms of stuff directly to the president is stuff from volker and sondland and a little bit from others. but a lot of the other stuff is sort of second-hand stuff, sort of atmospherics about what was going on inside the nsc or the state department. >> and i know that donald trump doesn't really care what happens inside the nsc, but he does care about the pr war, betsy. there is a lot of reporting that he's increasing the frustration. "the washington post" reports this. adding trump dictated much of a

defiant letter sent by white house counsel pat cipollone to house leaders earlier this month that claimed it was invalid according to people familiar with his role. now trump responded on twitter denying that he was frustrated but not denying his role in that letter which was really universally condemned by people in the legal community on the right and the left. >> it's markedly different. when mueller started investigating, ty cobb and other members of the legal team said we are going to play ball, we are going to be helpful, everyone's allowed to talk to mueller. this is the dramatic inverse of that. instead we have the president's lawyers going out on a limb making arguments that have drawn a lot of rebuke from the legal community to try to persuade these white house and administration officials not to testify. trump has been involved in the process of making that case and it hasn't worked. >> it is so much losing. i mean, the stonewalling and i think it was, again, a strategy that worked for them on mueller.

don mcgahn has so far not appeared on capitol hill, as far as i'm aware, neither have any of the other witnesses quoted in a symbolically important way in the mueller report. but here you have a steady stream. i think i have a list. it includes tim morrison who's already been mentioned. two more state department aides. here they are. tuesday. another nsc director. wednesday state department adviser for ukraine. two other defense department official. and then thursday the testimony that we have already talked about someone expected to, tim morrison is expected to corroborate what is widely believed to be the most devastating testimony given to date from ambassador bill taylor. >> what they are doing now is the tactics they used from the second half of the mueller probe, which was the stonewall, with giuliani out there trying to muddy the waters. it's also what they did when the house, when the democrats won control of the house earlier this year and it started running

investigation after investigation. and more or less the white house strategy and response was to just say no. they are willing to kick it to the courts, they are willing to run up the clock, they are along to just push back and see where they can get. that's where they are now because, in part, they don't have any better options. and the issue is this time around that the probe is moving so much faster and the narrative seems so much clearer than the mueller investigation. the prosecutors have said that the mueller actually did move quickly considering how complicated that matter was. but for the american public it didn't feel that way. it dragged on for two years. there were a lot of russian names people didn't understand. paul manafort was indicted. there were ways to explain their way out of it and eventually especially when trump didn't sit for an in-person interview, they were able to get off the hook. not only do the facts still remain them, but the process seems to be going against them as well. and right now they are flailing for a response outside of the president's twitter account. >> there weren't a lot of

witnesses or storytellers to bring that story to life in a way that connected with the public. there is no shortage of storytellers. you've got donald trump on the south lawn saying, yeah, china, if you're listening, you do it too. you've got rudy on fox news. you've got sondland's testimony that we are reading about. fiona hill, they are all witnesses to the conduct in question. is that, you think, the difference here at this point? >> yeah. look, so far it seems like every day they've been able to have a witness up there. and that generates a story and there is a statement that comes out from what the witness has begun to lay out and what they are saying. and then there are some leaks about broader things that are in the testimony. and it keeps the momentum going forward. and they are beating the drum against the president. now today they run into the problem where cupperman was supposed to testify. that would have been a big deal because he was the deputy national security adviser. but because cupperman did not go up there today, there is a bit

of a void. there is not the same stories as there have been over the past several weeks. >> we'll keep watching. mike schmidt, thank you for your reporting and for spending some time with us. after the break, "the washington post" that describes defending donald trump in impeachment as a, quote, horror movie. we'll bring you that whole delicious story. and the death of an isis leader, an incredible story of meticulous planning and unmatched bravery who worked closely with our kurdish allies in syria. we will bring you remarkable in-depth reporting on that operation and details about how it was carried out despite donald trump, not because of him. and a public shoutout to russia from donald trump while democrats in congress are still awaiting their briefing on the deadly raid. all those stories coming up. ♪ limu emu & doug hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need.

your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. you don't let a cold ruin your day. you take dayquil severe liquicaps and crush it. dayquil severe. the daytime, coughing, aching, stuffy-head, fever, sore throat, power through your day, medicine. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage.

ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. hey. ♪hey.

you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today.

i said whatever you, do don't hire a yes man, someone that's going to tell you -- or won't tell you the truth, don't do that. because if you do, i believe you will be impeached. and someone has got to be the guy that either have the authority or you don't or, mr. president, don't do it because, whatever, you know. but don't hire someone that will just, you know, noed and say that's a great idea, mr. president. because you will be impeached. >> that was prescient. that was the president's former chief of staff john kelly, an uncontrolled president trump he

predicted would end up getting impeached. and it's wording like kelly's first hand accounts that may ultimately lead to a tipping point for some republican senators who, based on new reporting in "the washington post" are, quote, lost in a drift as the impeachment inquiry enters its second month navigating the grave threat to president trump largely in the dark, frustrated by the absence of a credible case to defend his conduct and anxious about the historic reckoning that likely awaits them. quote, it feels like a horror movie said one veteran republican senator who spoke anonymously to candidly describe the consensus. trump and his allies have strained to focus the debate on the process. but republican officials have struggled to answer for the substance of the startling statements made by the growing list of credible witnesses. that struggle is clear in the 32 days since the whistle-blower

complaint was released. we have seen zero pushback on the many revelations that have come out so far, including the white house's summary of that july 25th call. the testimonies of career professionals like fiona hill and bill taylor and even admissions by trump's personal lawyer rudy giuliani. bob costa, this is an incredible piece of reporting. and i wonder if you could take us through what you and phil rucker report, and then add this element of the process being turbo charged by nancy pelosi today. >> working with phil, we canvassed the republican party over the past week. i spent the week up at the capitol. and republican senators were not like house republicans who were storming the skiff, the impeachment hearing room. instead, senator after senator would say to me, costa, i am sorry. i'm going to be a juror if there is a trial up here, so i don't want to say anything. then some of them would walk four or five paces ahead and turn around and say, come here,

let's talk. but it wouldn't be on the record. you accept that because of the charged atmosphere and they want it to be candid. they would say privately they're unhappy with the white house or unhappy with mick mulvaney the acting chief of staff. they feel like they can't even engage on the substance because they don't know what's going on come out next. they said the white house isn't engaging with them. senators raging across the conservative and moderate spectrum aren't getting any kind of talking points or even guidance from the white house. but what you really feel is they know a trial's coming. and they also know that mitch mcconnell more than president trump is their leader. president trump, they tell me and phil, is in control of the party. but mcconnell's in control of the senate. they feel they have to trust mcconnell's guidance. if he feels the senate majority is on the line, he is going to let them take certain steps, whether it's breaking fumy willh the president. but they are thinking through their range of options because they have their own futures and conscious

consciouses -- consciences. >> passed 50%, mitch mcconnell made his first statement about never having a conversation about donald trump in which he said there was nothing wrong with his call with zelensky. how close is mcconnell, 55% of the american public, which imperils, i don't know, at least four or five of his -- i think you were right about colorado seats. i mean, who's in trouble and who are you watching now? >> you're watching people who are close to mcconnell like lamar alexander, retiring republican from tennessee. we are told behind the scenes he is one of the most anxious about president trump's conduct. cory gardner, thom tillis. but we are also watching people like pat toomey of washington, someone who needs to be if he wants to keep winning in pennsylvania he is the kind of quiet senator along with rob portman of ohio who could be a problem for the white house if they feel like they cannot stick

with this president. mcconnell's interesting. he gave a powerpoint presentation to a senator. he is taking the process seriously. you talk to house republicans on the phone, they say this is going to be a sham trial, it's fake news. then you talk to senate republicans and they say we have to be ready. >> it's so interesting to me that the sort of conventional wisdom and it's always wrong, has been that you'd never get 20. but i think what bob costa's reporting shows that it's a dynamic process. you don't know what you don't know because they don't know what they don't know. >> the white house hasn't given them any defense yet. >> but might that be because there isn't one? >> of course there is not. but the difference between the house and the senate, the house is filled with silly people like matt gaetz who will pick up the president's talking points that it was a perfect call or repeat mick mulvaney and say, oh, quid pro quos are okay, that's what the administration does all the time. that's a much harder argument

for a senator to make. and the problem that i think that the president ultimately has here, for years senators have been able to look the other way at some of the things he does because they don't have to vote on it. and eventually at the end of the day there is going to be a trial and all the evidence is going to be laid out. they are going to have to vote on it, and the public is going to be watching closely. and i think the buckets of senators you lay out, there are four senators who are retiring this cycle who are no longer accountable to donald trump. they don't have to worry about being attacked. there are five other republican senators in various close seats who have seen thar proval ratings plummet over the last month and are in dire straits for the election. then there are other people who just, i think, on at some point, may be so tired of having to defend him all the time that if the public opinion goes south on this, and that's the key thing to watch is the public opinion, he could be in real trouble. >> i thought it's also tlag where mick mulvaney has some pockets of support in house from his former silly friends, not so

much in the senate. >> no. there is a real frustration amongst senate republicans who had a closer relationship with john kelly. mick mulvaney is a man of the house. he comes from the house of representatives. he's close to people who are in the freedom caucus. and if you're leader mcconnell, senators told me they wanted don mcgahn in there because if you're going to have a transactional relationship with president trump, it's got to work like a machine. get all the conservatives into these judicial posts, don't care about the president's tweets. it's just nomination after nomination stealthily overhauling the entire federal government. when that process breaks down a bit and pat cipollone is not as focused, then you have a gap politically between the senate and the white house. >> it's amazing, too, don mcgahn, the guy who sort of kept the president just on the other side of the line of criminal obstruction of justice and the current white house counsel may get him impeached. >> the strategy may very well backfire. and i think the mulvaney point

is right. the deep frustration about how he is both inside and outside the white house how he has sort of steered the ship during this impeachment inquiry that they felt like the president has been angry at him from the beginning that he has not been able to sort of navigate some of these rough waters, that he hasn't been able to change the story line at all. some of that may be unfair, but he didn't do the president any favors. john kelly point, certainly he had some success keeping the president in line for a few months, some success. and also by the end of their relationship, the two men weren't speaking. so it's perhaps the former chief of staff is overstating his ability to keep the president out of this politically legal hot water. but certainly there are republicans all over why the april who are frustrated there isn't someone in the building who can provide any sort of guardrails. >> house republicans know mulvaney but they don't all like him. in the afternoon after his now historic press conference, there were members on the hill sort of

chuckling amongst themselves about what they saw as mulvaney's overexaggerated view of his own intellect. when it comes to senate republicans, one of the biggest problems for trump is pretty simple. that is that a lot of the senate republicans just don't like him. they think he's crass. they are tired of being associated with him. and on a gut level, that's an issue for the president. on top of that, part of this is the reason that bolton's testimony or lack thereof is so consequential. the senate is a pretty small place. couple dozen republicans, bolton also has been a republican leader for decades. he knows a lot of these guys. if he comes out against the president hard, that will be meaningful. >> bob costa, thank you for that stunning piece of reporting. i read it with my jaw open. >> always good to work with phil rucker. it is. we love phil rucker too. after the break a heroic and risky intelligence operation carried out of the united states pulling out of syria. how donald trump made the mission he now harolds more

challenging. that story next. shark iq robot deep-cleans and empties itself into a base you can empty once a month. and unlike standard robots that bounce around, it cleans row by row. if it's not a shark, it's just a robot.

red lobster's endless shrimp is back for just fifteen ninety nine. get all the shrimp you want, any way you want 'em. like new sriracha-honey shrimp... ...savory grilled teriyaki shrimp,... ...classic shrimp scampi and more! red lobster's endless shrimp is fifteen ninety nine.

hurry in.with time, come that's for sure... and when those changes might help more people, especially those in retirement, i think it's worth talking about! so, aag is introducing a new jumbo reverse mortgage loan so you can now access as much as $4 million dollars in cash, tax free, from your home's equity. aag's new jumbo reverse mortgage loan if you've had your homeree for a while,er bef it's probably worth a lot more today. so why not use that appreciation for anything you need maybe it's some home repairs, or updates to make it more comfortable so you can stay in the place you love. it's a viable effective way to support your other investments long into the future, and another way aag is working to make your retireme... better. don't wait. get your info kit now!

we killed isis leader al-baghdadi. [ cheers and applause ] he's dead as a doornail. [ laughter ] and he didn't die bravely either, i will tell you that. he should've been killed years ago. another president should've gotten him. but to me it was a very important, i would say all the time they'd walk into my office, sir, we killed this leader at a low level, this leader. i said i never heard of him. i want al-baghdadi. that's the only one i know now. i want al-baghdadi. get him. and they got him. >> and i bet they love walking in and telling you who they get. that was the president still on a personal victory far, far, far

away from syria again reflecting on the raid that killed isis leader baghdadi even while reporting in multiple news organizations indicates he may have done more to hinder the operation than help it. from the "new york times," quote, mr. trump's abrupt withdrawal ordered three weeks ago disrupted the meticulous planning underway and forced the pentagon to speed up the plan for the risky night raid before their ability to control troops, spies, and reconnaissance aircraft disappeared with the pull-out officials said. while baghdadi's death in the raid on sunday occurred largely in spite of and not because of mr. trump's actions. richard haas, the president of the council on foreign relations said, quote, the irony of the successful operation against baghdadi that it could not have happened without u.s. forces on the ground that have been pulled out without help from syrian kurds who have been betrayed and

support of a u.s. intelligence community that has so often been d disparaged. while the raid was a success, the things that made it possible might not exist in the future. kevin, i want to ask you about that "new york times" reporting and read you a little bit more from it. american officials said the kurds continued to provide information to the cia on baghdadi's location even after mr. trump's decision to withdraw the american troops left the syrian kurds to confront a turkish offensive alone. the syrian and iraqi kurds, one official said, provided more intelligence for the raid than any single country. i know people like you know this sort of at a cellular level just how close the kurdish, american military and intelligence relationship is. but can you describe the

significance of this operation carried out over the weekend after donald trump made the decision to cut and run on them? >> sure. you know, i think everyone is highlighting that it just means once again trump made an announcement that something was going to happen in syria, and it's not exactly what's happening. so this was supposed to be a small pull-off from the north and then it would be a total pull-out from the whole country. then it going to be, well, we are going to have some troops in the region to fight i ssis. and protect the oil field locations in the east of syria. but this was different. this was about four miles from the border of turkey. so it's right in the region and right up there against what we've all been talking about for two weeks. it does show i think that long-term i think things are settling a bit. and the sense that i'm getting and what we are hearing even from the field is that the kurds know there is a difference between what donald trump is saying and what america might

do. they know there is a longer game to play. the kurds have been playing it for decades with regards to their own independence and autonomy and relationships. and they've got to forage whatever relationships they can to protect themselves. so i can understand that while, you know, trump made his announcement and everyone is riding rightfully at the same time the kurds were sticking with the operators and the commanders on the u.s. side who have been with them this whole time for something as sensitive and as valuable as baghdadi. we had an interview today overnight with the leader of the women fighting force, the ypj, an exclusive interview, and she said that, you know, they worked also with the americans ahead of time with the admission that they also viewed it as a win not just for them but for women everywhere that baghdadi was killed and they are going to continue the fight. >> you know, basil, i think what's so stunning is that in the reporting 24 hours after the successful raid, and we should

all take every opportunity to praise the military and intelligence professionals and our allies and the kurds that kevin's talking about who play a lawn game, as he's pointing out. but you also have to stop and listen to what he's saying. he is saying that even the kurds, our allies thousands of miles away, you know that, donald trump's words don't carry the weight of the united states government. that's amazing. it is amazing and i can certainly understand why they feel that way. but speaking about words, i actually often go back to maya angelou's comments. i may not remember what you said or what you did but i remember how you made me feel. if i think about the way in which donald trump delivered the message that this operation was successful and he listened to the cheers of the folks in that room, what i wonder is will anybody really care at the end

of the day the maneuver -- his maneuver to pull american forces out of the kurds still standing with us. or will they just remember that speech that he just gave? for me, you know, obviously i focus on the fact that he did withdraw troops, the fact that he did in the same speech go after obama needlessly, right? i focus on that. but i wonder if the average sort of voter, average republican that's still on the fence, if their only takeaway from this was the point was the way in which he delivered that message the other day. >> you know, betsy, i lapped up all of the reporting in every news organization about how they kept this secret. seemingly, some of the timing even from him. but how they had accelerate the timing because of his decision. he really has, and take whatever

metaphor you want. he really has affected everything, even the pursuit of one of america's most wanted terrorists. >> that's right. another piece of this that's important is that it's been reported that some of the intelligence that the united states used to put together this raid was human, which mean it came from people who trusted americans and shared information with them. people in the intelligence community say our capabilities of gathering and cultivating that type of intelligence have waned. and to the extent that folks feel that they can't trust the americans they are working with and that people within the cia and the other intelligence agencies have a lack of confidence in washington, those capabilities are in a tough spot under this administration. >> all right. no one's going anywhere. but when we come back, nancy pelosi was right. how all roads always lead to russia. that part of this story next. i've heard a lot of excuses to avoid screening for colon cancer. i'm not worried. it doesn't run in my family. i can do it next year. no rush.

cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab. there's no excuse for waiting. get screened. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. have been recalled because of dangerous takata airbags. one of them could be yours. go to safeairbags.com to see if your vehicle is on the recall list. it could save your life. to earn j.d. power chevdependability awards... across cars... trucks... and suvs. four years in a row. since more than 32,000 real people... just like me. and me. and me. took the survey that decided these awards. it was only right that you hear the good news from real people... like us. i'm daniel. i'm casey. i'm julio. only chevy has earned j.d. power dependability awards across cars, trucks and suvs.

four years in a row. if you have moderate or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

but we're also a company that controls hiv, fights cancer, repairs shattered bones, relieves depression, restores heart rhythms, helps you back from strokes, and keeps you healthy your whole life. from the day you're born we never stop taking care of you. i want to thank the nations of russia, turkey, syria, and

iraq. and i also want to thank the syrian kurds for certain support they were able to give us. >> why do you want to thank russia? it is so bizarre, or is it? it keeps happening. russia, russia, russia keeps coming up again and again. it was trump's first thank you after the baghdadi raid as you saw there. also consider the white house told russia about the raid but opted against briefing people like nancy pelosi the house speaker because they were worried about leaks from pelosi but not russia. although when asked today by nbc news, the white house press operation couldn't identify a single instance of nancy pelosi leaking any national security secrets. kevin's still here and the table's still here. always, always, always a russia angle. >> i am reminded as he stumbled into this ridiculous accusation that nancy pelosi might leak this. who was it that actually leaks classified information to russia? it was president trump not nancy pelosi. you know, obviously it was the special forces operators who did

the heavy lifting in this operation. the president's speech should've been a lay-up. it is such an easy thing to do. it ought to be such a unifying moment for the country for the president to come out and announce. he can thank our allies and praise the troops. and that's it. instead he turned this into this self-aggrandizing moment where he talked too much about the operation where he picked an unnecessary fight with democrats on the hill and lost what could have been a great opportunity for him, what could have been a great political opportunity for him to bring the country together to his benefit. but he can't do that because he doesn't have that gene. there is something broken inside him that instead leads to this kind of just foaming at the mouth that we saw yesterday. >> and contrast that to president obama's announcement about osama bin laden. >> it was nine minutes, it praised the vailor of those

involved. this president opened that way mostly but then went on for 48 minutes. and it turned into almost another riffing general question and answer session where he attacked democrats. he attacked european allies for not doing enough. he praised russia several times. and it became far less about the raid and more about donald j. trump. it was -- it was clear. look, this is obviously and the troops deserve a lot of credit. the president did give the go order. they are going to frame this as a win. this is the world's most wanted man that is now dead. that is a victory for america, period. but the president's going to turn it into a political victory. this is going to be a staple on the campaign trail next year that he's the one who got baghdadi and it comes at a good time for him. maybe this even pacifies some -- we heard some of them willing to break ranks with him on this but they of course with applaud this death. but he made it about himself in a way that is sort of unprecedented.

and also, the language he used about al-baghdadi, as experts around the world suggest that could inflame would be terrorists. >> whimpering like a dog. >> and as others have pointed out, there's no clear evidence there was an audio link for the president to even hear if baghdadi was -- in fact, the defense secretary when asked about that today said, well, maybe the president spoke to some of the members on the ground who i haven't talked to yet. which was obviously his attempt of trying to back up what the president said and instead said this may be donald trump trying to -- >> so one terrorist dead and a fact dispute with the pentagon and in an ego dispute with obama. we'll see how that works out. when we come back, a photo on the president's twitter feed has made one of the heroes in saturday night's raid an instant and deserving celebrity. instant and deserving celebrity. and etfs, plus zero minimums to open a brokerage account. with value like this, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelity.

there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. i need all the breaks as athat i can get.or, at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m...

am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ our canine as they call, i call it a dog, a beautiful dog, a talented dog, was injured and brought back. >> i don't even know what to say about that. they call it a canine. trump calls is a beautiful dog. today, trump declassified an image of that beautiful dog who was injured in saturday's raid on baghdadi's compound. the good news is the dog is okay. we can still agree that the dogs are awesome, right? in this highly-political climate. >> you call that a dog. i call it a good girl. a very good girl. yes, indeed.

>> yeah. >> yeah. this was a fun -- today, everyone wanting to know, wait a minute. where is the dog? how is the dog? is the dog okay? and what's the dog's name? all we learned from the secretary and joint chiefs today is that the dog is still in theater. it was slightly injured but healing well but her name will remain classified. but the president himself just before we came on air or maybe while you were already on air, he has tweeted a picture of the dog. so good on the dogs. >> they're heroes. the heroes are the men and women who carried out the mission, our allies on the ground and the dog whose name shall remain classified. >> everyone on two legs and four legs in defense of our nation deserves a round of applause and our heart felt gratitude. absolutely. >> thank you for spending some time with us. we're going to sneak in our last break. we'll be right back. ak in our lt break. we'll be right back. walk along y street of dreams ♪

♪ here i go again on my--- you realize your vows are a whitesnake song? i do. if you ride, you get it. geico motorcycle. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more. ...depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, with trusted protection for all out confidence... beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®. hendless shrimp even hotter?s you bring back nashville hot! oh yeah - it's back. crispy shrimp... ...tossed in a spicy rub... ...and drizzled with sweet amber honey. more shrimp more ways. endless shrimp's just fifteen ninety nine. hurry in. (mom vo) it's easy to shrink into your own little world. especially these days. (dad) i think it's here. (mom vo) especially at this age.

(big sis) where are we going? (mom vo) it's a big, beautiful world out there. (little sis) whoa... (big sis) wow. see that? (mom vo) sometimes you just need a little help seeing it. (vo) the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.

we've spent the break googling hero dogs. you should too. my thanks to michael, matt

miller, betsy woodruff, jonathan. most of all, to you for watching. "mtp daily" with the fabulous katy tur in for chuck starts now. >> welcome to monday. it's "meet the press daily." good evening. i'm katy tur in new york in for chuck todd. we have new major developing stories tonight. there are a lot of developments in the wake of this weekend's u.s. military operation that killed isis's leader abu bakr al-baghdadi. including, what it means politically for a white house embroiled in an impeachment inquiry. and that's where we're starting tonight. with the breaking news that house democrats are now going to hold a formal vote on impeachment. in a letter to house colleagues released this afternoon, speaker pelosi says they will be v