from president trump's call with the ukrainian president all as a way to provide visual aids to the folks in that room. a tense meeting but it felt like people were kind of losing energy even among the members on the committee. >> wow. thank you as always. we're going to be reading axios a.m. in a bit. you too can sign up for the newsletter at signup.axios.com. that does it for me. "morning joe" starts right now. i think that william taylor was a very impressive witness and was very damaging to the president. first of all, as you pointed out, he took very copious notes at almost every conversation when he put quotes in his opening statement, he said those were direct quotes from what was said. it also doesn't hurt that he has a voice like edward r. burrow, so he's a pretty impressive presence up there and very nonpolitical. he went out of his way to talk about what he knew, what he was

specifically testament too to. the only thing he talked about it was in the u.s. national security interests to support queue ukrai ukraine and he wasn't taking a position. >> welcome to "morning joe." it's thursday, november 14th. we have the white house reporter from the associated press, jonathan lemire. the host of the politics nation and president of the national action network, reverend al sharpton. nbc news correspondent heidi preside, and matt miller. and historian and author of soul of america and roth jer's professor at vanderbilt university jon meacham is with us. joe, it all started in open testimony yesterday, what a day. >> well, anybody that was

expecting a repeat of the testimony of robert mueller would have been surprised by what happened yesterday. we had some new revelations, some pretty shocking revelations, and also, though, mainly a lot of steady testimony that continues to blowholes in the republicans and the white house's defense. so we'll get to that in a little bit. it is something, though, how republicans are chasing their tails and coming up with laughable defenses that will, once again, be proven false in the coming days. >> the revelation from yesterday's impeachment hearing that directly implicates president trump in the ukraine scandal. it came from ambassador bill taylor who testified alongside state department official george kent in the probe's first public hearing yesterday. during his opening statement, ambassador taylor testified about a july 26th phone

conversation that happened just one day after trump's controversial call with the president of ukraine. watch. >> in the presence of my staff, at a restaurant, ambassador sondland called president trump and told him of his meetings in kiev. the member of my staff could hear president trump on the phone asking ambassador sondland about the investigations. ambassador and is lond told president trump the ukrainians were ready to move forward. following the call with president trump, the member of my staff asked ambassador sondland what president trump thought about ukraine. ambassador sondland responded that president trump cares more about the investigations of biden, which giuliani was pressing for. >> two sources tell nbc news that the aide who overheard the phone call inside that ukrainian restaurant is david holmes, the counselor for particular affairs at the u.s. embassy in ucrepe. ukraine. he is expected to testify behind

closed doors tomorrow. should be interesting. >> well, i mean, what's going to be really interesting -- >> were they on a burner phone? i mean what phone were they on? >> what's so funny is the republicans are now going back to what they tried at the beginning of this process with the whistleblower. and at the beginning of the process they say it's hearsay, it's hearsay, you can't trust the hearsay. poor lindsey, officiwhere he we law school didn't have a hearsay class. and then they rolled out a plethora of evidence that says it wasn't hearsay. so what did they then say? we can't move forward until we hear the hearsay. we can't move forward until we get the whistle-blower here who they were saying had hearsay. willie, the same thing is going to happen here now, the phone

call, it's secondhand, third hand, fourth hand, this is terrible, this is stupid. you can see it as my old professor pearson would say, like a freight train slowly coming at you out of the mist. you know what's going to happen. they're going to hear testimony from the person that was at the table and it will no longer be hearsay. so the dog continues to chase its tail and all we can do is sit back, look down amused, shaking our heads. because the republicans have no defense. >> and let's remember we don't even have to wait for that. the hearsay argument blew up when lieutenant colonel vindman testified, when he gave a deposition, because he was on the phone call, it was first hand. let's add in something else on the hearsay question. a lot of the first hand witnesses have been blocked from testifying in these proceedings. >> right. >> blocked by the white house and the state department. so the hearsay argument does not hold up. matt miller, some of the other arguments made yesterday the aid

was released. was released because the whistle-blower report came out and the hand was forced -- the white house was forced. also that ukraine didn't know the aid had been held up, that's blown up we know by report frin from the "new york times." argument after argument when you don't have the facts on your side, when you know you're in a corner, you present these arguments to the public who may not have heard them already that we all know from reporting fran from first-hand testimony have been blown up and undermined already. >> i was surprised how responsive the republican response was. if you've watched republican conspiracy theories in the past, ben gaas ghazi or fast and furious, you know, they usually will take one conspiracy theory and stick with it. yesterday they were pick all these points and not weaving them together in any coherent narrative. i thought that was a problem for them. i thought this new information

that ambassador taylor tofd and a member of his staff will testify to tomorrow was devastating. number one it knocks out this new argument they were trying to advance that the president just cared about corruption in ukraine. which was absurd. if you read the call transcript he doesn't care about corruption in ukraine. he only cares about joe biden. but i think it was really important because it really jams gordon sondland who will be a key witness. because his previous testimony said didn't know, had he no idea that burisma and joe biden, he never heard anyone talk about joe biden until after the call transcript was released in september. and now you've got gordon sondland, a witness who's going to come in and say that is flat out untrue. i think it puts gordon sondland in a really difficult position. if i were him i'd be worry about coming clean and telling the truth about what i know about my conversations with the president when i come up next week. >> he's got to worry about perjury. he's also going to worry about

lying under oath. the guy does not want tend too in jail because he lied for donald trump. he can just call michael cohen and find out that that doesn't work very well. jon meacham, let's see in also on a couple of arguments that the republicans made yesterday that are just preposterous. that is the aid, they ended up getting the aid anyway so this extortion didn't work. of course, we can look at, you know, fbi often kicks down doors and arrests conspirators while they're making the bomb or planning the bank robbery. it's still a crime reasoned o an and, of course, watergate not a successful burglary. a third-rate, botched burglary that brought down an entire governme government. just because donald trump failed at extorting the ukrainians,

doesn't mean it's not impeachable. >> and in watergate, if the burglary was third rate, the cover-up was fourth or fifth rate because it didn't work because here we are talking about it. and president nixon went back to san clemente. whoops. but still impeachable. you had republican support for the first article, which was about the cover-up, the attempted obstruction of justice which is the more serious term. i don't think -- i watched a great deal yesterday and i kept, you know, trying because we're ordered by the enlightenment example to keep an open mind, to weigh contrary evidence. but there just wasn't any contrary evidence to the idea that the president has abused his power in a remarkable way. i thought one of the great moments which was -- and i

loved, mika, we haven't mentioned this, that your father was mentioned as a paragon as was henry kissinger for george kent. but looking at secretary kent or secretary kent and ambassador taylor, you know, you sort of saw the ghosts of dean achison and robert lovett up against the guys on the republican side these contestants from the apprentice. >> right. >> you get this cultural clash between the wisemen of the old era and these eyes guys. and wise guys. i think that's a revealing cultural point here. they were playing by a certain set of rules. and it was about memos and it was about listening when they were in the room with foreign leaders and trying to execute american policy over parties --

presidents of different parties. wholly a universe that many of us were accustomed to, not always right, you know, vietnam not so great, you know. so the long history of this is mixed. but that's what human nature is like. but you had this world of facts and policy and the kind of -- i don't want to overplay the dignity part, but a dignity about and a seriousness about the american experiment up against guys who were talking about conspiracy theories that i found myself googling and they went pretty much to the same places. so my own sense is the facts are the facts whether -- whether congressman and senators are going to say, you know what? this is what it is, that's where we are. >> yeah, well -- >> the divide actually it's even

sharper. you could do a divide between illiterate -- litter rate testimony and an immaterilliter defense by republicans. and just to be fair to the republicans, they've promised to be illiterate. they promise not to read reports. they've promised to go in and to be stupid when these hearings start. and they -- that's at least one promise that they -- they fulfilled. but while you had witnesses testifying about facts, and being as state forward as possible in talking about u.s. foreign policy, you had the republican side dredging up facebook conspiracy theories that really it wasn't a fair intellectual fight. and there was a divide between the literate and the illiterate. those who spent their entire

life trying to better themselves, to forge u.s. foreign policy, and those who promised americans that they were not going to read or be prepared for these hearings. and, well, that's exactly what happened, mika. >> it was hard to watch some of these incredible public servants get treated with such disrespect. ambassador bill taylor tied acting white house chief of staff mick mulvaney to the, quote, irregular diplomacy team actively working between washington and ukraine. >> i encountered an irregular formal channel of u.s. policy making with respect to ukraine. unaccountable to congress. a channel that included then special envoy kurt volker, u.s. ambassador to the european union gordon sondland, secretary of energy rick perry, white house chief of staff mick mulvaney, and, as i subsequently learned, mr. giuliani. >> in fairness, this irregular

channel of diplomacy, it's not as outlandish as it could be, is that correct? >> it's not as outlandish as it could be, i agree. >> and the second member of the irregular channel is ambassador sondland who is senate confirmed, ambassador to the eu. so his involvement here, while, you know, not necessarily part of his official duties as the ambassador to the eu certainly is not outlandish for him to be interested and engaged pursuant to the president or secretary pompeo's direction, correct? >> it's a little unusual for the u.s. ambassador to the eu to play a role in ukraine policy. >> okay. and it might be irregular, but it's not outlandish? >> yeah, ambassador taylor left

completely speechless on that one. >> jonathan lemire, the defrsen is going well in a sort of washington general sort of way. the globetrotters are only boating th beating them by 103 points. >> there's only so many things, i suppose. you're right. i think that was representative of what we've seen from the beginning of this intire impeachment inquiry, that the represents have really struggled to defend what happened. the facts are not on their side. they're left grasping for conspiracy theories. david nunes spent the first minutes of his opening statement in the fever swamps of the extreme right trying to push back on some of this stuff. we've seen the president, you know, ordering the republicans in the house and the senate to not fight on process, to not suggest that, hey, quid pro quos, maybe it's not the best scenario but it's not unusual.

it's certainly not impeachable. instead to try to say defend what he did on its merits and that's left a lot of them very uncomfortable. the president himself yesterday attempted to take the position that he was too busy to pay attention, despite the fact that he tweet and retweeted about three dozen times during the day when he spoke to reporters twice at the oval office alongside president erdogan of turkey. he said that he was -- he tried to project the idea that he was attending to the people's business and therefore was not focused in on what was happening on the other side of pennsylvania after hevenue. there's been some frustration among white house allies and the president and his confidants thinking that the republicans missed and opportunity yesterday, that it wasn't a great day for them. they certainly are aware that these career officials, these decorated officials who are hard to malign, they work for both republicans and democrats, carried the day with their respectability, with their note taking, and their commitment to a strong american foreign policy. >> yeah, just does republicans

no good to try to trash these foreign policy professionals. oh, yeah, donald trump too busy to watch. also he doesn't watch "morning joe" anymore. hi, donald, how you doing? >> oh, goodness. don't trigger him. >> so, reverend al, it seems to me, rev, that if these republicans were intelligent, if they did read books, of course but they promised us they're not going to and we have no reason to doubt their word, do we? but if, rev, they -- they had -- they had any common sense, they would have followed the advice of one of the president's most aggressive defenders several weeks ago who said, listen, he did it, all right some everybody knows he did it. the evidence is going to come out that he did it. yes, there was a quid pro quo.

yes, donald trump shook down the ukrainians to get dirt on joe biden. okay. let's just admit that up front and say, okay, yeah ar, he did so what? it's not impeachable. and that is the sum of the republicans' argument because they've been fighting this and talking about hearsay and how it was a botched burglary and talking -- no, it's been drip, drip, drip, drip. instead of just admitting that the president did extort the ukrainians and go from there. but they haven't done it, they've mishandled it and every day say new revelation, every day is a new embarrassment, every day is another reason for more americans to suspect donald trump should possibly be impeached and removed from office. >> that was the most startling thing to me about yesterday is they seemed to go back to try to

defend what is clearly indefensible. it would have been a much better strategy to go with, as you said, where they had said, yes, he did it but it is not impeachable and doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable act pot they weact. they went back to prove what is clearly evident that happened. to act that ambassador miller would have just fabricated that a staff member was in a restaurant and heard what they heard, if you're going lie, you don't need to go through a staff member in a restaurant. it was so elaborate that clearly the american public looking at this man that personifies dignity telling this story, you'd have to believe it because if you were going to go through telling some fairytale, you certainly wouldn't have an elaborate fairytale like that. it would have been much better for them to say, yes, did he it but it doesn't rise to the level of a high crime or idea and

let misdemeanor and let's move on. they're trying to insult the against of the american people and i think it's going to come back on them. it was absolutely a flop for them. >> you know what they say in ohio state? that's strauss. but anyway, willie, i talked about this at the beginning. but it's fascinating. they attacked the whistle-blower for providing hearsay evidence. and then they're made fools of when all of these people testify and it's, of course, not hearsay, it's first hand evidence. and now they're doing the same thing with this phone call in the restaurant say oh, it's hearsay, second, third, fourth, you know, fourth-rate testimony, he said/she said. they're going to -- have the guy testify who is at that table.

they're going to take americans to that table where they heard donald trump demanding updates on the shakedown and whether they had agreed to the biden investigation. so once again, couple of days from now, republicans are going to look like idiots again. >> and what are they going to say to that testimony? well, he was there, he heard the president's voice through the phone, how could have heard that? he doesn't know what the president said. there's also a whole other question that you alluded to, which is the ambassador of the eu blowing up the president's cell phone at all hours of the night to report back on ukraine. lieutenant colonel vindman is going to testify next week. he was on the phone call, he heard it with his own ears and he'll testify to that. >> i just want to ask, willie, do they want hearsay or not? they complain about the whistle-blower and hearsay, so they've got somebody in vind

bhoon was on tvindman who was on the call. and now lindsey graham going i'm not going to let this come to the senate until i hear from the whistle-blower. why? you said his testimony was hearsay. and now we find out the evidence and now you prefer hearsay evidence to a first-hand account? why, lindsey, you're changing your tune and it seems almost as if you're not interested in the truth getting out. that's fascinating. >> remember, he's chief among republicans who said i'm not even going to read the transcripts of the testimony. i'm not interested. the whole process is a sham, even though i'm the chair of the judiciary committee and a potential juror in this impeachment trial. heidi, i'm curious as you cover capitol hill how both sides feel like it went yesterday. we sat at this moment yesterday morning, 24 hours ago, we said on the democratic side don't let it become a circus. i think chairman schiff achieved that. he didn't take some of the taunts and bait put out by republicans. on the republican side we heard that argument from steve castor,

the gop counsel, that wasn't some last ditch hail mary, he was the first line of questioning and his argument seemed to be, well, it wasn't that outlandish. don't forget hunter biden, that wasn't that bad too. which swhant we're talk bug in the impeachment inquiry. how do both sides feel that it went yesterday. >> there was a poinment moment where bill taylor was asked, hey, attempted robbery, attempted murder, those are still crimes, right? and bill taylor said, right. because the republican argument seems to be here that the president never robbed the bank and we haven't talked to the guy who called the cops. but let me just walk you through some of those arguments specifically because in speaking with democrats, they said basically that the republicans were asking you to disbelieve what you just heard in the hearing on point number one, that there was no pressure on ukrainians. bill taylor said that the ukrainians at a certain point

really became desperate, that the defense minister was so upset he was going to fly to washington and that after that july 25th phone call that zelensky really was ready to cave. number two, that the aid was not jeopardized. this is something i want to flag because did i speak with democrats and in the coming days what you're going to hear is that the aid was jeopardized. that the aid was a couple weeks away from essentially the ukrainians getting nothing. the aid wasn't released until september 11th. the end of the fiscal year was september 30th, guys, so if the whistle-blower hadn't come forward, who knows what would have happened, because as it was pointed out, it only got released two days after the whole whistle-blower report blew up and it seemed like zelensky was on his heels and ready to cave to the president. the third point, that there was no investigation into the bidens. again, it seemed like they were ready to agree to that, it was

just of that zelensky didn't have a chance to go on cnn because everything blew up. final point, in speaking with representative keating from massachusetts, he sits on the foreign affairs committee on the europe subcommittee and he said, look, in addition to some of this additional evidence that came out today, there was something very important that happened. because in speaking to my constituents back home, the piece that's been missing is that people haven't understood how this affects them personally. well here you have a decorated vietnam veteran threatening to quit his post cabling the secretary of state for the first time because he is saying that russia is violating all of the security protocols, treaties and rules that have kept us and europe safe for 70 years. and here we are trying to -- to kneec kneecap the country that's the frontline against all of that aggression. this is something that we should all be concerned about. this is something that affects

us, that affects your grandchildren, that the president came this close, think about it, two weeks from pulling all of this funding from beneath the ukrainians because we're going to see also in additional testimony that this money accounts for a significant portion, not only of their military aid, but their gdp. >> well, to that point, matt miller, we want to get your take on both ambassador bill taylor and state department official george kent explaining why withholding of ukrainian aid was a big signal to russia. >> he also testified that russia was watching closely to gauge the level of american support for ukrainian government. why is that significant? >> this is significant, mr. chairman, because the ukrainians in particular under this new administration are eager to end this war and they are eager to end it in a way that the russians leave their territory.

these negotiations, like all negotiations, are difficult. ukrainians would like to be able to negotiate from a position of strength or at least more strength than they now have. >> if the assistance had been cut off, he would have been much weaker in his negotiations with the russians. >> the russians may have taken it as an invitation to actually take military action against ukraine, is that right? >> the russians always look for vulnerabilities, and they know that the united states has supported ukraine. if they -- if the russians determine or suspect that that support is lessened or not there, they will likely take advantage. >> they could have pounced? >> they could have taken advantage. >> and that, matt mill, he er, exactly the point, is it not? >> it is.

as nancy pelosi said, it always comes back to russia with you. i don't think that the president withheld this aid or that he was pressuring ukraine because he wanted to help russia. i think he was doing it because his ultimate goal was to uhurt his political opponents. but i don't think he cared that withhelding this aid helped russia. i think earlier this in this sc the president saw on television that a u.s. ship was being deployed to the region, being deployed to ukraine as a symbolic effort. the president called john bolton at home and complained about it. there is something about russia that he is, at best, indifferent to standing up to russia and at worst he encourages their aggression around the world. and think we see that in this scandal as we've seen it really throughout his term in office. >> all roads lead back to russia. matt miller, thank you. and still ahead on "morning joe" -- >> i think we need to say it a little more directly. going back to december, 2015.

>> that's right. >> when he first pledged his failty and loyalty to vladimir putin by attacking the united states. he's somewhere in between, we don't know where. we will one day, but at the very least he's a useful idiot or perhaps it's what john bolton is now saying in public, and that is donald trump's foreign policy is not run by what's in the best interest of the united states of america, it's not run to protect the american people, it is run for what's in the best interest of his bottom line and it's run to protect his bank accounts. it's all about the money. >> the russia, turkey, saudi

arabia, all interesting. >> well, his sons -- his sons clearly both said most of their money before he ran came from russia. the president bragged that the saudis loved trump's toys. >> yeah. >> they paid him $150 million or so buying trump's toys. the turks, what is it? do they have two towers i think? one or two towers in istanbul. maybe it's the two tours they have in the philippines. i can't remember because he always put his trump towers, it seems, in places where autocrats and people who did not respect democracy rule. you don't have a trump tower in paris or london, i don't think, or any where in germany. it's always where hardened autocrats and dictators run. and he's been desperate to get a donald trump tower in moscow now for decades. >> all right. still ahead on "morning joe," the number two democrat in the house, majority leader steny hoyer joins the conversation. plus, congressman joaquin castro who is front and center at the

impeachment hearing yesterday on capitol hill. and a potential shake-up to the democratic presidential field is expected as soon as today. we'll talk to reverend sharpton about that. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. at. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. without my medication, my small tremors would be extreme. without it, i cannot write my name. i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month. prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop.

join us in fighting for what's right. when youyou spend lessfair, and get way more. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com

seaonly abreva cany to help sget rid of it in... ...as little as 2 1/2 days when used at the first sign. abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. abreva acts on it. so you can too. it's an honor to tell you that [ applause ] thank you. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

welcome back to "morning joe." we have breaking news. deval patrick, former governor of massachusetts and reportedly early on an early favorite of barack obama and the people around the former obama administration, people that led that administration has decided after passing ton laon it last has decided he is going to enter the race for president of the united states. there are a lot of people saying perhaps there's not an opening for him. rev, i'm curious what you think because we know right off the bat that if you just look at it

on the surface, we don't know how he'll perform in the presidential contest. but it certainly has to be a concern to elizabeth warren that another massachusetts political figure, in this case a governor, who was seen by the people of new hampshire, new hampshire's basically a boston media market for eight years is jumping into that race. and so may cut into her support in new hampshire. and then the next race, one that we've talked about an awful lot, south carolina. other than joe biden, there isn't a candidate that is really able to do well in the churches, really able to do well in moving older black voters. i'm curious what your thoughts are on deval patrick's ability to do well in new hampshire and possibly south carolina and be a factor in this race. >> deval patrick could end up being the quiet storm in this race. he doesn't make a lot of noise, but he can certainly drown some of the other opponents. when you look at the impact that he would have on elizabeth

warren being that he was elected and re-elected governor in the state that is overwhelmingly white, he could get white and centrist votes and his affiliation and close association with barack obama and the fact that he can go south and has the cadence of a minister to older voters, i mean, if you look at his speech at the 2016 democratic convention, it probably was the best one there outside of probably michelle obama. and i think be that you really have seen someone enter the race that cause concern for elizabeth warren and bernie sanders who needs the help in new hampshire. and the two black candidates, kamala harris and cory booker can't ignore he has the gravitas, he is more centrist. he also gives a problem as to whether michael bloomberg can come in as a scentrist to swoop

in. i think he has reshuffled the cards and it's going to have a real impact on where this election goes. >> jonathan lemire, couple things if you're looking for the american dream, here it is in deval patrick, grew up in the robert taylor homes in the south side of chicago, raised by his mother, went to harvard, harvard law school, grew up to become the governor of massachusetts. we'll find out if democrats were sincere in their deep concerns about bane capital. but it is late and he acknowledges that in his announcement, it's late to get in in terms of fundraising, getting on ballots, the deadline is tomorrow for new hampshire. where does he fit in. what do you think his calculation was jumping in? >> it is late jumping in. he tells "the boston globe" that any run for president is a hail mary but this one say hail mary from two stadiums over because of how late it is and how established the field is. i think there are a few

different impacts. he is very close to former president barack obama so that the raise questions if obama didn't tell him, don't do this, what does that say about how obama feels about vice president biden's candidacy. we know he's not going to offer any sort of endorsement until the nominee has been selected. we know this raises questions for cory booker through the business friendly moderate who could play well potentially with african-american voters, it's a sign that his campaign has not taken off just yet despite that he's well organized in iowa and hope doing well there. it represents a real difference from what we're seeing from former new york city mayor michael bloomberg. he has not officially jumped in yet. patrick is going to today. patrick said he's going to the early states, south carolina, iowa. bloomberg has let it be known if he were to jump in he's going to skip all of that. he's going to use his finances and basically unlimited wealth to play in some of the big states later on. he's going to skip the first four, play in california, play

in the super tuesday states and try to make an impact there. patrick is certainly a long shot. there's some ripple effects here for other candidates. but at the 11th hour like this, we keep going back to the idea democratic voters keep telling us they're not looking for the field to expand, they're looking for it to shrink. they're frustrated by how many candidates are still in this race and i'm not sure there's an appetite for deval patrick, despite an impressive resume and great american story. >> deval patrick has been an analyst for cbs news and he's been on television critical to joe biden. interesting in sort of obama world. obama administration officials and aides love joe biden, they also love deval patrick. it will be interesting to see how people from the obama years sort of gravitate toward deval patrick and many of them are on the side of joe biden right now. >> many of them are. it's interesting, though, the president and those around him reportedly were pushing -- pushing deval patrick into the

race. and we, of course, heard that president obama, at times, was in iffy at best of joe biden's possible run. it will be interesting to see how much of obama world jumps in and helps deval patrick. you know, jon meacham, the events of the last week are very interesting as it pertains to michael bloomberg and now deval patrick. and it's very interesting in that if either one of those two candidates are successful in the least, that it shatters forever this political model that you have to throw a grand piano on your back and a knife between your teeth and hike up mount ki kilimanjaro for a year and a half campaigning and slogging and basically just killing yourself so you can put your stakes down in iowa and new

hampshire. the math never really made any sense. and it be really makes absolute -- because there's so few delegates awarded in those first two states. but, again, the oversized importance to these almost all-white states for a democratic primary that is very diverse, it hasn't made the greatest sense. i wonder if we may be seeing the beginning of a new business model, so to speak, for candidates who decide they -- because, look. deval patrick has come in and look at all the candidates who have already jumped in the race, raised tons of money, spent all the money and quit. and almost everybody else is teetering on the brink of basically being out of money anyway. right now they jump new fresh, they jump in new, and they can have a two, three-month sprint to these early contests. >> it's about a 45-year model,

and not many things last that long. 1976 president carter, governor carter makes the iowa caucuses into what they are now. it was followed quickly on james baker and george h.w. bush, studied that model as they went back to houston after the ford administration and planned kind of a -- it's hard to use the word george bush and insurgent in the same sentence, but he was running an insurgent campaign against ronald reagan. surprises them in iowa and got as only george h.w. bush could say, got the big mo which didn't last -- big mo didn't make it through new hampshire. but, you know, the model there was you surprise and you moved iowa for "x" months. you went to all the counties. you won. you were in that analog universe

because you got on the covers of "time" and news week and u.s. news report and everybody discovered you and wrote big pieces and suddenly you were kind of anointed as a first rank person. we're entirely disintermediated from that universe now. on the other side, no nominee of either the republican or the democratic party since 1976 failed to win one of the two of iowa and new hampshire. and so what bloomberg is potentially doing by pushing past iowa and new hampshire looking down the road, absolutely makes sense from a data and cultural point of view. it does not make so much sense from the modeling point of view we're accustomed too to. b but let's be clear, donald

trump is president of the united states. so all of these michael barone like rules that we use feel a little rickety. >> okay. well put. up next, i'm really looking forward to this, the wife of late congressman elijah cummings is making a run for his old seat. former maryland democratic chair maya rockeymoore comings is standing by. why she's the best person to carry out her husband's legacy. "morning joe" is back in a moment. sband's legacy. "morning joe" is back in a moment. i want you all to know it was not easy. but congressman chairman cummings did was not easy. and it got infinitely more difficult in the last months of his life when he sustained personal attacks and attacks on his beloved city. and while he carried himself with grace and dignity in all public forums, it hurt him.

because one thing you do not know about congressman cummings, he was a man of soul and spirit. he felt very deeply. he was very empathetic. it was one of his greatest gifts. and it was one of the sources of his ability to be a public servant and a man of the people. servant and a man of the people. we call it the mother standard of care.

it's how we care for our cancer patients- like job. when he was diagnosed with cancer, his team at ctca created a personalized care plan to treat his cancer and side effects. so job could continue to work and stay strong for his family. this is how we inspire hope. this is how we heal. we love you, daddy. good night. i love you guys. cancer treatment centers of america.

appointments available now. cancer treatment centers of america. of millions of americans during the recession. so, my wife kat and i took action. we started a non-profit community bank with a simple theory - give people a fair deal and real economic power. invest in the community, in businesses owned by women and people of color, in affordable housing. the difference between words and actions matters. that's a lesson politicians in washington could use right now. i'm tom steyer, and i approve this message. - [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. 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. i need all the breaks, that i can get. at liberty butchumal- cut. 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. ♪

joining us now, policy consultant and former chair of the maryland democratic party, maya rockeymoore cummings. she resigned from the post on monday and is now running for the congressional seat vacated by her husband congressman elijah cummings who died last month. me maya, it's good to see you again. >> good to see you, mika. >> we saw him living on in you. was this his wish, for you to succeed him? >> we did talk about it and he said that he thought i would be a natural successor so him. so we talked about it. and, you know, when we met, i was in the fight working on

capitol hill. house ways and means commit teen then for charlie wrangle. our relationship blossomed into a friendship and then a remance and we got married in 2008. i've been fighting alongside elijah all these years and doing my own work, you know, to defend and protect and expand social security, to make sure our kids have healthy nutritious meals and safe places to play and exercise. i have a body of work that shows that i can work across sectors and get things done. i'm ready to roll up my sleeves and help the baltimore region because we need change and i think that i can lead that. >> wonderful. >> well, you know we loved meet you at our wedding and we're so honored that you were there along with elijah. when we were talking to you before the funeral, you tried to convey to us how much it hurt elijah, the attacks on him personally, the attacks on your

great city of baltimore, his great city of baltimore. i think people -- people think that elijah was such a big man, so strong, such a man of deep faith that somehow those attacks couldn't pierce that armor, that spiritual armor. but you told us it hurt him so much that the city of baltimore was being trashed that way by the president. i wonder, is there a part of this run in you that you feel compelled to run, not only to defend elijah's wonderful legacy, but also to defend the people of baltimore against the attacks from this president and others? >> not just the people of baltimore, but the people of the united states of america. and frankly the world. this is the most dangerous regime in the history of this country. these people had launched a campaign of terror against elijah. this is a public servant, my

husband was a public servant who cared deeply about this country, who wanted to make sure our democracy was left intact so that our children would have an opportunity to live their best lives. and this administration piece by piece is trying to tear apart our constitution, our democratic norms, and certainly, you know, elijah was on front lines of trying uncover the corruption. and so the campaign of terror that this administration launched included all kinds of nefarious things. so, you know, what you all saw in the public with regards to the, you know, the president's public attack on the city of baltimore and elijah was just the tip of the iceberg. and so, you know, elijah was a man of deep empathy. he felt deeply. and, you know, sirnl in tcertai last months of his life it did not help that the attacks were coming from the highest office in the land and against our democracy and certainly my great

husband. >> maya, good morning. i want to remind our viewers here, you're no political novice, you were chairman of the democratic party. you know how the state works and baltimore works. what would be for you in this campaign the top one or two issues? because even as your late husband acknowledged, baltimore has its problems with violence and poverty. what do you think is top of mind for people in your district? >> economic security and economic development are number one. number two is health. i mean, i'm not talking just healthcare access, i'm talking about public health. gun violence is a public health matter and public safety is a big deal. with that universal access to healthcare. we need to make sure that we cover all people. we have an opioid crisis in this city we need to address. and certainly education. there are too many people, young people who are being left

behind. i never forget when a young man came up to elijah saying i wake up every morning here in baltimore city feeling like i'm in a coffin and i spend my day trying to claw my way out. that's simply unacceptable in the american city in the richest country in the world. we need to do better. we must do better. so the fight continues. my goal is to build on elijah's legacy and lay down my own markers. i mean, this is all important for the future of the city and the region and i look forward to helping baltimore prosper. >> 100%. maya, reverend al sharpton has a question for you. reverend al. >> i remember maya, one night at the white house when president obama was in i think it was a jazz concert and elijah and you were there and how passionate he was about various pieces of legislation. and you and him talking to me about it together, it was clear that you were partners as well as husband and wife.

so in many ways you're not continuing his legacy, it's continuing what you were already involved in and he would defer to you in a way that was unusual to me. as you go forward now in this race, are you also saying that i'm continuing my journey that elijah and i went and walked together and he would expect me to keep going forward as we deal with this president who attacked baltimore and attacked elijah and the things that he stood for? because i think that from my knowledge of you, the policies and the legislation was always more important than the theatrics. >> absolutely. and so thank you, reverend al. i have been fighting in the trenches for a long time. many people know me as a policy expert. i work in the areas of health, education, and income security. you know, i stood at the forefront of fighting against george w. bush's attack on social security in 2005. i was a leader to educate people about what a raw deal that was.

i've been working on behalf of working families all these years, and certainly women making sure that we're closing the pay gap and doing what we need to do to make sure that everybody is included. what we need, reverend al, in this country is an inclusion revolution. we need a zros that embraces all people. we don't have the luxury of leaving talent on the table. we need to invest in those communities and people that have been historically excluded so that they can be brought into the mainstream, made relevant to the 21st century economy and so that we can lift all boats. it's time for an inclusion revolution. >> you know, it's clear your years of service is one thing. but now, maya, it's so deeply fornl you on t personal to you given what has happened over the past year. your body of work as it pertains to elijah is you all shared in your passion for service. but i want to talk about the strength of you at this moment

in time. in this moment in the wake of the loss of your husband, the political scene in washington, the fight you want to take on, and the fight that you're taking on tomorrow as you go in for a double mastectomy, a preventative one, and still talking about that as it pertains to healthcare. you have a lot going on. >> yeah. yeah. so before running for congress was ever an option, before elijah's health took a deep turn for the worse, we were already in discussions about what i needed to do to affirmatively take reins over my health. my mother died of stage four breast cancer in 2015. last year my sister was diagnosed with it. you know, certainly it seems like we have some kind of genetic mutation, although it's not bracka. we have some kind of genetic mutation that runs in nigh my family. i decided along with elijah, we worked together to make the decision that i was going to get a preventative double mastectomy. and that is tomorrow. but this issue of breast cancer

facing women all over the country, but it's especially facing african-american women. we die at younger ages. we have later diagnoses. and so by the time we're diagnosed unfortunately it's too late. and so i want to do it before anything gets started. and so, you know, i'm making this decision to do it tomorrow and not postpone it until after the election because there will always be some other priority. i want to make sure i'm healthy and well and run this race and run it to win. >> absolutely. maya rockeymoore cummings, come back soon. thank you very much for being on the show this morning. reverend al, thank you as well. still ahead, despite the deadly offensive in northern syria, president trump told reporters yesterday he believes president erdogan has a great relationship with the kurds. we'll talk to a member of the senate foreign relations committee chris murphy about that and legal analyst with his impeachment hearing. that's ahead on "morning joe."

impeachment hearing. that's ahead on "morning j."oe make fitness routine with pure protein. high protein. low sugar. tastes great! high protein. low sugar. so good! high protein. low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein bars. try lemon cake. pure protein bars. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. i wish i could shake your hand. granted. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

make family-sized meals fast, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. note this important fact. the security assistance was provided to ukraine without the ukrainians having done any of the things they were supposedly being black mailed do. >> for the millions of americans viewing today, the two most important facts are the following. number one, ukraine received the aid. number two, there was, in fact, no investigation into biden.

>> president zelensky didn't announce he was going investigate burisma or the bidens. he didn't do a press conference and say i'm going to investigate the booitd bidenidens and buris he didn't tweet about it. president zelensky doesn't announce it before the aid is released on the 11th. >> what did president zelensky do to get the aid? the answer is nothing. he did nothing. did nothing. >> convicted of a crime i didn't even commit. attempted murder. now honestly what is that? do they give a nobel prize for attempted chemistry? oh really? this here is a personal call. >> so, willie, of course the simpsons had the side show bob defense. south park had the chewbacca defense. >> oh, yeah. >> and i guess jim jordan and the republicans have the strauss defense. he didn't do it.

that's strauss, man. >> the argument the republicans made strikes me has far reaching implications. if attempted, then question let a lot of people out of prison this morning. but we talked about it last hour. when you don't have a great set of facts to work with, you change the conversation as we heard right out of the gate from the ranking member devin nunes who went right to all the conspiracy theories, stuff you'd find in chatrooms, found their way into an impeachment inquiry hearing yesterday. >> right. so it's just unbelievable. from a group of people that said they weren't going to read the information. mika, this is, again, when the fbi kicks down doors and people are putting bombs together because they want to blow up the brooklyn bridge, you know. >> okay. >> they don't go can you kids go back to the playground and just do your thing? because you didn't actually blow up the brooklyn bridge, but you were trying to blow it up. >> right. >> that's the insanity of the

logic of every one of those republicans who are following what i now call the strauss defense. that's just straussman. >> well, still with joe, willie and me we have white house reporter for the associated press jonathan lemire. historian and author of the soul of america, jon meacham. and joining the conversation, former acting u.s. solicitor general neil. "new york times" reporter is with us and senior white house reporter for nbc news digital shannon pettypiece joins us. joe. >> i'm just curious, jonathan lemire, since you cover the white house and you had a great article that was picked up across most of the country about how this impeachment process is different for donald trump because he can't control it. he can pretend he's not watching it, he cean't watch it because it's a constitutional process. >> that's right. >> because this is a process that was envisioned by our founders in 1789.

it's something he doesn't really understand because a guy that says that article two gives him complete power to do whatever he wants to do doesn't understand sort of that madisonian concept of checks and balances. i would guess he's very frustrated by this point. what can you tell us? >> that's right. i think it's important to take a step back. this is the fourth formal impeachment inquiry process that this nation has ever seen. this is a president who from his first moments in office has suggested that he was going to throw out every norm, break every guardrail, not honor the pra traditions and conventions of the presidency. and in many ways has gotten away with it, you could say. but this is a moment where that has changed because he's up against a constitutional enshrined process that seine visioned by the founders with these checks and balances. and this is a moment where he has lost control. yes, there's some speculation about, well, we already sort of know the outcome here, right? perhaps the house will likely

impeach, the senate likely won't remove. but that sort of doesn't matter in some ways. this is about -- this is bigger than just about this particular president. this is about the constitution, it's about the traditions of this nation, and that also frustrates this president who we have heard over the last couple of days has been really irritated with the lack of a strong defense from the allies on the hill and who do not think it went all that well for him. these are career officials, bipartisan officials who testified yesterday. republicans attempted to ding them on certain things but ended up in the fever swamps of the conspiracy theories and didn't land too many punches. and now this is the process that's just beginning. the ukrainian ambassador goes on friday. more officials will testify in public next week and right now the president here does feel like this is spiraling out of his control. >> let's get to the revelation from yesterday's impeachment hearing that directly implicates president trump in the ukraine scandal.

it came from ambassador bill taylor who testified alongside state department official george kent in the probe's first public hearing yesterday. during his opening statement, ambassador taylor testified about a july 26th phone conversation that happened just one day after trump's controversial call with the president of ukraine. watch. >> in the presence of my staff, at a restaurant, ambassador sondland called president trump and told him of his meetings in kiev. the member of my staff could hear president trump on the phone asking ambassador sondland about the investigations. ambassador sondland told president trump the ukrainians were ready to move forward. following the call with president trump, the member of my staff asked ambassador sondland what president trump thought about ukraine. ambassador sondland said president trump cares more about the investigations of biden which giuliani was pressing for. >> two sources tell nbc news

that the aide who overheard the phone call inside that ukrainian restaurants is david holmes, the counselor for political affairs at the u.s. embassy in ukraine. he is expected to testify behind closed doors tomorrow. neil, i feel like that was kind of a bombshell with this phone call, never heard of that before. it should be very interesting to hear from the staff member himself. >> absolutely. so i think that we heard yesterday that ties the president to this whole ukraine conspiracy to the bidens. that has two implications. one, it shows that trump himself was involved, it wasn't some shadow foreign policy by others in his orbit. and number two, ambassador sondland who's already had to come back and recollect his testimony because he suddenly remembered a whole bunch of conversations that he forgot about the first time, now has to come in and explain to the

congress of the united states how is it that he forgot about a phone conversation he had with the president of the united states about all of this? which he hasn't brought forth beforehand. and as jonathan was saying, impeachment is not just an outcome, it is also a process. and this is the process working out, mika, day in and day out and it's going to anger the president, but it is absolutely something called for by our constitution. regardless of what happens at the end of the day, however the senate votes, this is about the most solemn and important inquiry we could imagine. because when we learned just in one day of testimony yesterday is that if the president had his way, he would have gotten secret help in a campaign against his chief political rival and americans would have never known about it. >> neal, i'm curious as an attorney what you thought about the defense of president trump yesterday put forth by republicans. the idea was to have gop counsel lead the questioning because he would be viewed in some way as professional and nonpartisan.

he immediately lept to all questions about hunter biden and why he was on the board and whether or not ambassador taylor and undersecretariy kent though that was appropriate. he pushed him to say this was bad, this back channel foreign policy they were running, giuliani and others, but it wasn't outland inn. bill taylor could only laugh at that claim and suggestion. and then you go down the line. the aid was eventually released. that the ukrainians didn't know the aid was being held up. all of those have been shot down previously. as a defense attorney, what did you think with those set of facts, how would you have defended him and could you have defended him? >> yipes. i sat there watching the hearings and i was thinking i'm a good lawyer but i don't know what i'd say if i'm the defense lawyer at that point. the argument that they did make were weak. one, the aid ultimately flowed. that's like the bank robber saying, well, i didn't rob the

bank because the cops busted me on the way. so, you know, no harm no foul. that's never been the principle and the law. here the timeline is so devastating. so the whistle-blower files his report on august 12th that goes immediately to internal channels in the intelligence community and the intelligence community lets the congress know about it on september 9th. on september 10th the house sends the against community in a letter saying we want more information about this whistle-blower. and then low and behold, the next day on september 11th the aid flows. the idea that, you know, this is just, you know, no harm no foul, the reason why this shadow foreign policy that to help trump didn't happen is is because he got caught red handed. so, yeah. and then there's this other defense that the counsel tried to float which was, well, there's no first-hand witnesses to the president saying all this stuff. there's no first-hand information about the president's criminal intent. well, yeah, there are no

first-hand witnesses for one simple reason. the president is blocking not just himself, but all of the people around him, every executive branch employee, from going and testifying. and the only reason we heard yesterday from those two amazing gentlemen is because they went and defied a presidential order saying don't testify because they felt their duty to the country was that important. so, look, if we want to have first-hand witnesses from that's what the republicans want, i'm sure the democrats' view is bring it on. just come in and tell the truth. why are you so afraid do that? particularly in a process ultimately controlled by senate republicans. so n so it's not like you can say the deck is stacked against you. >> well, george kent testified that president trump's personal attorney rudy giuliani was damaging america's relations with ukraine with politically motivated investigations. >> over the course of 2018 and

2019, i became increasingly aware of an effort by rudy giuliani and others, including his associates lev parnas and igor fruman to run a campaign to smear ambassador yovanovitch and other officials at the u.s. embassy in kiev. i became alarmed as those efforts bore fruit. they led to the ouster of yovanovitch and hampered efforts to establish rapport with the now zelensky administration in ukraine. in mid-august, it became clear to me that giuliani's efforts to ginn up politically motivated investigations were now infecting u.s. engagement with ukraine, leveraging president zelensky's desire for a white house meeting. >> it's so weird to hear and think about all of these conspiracy theories and then to hear from the career diplomats who have served presidents on both sides of the aisle trying to figure out what's going on here. what more do you know about rudy giuliani and where he was getting all of this information? >> so, mika, from the very

beginning about 11 months ago rudy giuliani started trying to gather information, basically running around ukraine like he was some kind of freelance pi for president trump getting information on the ambassador. and the intent here really was to try to prove that the ukrainians were somehow corrupt and somehow involved in trying to steal the 2016 election. so basically trying to -- >> so, jeremy, let me ask you real quick. just on that point, the genesis of this relationship, the genesis of that plan, do we have information of when donald trump said, hey rudy, i want you to go over to ukraine? was rudy freelancing? we know later on, obviously, the call with zelensky the president kept saying talk to rudy, talk to rudy, talk to my attorney general, talk to rudy, talk to my attorney general. at that point we know the president was all in and that he

was using rudy in this very strange role. but how did the -- how did that begin? did trump send him over? was he just following orders? >> well, we know how this president likes to delegate and how often a lot of people around him are kind of operating under what they believe he would like them to do. i think, joe, the question that you ask is something that these hearings will have to uncover for the american people, for the members of congress who are ultimately going to decide the president's fate. you know, we don't know exactly at what point the president said do this or do not do this. but what's interesting is the way that this story has been woven from the very beginning through this information that rudy giuliani collected, through his ukrainian associates. and then through a key conduit in the american conservative media, a man by the name of john solomon who was a reporter at the hill until recently who basically rudy giuliani told my colleague ken vogel as we were reporting this story on who

exactly this guy john solomon is, he said, all right, i can't get anybody to pay attention to this information that i've uncovered, that i think is so devastating towards the bidens. so wham i going t am i going to it? so he gives it to this conservative journalist who starts to weave the story together of the ukrainians as these corrupt entities that are essentially involved in trying to interfere with american elections when really the source for that information, the primary source that rudy giuliani provided to this journalist john solomon was a prosecutor in ukraine we know to be corrupt who is now under criminal investigation in ukraine. >> so we know that the white house has not had an official war room to defend against itself against this impeachment to this point. shannon, i was struck yesterday. there was an effort to have some sort of rapid response from the campaign from some trump allies,

some outside forces to try to push back, to try continue to ject their own narrative into this. the talking points that we saw from press secretary grisham and eric trump, the president's son was at the matter, the hearings were boring, that was a word we heard a lot. also this may have been a foreign policy disagreement, that was their claim, that taylor and kent were making, but it was not an peeshl offenimpea offense. what are you hearing and what do they think they need to do going forward? this is a process that's just starting and it's going to get more intense in the days ahead. how do they plan to combat it? >> despite everything that happened yesterday which you have all outlined, i think there's a genuine sigh of relief inside the white house. i know some of that is spin, but i think there's a genuine sense of feeling like, okay, there were no big new revelations that substantially changed the narrative. they do not think any republican senators are going to change their mind based off of what they heard yesterday, which in the short-term is really what

matters making sure they hold in those republican senators and there's no sort of jailbreak there. and on the public front, we're in month two of this. they have seen their numbers hold up among republicans. they feel their numbers are holding up in those battleground states, michigan, ohio, wisconsin, the places that really matter despite what you see in the national polls. and the president's approval rating, while it is bad, has been bad his entire presidency. and even among the midst of this they see his approval rate offing holding in that 39%, 40%. so there is not a sense, at least of yesterday, that their hair's on fire. but of course this president, his administration, it's the frog boiling in water mentality. they have been told so many times your mayor is on fire, the temperature keeps getting turned up and we don't really know when that moment's actually going to come, you know, when this is for real. that's always a concern among them. but for now, i think they are feeling confident that the

democrats have positioned this as their strongest witness there are was supposed to be coming out with a bang. we'll see what happens in the polls in the coming days, but there's not a sense in the white house among the president's allies that there was any substantial change to the narrative that could, you know where are affect republicans or voters in some way. >> interesting. and speaking of conspiracy theories, top minority party member of the house intelligence committee congressman devin nunes wove many of them into his opening statement. and diplomat george kent taking a scalpel to debunk them. >> in the blink of an eye we're asked to simply forget about democrats on this committee, falsely claiming they had more than circumstantial evidence of collusion between president trump and russians. we should forget about them reading fabrications of trump/russia collusion from the steele dossier into the congressional record. >> i just want to be clear that

some government officials oppose president trump's approach to ukraine, but many had no idea what concerned him. in this case, it was numerous indications of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election to oppose his campaign and support hillary clinton. alexander cha loupa admitted that she works with officials in washington, d.c. to dig up dirt on the trump campaign. she revealed that ukrainian embassy officials themselves were also working directly with reporters to trooid trade information and leads about the trump campaign. >> now, are you aware that this is all part of a larger allegation that ukraine interfered in the 2016 election? >> yes, that is my understanding. >> and to your knowledge have there any factual basis to

support the allegation that ukraine interfered in the 2016 election? >> to my knowledge, there's no factual basis, no. >> and who did interfere in the 2016 election? >> i think it's amply clear that russian interference was at the heart of the interference in the 2016 election cycle. >> let's move to the third excerpt that i mentioned related to vice president biden. biden was the front runner for the democratic nomination in the 2020 election. and mr. kent, are you familiar, as you indicate in your opening statement, about these allegations related to vice president biden? >> i am. >> and, to your knowledge have there any factsuual basis to support those allegations? >> none whatsoever. >> wow. >> jon meacham, devin nunes and the rest of republicans using bad sources and bad lies in an attempt to throw up a bad defense. and it just didn't work yesterday regardless of what donald trump and others inside

the white house might be saying. yesterday was a very bad look for the republican party and people who have been republicans and conservatives their entire life said as much last night that they were embarrassed to be republicans. >> well, that's a perennial problem over the last three years, isn't it? and -- >> it is. >> -- it may be a disease without a cure for the foreseeable future. one of the things that struck me yesterday was while i think self-evidently the president of the united states was participating in the architect of a plot against the sovereignty of the 2020 presidential election using american foreign policy and our -- putting our national interest at flisk order risk in benefit his own candidacy. that's the heart of this. there's not a heck of a lot of argument about it.

the only argument, seems to me, it didn't work. and it didn't work because of the whistle-blower. you've laid out the timeline. and i think in some ways the whistle-blower's the most important person in america right now. usually it's john roberts. but right now it's -- it's the whistle-blower. and i'm fascinated by and explain this to me if you can, why the republicans, lindsey graham and others, are so hostile about this when i think a very plausible case can be made that without the whistle-blower, this plot rolls forward and who knows when it blows up. you know, look, when you have rudy giuliani and igor and whatever running around midtown manhattan smoking cigars in the grand havana room and trying to plot against america, it's not going to stay secret forever, it's just not going to happen. >> right. >> the whistle-blower actually

gave -- gives the republicans a reason to vote against impeachment. they would find one anyway, let's be very clear, before twitter goes crazy. what the president did in the record now, to my mind, is clearly impeachable and clearly removable. because he was giving away, he was compromising the sovereignty of our elections for personal benefit. but he released the aid because he got caught. i understand what everybody's saying about the law, i get that. but politically, that gives republicans who are scared of that strong support number that their polsters's handing them a reason to say it didn't work. jim jordan -- actually i would urge people, watch the jim jordan questioning yesterday which i was expecting to be more of a thunder dome kind of thing. it's actually really revealing

because he walked ambassador taylor through this particular defense. it didn't happen. now, it would have happened, but that's going to be the argument in foxland and foxland of course now as george h.w. bush would say, has had mission creep. >> right. you're exactly right. the side show bob defense that republicans are trotting out that it was only attempted murder and people don't get a nobel prize for attempted chemistry, that argument can only be put forward because, well, because of the whistle-blower and because the whistle-blower came out. but, willie, it's all a distraction and a smoke screen. donald trump is make those poor people in kentucky wear the read the transcript, it wasn't a transcript. so he catches on to a phrase, he

shoots the smoke screen out, it doesn't matter that it's insanity, that it's a lie, that it's a false. and in this case, poor lindsey graham has to go out and say i gotta hear the whistle-blower. well, again, they were attacking the whistle-blower for being hearsay. now we have first-hand evidence of it and now they want to go back and hear the guy that they attacked for hearsay. again, makes no sense. all of his arguments, all of his concerns have been proven. and yet, you know, and the person who's great, kurt is great on this stuff when he talks about all the times that republicans use the whistle-blower for fast and furious and benghazi and the whistle-blower. it's siank fied and they throwig

whatever mud at the wall they can throw and hope it will stick. >> still throw process up against the wall. opening statement devin nunes talked about this star chamber, secret process locked away in the basement of the capitol. it was in the basement because that's where the scif is, he knows that. but they're trying to create mystery that's very clear to people and it was made perhaps more clear who you have two people who have served republicans and democrats say i'm not here to help you decide whether or not the offensives we're laying out are impeachable, i'm here to tell you what i know. i'm here as a fact witness to tell you what happened. and jim jordan, others tried to get them to say, do you think this is impeachable? they wouldn't take the bait. bill taylor rejected the idea he was a star witness he's was named by devin nunez. he said i'm just here to tell you what happened. i guess the question is what happens from here? we know the attention span is short in america.

we know she's hearings will go on for weeks. we'll have marie yovanovitch, next week lieutenant colonel vindman. but people will begin to tune this out. it will become wallpaper on the television at some point. so how would you recommend democrats proceed here? they had good witnesses yesterday to begin the process. what should they do from here? >> well, the democrats are building both the political and legal case. but to build a legal case, they're doing it exactly right. first, closed interviews and then second open interviews. and the reason to sequence it that way is because when people come in in quiet like ambassador sondland, they'll say one thing. but then as other witnesses come forward and they learn, oh, i wasn't actually totally truthful, they'll have to come in and correct their statements. and ambassador sondland of course is going to have to come in again and address that testimony from yesterday and take one of two stances, either, number one, i now remember a conversation i had with the president in a restaurant on a cell phone that i somehow forgot

about. or, number two, ambassador taylor was lying yesterday. and good luck with the second one giving that man's ethos in credibility. but we're going to see that kind of dynamic playing out over the next month with other witnesses. maybe not in such stark terms. and then i think it moves into the more political realm. but i think for people who right now rush and talk about the politics and where the senators are is really, really premature. and the one last thing i'd say is as we think about it from the legal case, the reason why, you know, attempt is always considered criminal and why we don't let people get off when they say, oh, the crime wasn't committed, is twofold. number one, if someone does this stuff in secret and gets caught, the law presumes they're going to do other bad stuff in secret and it's hard to get them caught because they don't particularly hear when you have the president and his massive powers over secrecy. and number two, deterrence. what message are we going to send to a future president? if you're a republican, think

about what, you know, president elizabeth warren would do or barack obama, whoever, pick your president, and say is that the way we want a president to behave? running a secret foreign policy, even if he got caught this time, they won't always get caught and our constitution demands a little more than that. >> all right. thank you so much, neal. and, mika, you know, glen k gle kershner was on hardball last night saying is this how we want a president to act? so unphased by the ten counts of obstruction of justice that were laid out against him. the damning facts on his cooperation with russia. his attempt, his failed attempt to collude with russia. but as glen said last night, this is nothing more than arms for political dirt. during the iran contra, you

know, it was arms for host agag this is arms for political dirt. do we really want a commander and chief to be going around trying to trade arms for political dirt? does jim jordan really want the president of the united states, the commander and chief, to trade arms for political dirt? did devin nunes, if it's elizabeth warren who's president or joe biden who's president, do they want them to have the power to trade arms for political dirt? and are they really going to sit back and say, it's okay if the extortion plan to trade arms for political dirt fails. is that the precedent they want to set for the democrat who's going to be replacing donald trump next year? i don't think so. >> is that what america's supposed to look like? i mean, it's a president extorting a foreign leader.

jeremy peters, shannon pettypiece, thank you both for your reporting. and up next on "morning joe." >> i think the president has a great relationship with the kurds. many kurds live currently in turkey and they're happy and they're taken care of. >> oh, gracious. most of the senate along with the kurdish people would likely disagree with that. that's painful. member of the foreign relations committee democrat chris murphy joins us next on "morning joe." e democrat chris murphy joins us next on "morning joe." ♪ i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks.

humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. 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. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. geico would like to take a moment to say thank you to our military service members at home and abroad for all their hard work and sacrifice. we all sleep easier knowing you're out there keeping us safe. and on a personal note... sfx: jet engines ... i just needed to get that off my chest. thank you. geico: proudly supporting the military for over 75 years.

hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams. chris murphy joins us next on chris murphy joins us next on without my medication, my small tremors would be extreme.

without it, i cannot write my name. i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month. prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop. join us in fighting for what's right.

on september 5th, i accompanied senators johnson and murphy during their visit to the kiev. when we met with president zelensky, his first question to the senators was about the withheld security assistance. my recollection of the meeting is that both senators stressed that bipartisan support for

ukraine in washington was ukraine's most important strategic asset and that president zelensky should not jeopardize that bipartisan support by getting drawn in to u.s. domestic politics. i had been making and continue to make this point to all of my official ukrainian contacts. but the odd push to make president zelensky publicly commit to investigations of burisma and alleged interference in the 2016 elections showed how the official foreign policy of the united states was undercut by the irregular efforts led by mr. giuliani. >> that was ambassador bill taylor yesterday during the impeachment hearing recalling a meeting with senator chris murphy during their visit to ukraine. and center murphy joins us now. he's a member of the senate foreign relations committee. also with us, former u.s. senator now an nbc news and msnbc political analyst claire mccaskill.

nbc news white house correspondent kristen welker joins us and nbc news chief foreign correspondent richard engel. great group here. joe, take it away to the senator. >> yeah, senator, before we jump into the testimony from yesterday, ukraine, the kurds, turkey, all of those other things, let's talk about a landmark decision from two days ago that i saw you speak on. and that was the supreme court's decision to allow sandy hook parents to actually continue their lawsuit against the gun maker who made the ar-15 that the sandy hook murder spree was fueled by. let's talk about how important that is on two different grounds. first of all, the first ground, just that it allows these parents to seek justice and to not be -- not be stopped by some

arbitrary shield law that wouldn't protect automakers, he wouldn't protect cigarette makers, wouldn't protect any other industry in america. and secondly, and i think more importantly, i've been having gun rights activists tell me for years that the supreme court would find the ar-15 constitutionally protected and whatever followed heller. there is no evidence of that at all. no evidence in all of the cases that have come before the supreme court since heller in 2008. i find it hard to believe, senator, that the united states supreme court would allow parents to sue for the making of a gun that they believe is constitutionally protected. because, of course, they wouldn't. >> no matter what you think the second amendment is really protecting, there is absolutely no doubt that at the time of our founding there was oodles of gun

regulation. at that time many stalgtes didn allow for concealed weapons to be carried, lots of ammunition had to be registered with the government. i think any reading of the second amendment has to allow congress to be able to regulate the kind of people that owns guns and the kind of guns that are owned by civilians. but, yes, on this particular -- >> which is what the supreme court said that in heller just explicitly. you have a right to keep and bear arms, but that constitutional protection goes to handguns in your home and shotguns, basically. >> and so i think the supreme court will allow for either congress or state legislatures to be able to restrict a prrks 15 style weapons. as you mention dollars, all the sandy hook families are asking for is to be able to present their case in court. and the gun manufacturers during the 2000s, during the heyday of the nra's power in congress got this law passed which gave the gun industry more protection from liability than the makers of toy guns have. there's only one industry that you cannot sue for a faulty

product or a mislabeled or misadvertised product, and that is the gun industry. but, the supreme court said that they do not have full protection from liability and the sandy hook families are going to be able to go to court and say that the maker of the ar-15 that was used to kill 21st graders should not have been marketed to civilians, should not have been sold to civilians because it was specifically designed to be used by the military and law enforcement. and i'm glad that they're going to be able to at least present that case in court now. >> absolutely. we'll be following that along. and with you wasne want to ask e hearings yesterday. your name came up. what was your takeaway? >> it was devastating. this additional evidence that was presented yesterday that, in fact, the president of course was personally directing this extortion scheme just heightens the need to have an impeachment process that eventually may lead to a trial in the united states senate. and i think as one of your guests was making the point

earlier, you know, this is really about setting a precedent. and republicans have to ask themselves, do they really want a democratic president to be able to have a green light to use taxpayer dollars in order to try to dig up evidence that destroys republicans in the future? because once you let this cat out of bag, once you telegraph that it's okay for a president to use the massive powers of his or her office in order to try to win re-election or destroy people who don't agree with him or her, then i don't know how you correct for that and put it back together. and i just think that republicans are going to rue the day that they normalize this behavior in the way they're doing now. >> it's also telling the world that this is how dwo business now. >> that's what people ask themselves. is this how we want to do business? claire, your assessment of the performance of democrats in the room, republicans in the room, and the two witnesses. >> you know, think first of all

the witnesses oozed credibility. you really couldn't have had stronger witnesses. you know, these guys aren't political. they didn't have it out for trump. for gosh sakes, taylor was appointed by trump. think they were the stars because they were calm and factual and credible. i thought the republicans, it was confusing to me the shifting defenses. you know, he didn't 0 do it. well, he didn't do it because other people were doing it but if he did it it's okay. hearsay, hearsay, hearsay. as i said yesterday, shut up about the hearsay if you're blocking the witnesses. if you want the witnesses that were in the room when this extortion scheme was hatched, then the president needs to say to rudy giuliani, get over to congress and testify, get over bolt d bolton, get over mulvaney. these are the people who have

first-hand knowledge and he is going to the mat to keep them from ever going under oath. >> you know, we've heard this morning, mika, that the white house considered yesterday to be a pretty successful day for them and breathed a sigh of relief. and just listening to the testimony, you know, maybe some people didn't think these guys were flashy enough. i think they were extraordinary witnesses, not against trump, but for the united states of america. >> that's right. >> for protecting american values and protecting american foreign policy from untoward influence. but if yesterday was a good day for the white house, i would certainly hate to see a bad day for them. >> yeah. kristen we will krelker, how di white house respond? was the president watching and what was his mood? >> he says he wasn't watching the this is the one who watches as we all know -- >> he looked stressed out later

in the day. >> he tried to dismiss this during his joint news conference with the president of turkey. the white house is trying to make the case this wasn't a bad day because they don't think it shifted public kopinion and the don't think it shifted the broader opinion among republicans in the senate. but they acknowledge there's some wild cards. one, what's the impact going to be? as you stretch out over several weeks as these hearings are on people's televisions day to day, will that have an effect? and then, two, the biggest wildcard. what's going to happen when gordon sondland testifies about that newly revealed phone call? the white house was caught off guard by that. so those are among the wild cards i think that are giving some jitters to the president and to his allies. the president's trying to remain presidential, sort of taking a page from the clinton playbook, he had that joint news conference yesterday, he's going to be on the road tonight. but, again, they're concerned about the effect of this over time. >> before we get to turkey,

richard engel, and the meeting with erdogan, let's just talk about this concept of all roads leading to russia. because we heard that again yesterday. it's something we saw during the campaign live on this show where candidate trump just could not say anything bad about putin, could not do it. you immediately our ears perked up like there's something wrong with this. and now -- >> look what he was holding up, he was holding up aid that would have been used to confront russia. >> how does that -- >> it wasn't other kinds of aid, it was military aid that was going to stop russian troops. >> something russia benefits from. >> absolutely. >> it's a favor for russia. it's helpful to russia. >> yes, it certainly is. >> i think that's part of what happened yesterday. you had these two career diplomats laying out that broader picture. and the history, frankly, of aid to ukraine as it relates to russia. >> it's a pretty open and shut case, frankly. you have the conversation that was president released his own transcript of it in which he says do this for me or you don't

get -- or you don't get the money. it was very, very obvious. then you have all these people who are involved who are in ukraine talking about it. there are text messages, they have the testimony, it's pretty clear what happened. >> and, joe, people working in and around this in ukraine in the interest of the united states of america were, from what we've heard, pretty shocked at what they kwr seeiwere seek. it as all happening in open air. >> well of course they were. and, you know, they were in a terrible position just like -- i will say ambassador volker was in a terrible position. if you believe like volker and a lot of these other foreign policy diplomats that they had to get the aid to ukraine to push back against putin's invasion, to send a message to putin that he couldn't continue his invasion westward. then you would do whatever it took to get them to say whatever they needed to say to get donald

trump to release that weapon. it was an arms for political dirt scheme and it put the ukrainians in the absolute worst position. and it's not a coincidence this is donald trump who's a bully. he picks on one of the weakest countries be in europe. he picks on a country that's been invaded already by his -- the man he admires the most on the world stage, vladimir putin, and has even said behind the scenes that they're not a real country. but, you know, richard, which, by the way -- >> it was just -- just gotten into office. >> right. >> that was like his first foreign policy experience. he just showed up in office and, by the way, the aid that you need is cut but we want you to reopen these investigations and look into the -- into joe biden. >> and the word was zelensky, this new president, had the most promise of being an anticorruption president of anybody. richard, let's change topics a little bit.

you're just the best at what you do. >> thank you. >> the best at reporting events in danger zones and i know that you're a journalist so you try not to take things personally. i know that had to be a challenge for you yesterday seeing the suffering that was going on with the kurds, understanding that the top u.s. envoy over there said that turkey was helping promote genocide in that area and ethic cleansing of the kurds. to hear the commander and chief say yesterday that he was a fan of erdogan and then say that the kurds were happy people had to be upsetting. and alex said we have the clip, let me play you the clip and then since you were on the ground and you saw these tragic events unfold before your eyes, i'd love to get your reaction to this clip. >> right. >> i will say that we've had a great relationship with the kurds and we fought with them

very successfully against isis. we fought together. we had -- we have great generals and we have great equipment and it certainly helped a lot. but we were very, very successful. and we captured, as i said before, 100%. i was going to when we were at 97% i was going to say, well, that sounds pretty high to me. and i was thinking about stopping it then and a lot of people said, please go to a hundred. and very quickly, very rapidly the military got the hundred i wanted to have there. but we have a great relationship with the kurds. we have had. we're with them now. we get along with them. by the way, i think the president, he may have some factions within the kurds, but i think the president has a great relationship with the kurds. many kurds live currently in turkey and they're happy an they're taken care of. >> yes. so first of all, erdogan does

not have a great relationship with the kurds. erdogan right now is invading the kurdish-held pockets in syria and the kurds there say they're facing ethnic cleansing, a deliberate, wide-spread campaign of ethnic cleansing by the turkish military and turkish-controlled militias that include, according to u.s. officials, former isis and al qaeda members. you have u.s. officials saying thousands of militiamen including islamic radicals are being directed by turkey to push out the kurds from northern syria. it is not a good relationship with the kurds. president trump does not have a good relationship with the kurds. the kurds in northern syria say that they were betrayed by president trump. the kurds in northern syria fought with the united states for five years. they lost 11,000 men and women fighting against isis. they were still fighting against isis until about five weeks ago when president trump had this

phone call with president erdogan and gave the green light for turkey to begin its ongoing military campaign, and suddenly our allies there found themselves under attack, not in a position to fight against isis because they had to fight against themselves to defend their very existence in their homeland. so, no, erdogan does not have a great relationship with the kurds and neither does president trump. >> senator murphy, there's new reporting from "axios" that president erdogan inside the white house presented a video on an ipad showing the president and the assembled group of senators proof, he said, a video that the kurds were terrorists. to his credit, your colleague, senator graham, said, maybe i should show you a video of you killing kurds as well. is this a man in president erdogan who deserved a white house meeting yesterday, an audience with the president of the united states, a joint news conference with the president of the united states? >> the irony of all of this is that the white house completely

understands the leverage that comes with granting a meeting in the white house. why? because they were using that leverage to try to engage in a corrupt extortion campaign with zelensky to try to get him to destroy vice president biden's reputation, and yet they didn't seem fit to use the leverage of erdogan's visit to the united states in order to get him to make any meaningful commitments in northeast syria. the day before he arrived there was video, satellite imagery of turkish aligned military forces inside northeast syria committing war crimes, targeting civilian populations. that backs up reporting and video we had seen in previous weeks. so the president had the opportunity to use this meeting to get them to make commitments to protect civilians, to go fight isis, to not resettle forcibly kurds from turkey back into this section of turkey. he didn't use any of those opportunities.

so i don't necessarily begrudge the fact that the president decided to meet with erdogan, i just think he should have used it to protect our interests and kurdish interests in the region. you are to view the two crises together because nobody wants to do business with the united states any longer, no vulnerable groups are going to partner with us in a fight against terrorism because they now think they will be abandoned by the united states, double crossed by us as happened to the kurds, or they will be dragged into our domestic politics as happened to president zelensky. all of this is an advertisement for other nations and other groups around the world to align with somebody else other than the united states. >> all right. senator chris murphy, thank you so much for being on the show this morning. we will be watching what happens. richard, you have a new episode of "on assignment" this sunday that takes a look at the fall-out from president trump's decision to withdraw u.s. troops from northern syria. let's take a look.

the turks seem to be bombing anything that moved. here at the front lines it is mostly deserted. the kurds are trying to stay off these exposed roads. two rounds came in over our heads. behind you, behind you, behind you. >> as we pulled back we saw what the rounds had done. a single vehicle was in flames, the driver dead. we didn't see any weapons or fighters inside. all around us kurds were fleeing what they said was indiscriminate shelling. this family had loaded up everything they had in the back of a pickup truck. they had 1,000 syrian lira, the equivalent of $2, in their pockets and no plan. >> she said they don't know where they're going, they just are leaving the war zone, that any place is better than there. the new episode airs this

sunday at 10:00 p.m. eastern. richard engel, thank you very, very much. we will be looking forward to that. kristen welker, thank you as well. still ahead, house minority leader steny hoyer will be our quest and congressman joaquin castro who struck at the heart of one of the republican's top defenses against impeachment during yesterday's hearing. "morning joe" is coming right back. ♪ so good! high protein. low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein. the best combination for every fitness routine. for all of the heroes who serve us, t-mobile is offering 50% off family lines for military, veterans and first responders. and now, we are also offering half off our top samsung phones. our service is just one way we say thank you... get the perfectly grilled flavors of an outdoor grill indoors,

and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do even more, like transform into an air fryer. the ninja foodi grill, the grill that sears, sizzles, and air fry crisps. the unitedllaxin'. explorer card makes things easy. traveling lighter. taking a shortcut. woooo! taking a breather. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. now you get jeep employee pricing as if you work here. at the jeep black friday sales event, you pay what we pay on select models. like the high-tech luxury of jeep grand cherokee. the most awarded suv ever. or other deals on the off-road capable jeep gladiator. and the legendary jeep wrangler. the most technologically advanced wrangler ever. move fast and take advantage of employee pricing plus at the jeep black friday sales event. jeep. there's only one.

♪ i can shine. ♪ i'mma do what i'm made to do. ♪ built for excellence. you start from the foundation up. the excellence is reaching dreams and chasing them at the same time.

i think that william taylor was a very impressive witness and was very damaging to the president. first of all, as you pointed out, he took very copious notes at almost every conversation. when he puts quotes in his opening statement he said those were direct quotes from what he said. it doesn't hurt that he has a voice like edward r. murrow. so he is an impressive presence up there and i think very nonpolitical. he went out of his way to talk about what he knew, what he was specifically testament to. the only thing he talked about was his strong feeling that it was in the u.s. national security interests to support ukraine in the fight against russia, but he certainly wasn't taking any partisan position. >> good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, november 14th. along with joe, willie and me we have white house reporter for the associated press jonathan lemire.

the host of msnbc's "politics nation" and president of the national action network, reverend al sharpton. nbc news correspondent heidi przybyla. and security analyst matt miller. and historian and author of "soul of america" and professor at vanderbilt university, john meachem is with us. he is an nbc news and msnbc news contributor. it all started in open testimony yesterday, joe. what a day. >> anybody that was expecting a repeat of the testimony of robert mueller would have been surprised by what happened yesterday. we had some new revelations, to pretty shocking revelations, and also though mainly a lot of steady testimony that continues to blow holes in the republicans and the white house's defense. so we'll get to that in a little

bit. it is -- it is something though how republicans are chasing their tails and coming up with laughable defenses that will, once again, be proven false in the coming days. >> the revelation from yesterday's impeachment hearing that directly implicates president trump in the ukraine scandal. it came from ambassador bill taylor, who testified alongside state department official george kent in the probe's first public hearing yesterday. during his opening statement ambassador taylor testified about a july 26th phone conversation that happened one day after trump's controversial call with the president of ukraine. watch. >> in the presence of my staff at a restaurant, solomon called president trump and told him of his meetings in kiev. the member of my staff could hear president trump on the phone asking ambassador sondland about the investigations.

ambassador told president trump the ukrainians were ready to move forward. following the call with president trump, the member of my staff asked ambassador sondland what president trump thought about ukraine. ambassador sondland responded that president trump cares more about the investigations of biden which giuliani was pressing for. >> two sources tell nbc news that the aide who overheard the phone call inside that ukrainian restaurant is david holmes, the coiner for political affairs at the u.s. embassy in ukraine. he is expected to testify behind closed doors tomorrow. it should be interesting. >> well, i mean what is going to be really interesting -- >> were they on a burner phone? what phone were they on? >> no, what is so funny is that the republicans are now going back to what they tried at the beginning of this process with the whistle-blower. at the beginning of the process they said, oh, it is hearsay, it is hearsay, you can't trust hearsay, it is hearsay.

of course, poor lindsey obviously wherever he went to law school they didn't have an evidence class. hearsay, hearsay. and then the democrats rolled out a plethora of witnesses who proved it wasn't hearsay and that it was firsthand evidence. so what did republicans then say? oh, we can't move forward until we hear the hearsay. we can't move forward until we get the whistle-blower here. of course, they were saying -- had hearsay. willie, the same thing is going to happen here now. oh, the phone call, it is secondhand, third hand, fourth hand, this is terrible, this is stupid. you can see it as my old torts professor, professor pierson would say, like a freight train slowly coming at you out of the mist, you know what is going to happen? they're going to hear testimony from the person that was at the table and it will no longer be hearsay. so the dog continues to chase its tail and all we can do is

sit back, look down amused, shaking our heads. because the republicans have no defense. >> and let's remember we don't even have to wait for that. the hearsay argument blew up when lieutenant colonel vindman testimony because he was on the phone call, it was first hand. a lot of the first hand witnesses have been blocked from testifying in the proceedings. blocked by who? by the white house and the state department. so the hearsay argument does not hold up. matt miller, some of the other arguments made yesterday that the aide was released, it was released because the whistle-blower came out and the hand of the white house was forced. also that ukraine didn't know the aid had been held up. that's blown up, we know, by reporting from "the new york times" that ukraine knew in early august about that argument after argument. i guess when you don't have the facts on your side, when you know you're in a corner, you present these arguments to the public who may not have heard them already, that we all know

from reporting and from firsthand testimony have all been blown up and undermined already. >> yes, i was surprised how ineffective the republican response was yesterday. we know that the facts they're working with aren't very good. they don't have a lot of factual defenses. but if you watched kind of republican conspiracy theories in the past, benghazi or fast and furious, usually they will take one theory and stick with it. yesterday they were picking all of these disparate points and not weaving them together in a coherent fashion. i thought it was a problem for them. i thought the new information that ambassador taylor testified to and that a member of his staff will testify to tomorrow is devastating. it knocks out the new argument they were trying to advance that the president cared about corruption in ukraine. if you read the call transcript he doesn't care about corruption in ukraine, he only cares about joe biden. i think it was really important because it really jams gordon

sondland who in some ways will be a key witness. in his previous testimony he said he didn't know -- he had no idea that bur eaisma meant joe biden, he didn't know that until after the call transcript was released in september. now you have gordon sondland who is going to come in and say it is flatout untrue. i think it puts him in a difficult position. i would be worried about coming clean and telling the truth about what i know about my conversations with the president when i come up next week. >> yeah. he's got to worry about perjury. he's also got to worry about lying and lying under oath. the guy does not want to end up in jail because he lied for donald trump. he can just call michael cohen and find out that that doesn't work very well. john meachem, let's key in also on a couple of arguments that the republicans made yesterday that are just preposterous, and that is, well, the aid -- they ended up getting the aid anyway.

so this extortion didn't work. of course, we can look at, you know, fbi often kicks down doors and arrests conspirators while they're making the bomb or planning the bank robbery. it is still a crime. of course, historically watergate, not a successful burglary. a third-rate, botched burglary that brought down an entire government. just because donald trump failed at extorting the ukrainians doesn't mean it is not impeachable. >> and in watergate the burglary was third rate, as ron ziegler has said. the coverup was fourth or fifth rate because it pretty self-evidently didn't work because here we are talking about it, and president nixon went back to san clemente. so whoops. but still impeachable. you had republican support for

the first article, which was about the coverup, the attempted obstruction of justice, which is the more serious term. i don't think -- i watched a great deal of yesterday and i kept, you know, trying -- because we're ordered by the enlightenment example to keep an open mind, to weigh contrary evident, but there just wasn't any contrary evidence to the idea that the president has abused his power in a remarkable way. i thought one of the great moments, which was -- and i loved -- mika, we haven't mentioned this, that your father was mentioned as a paragon as was henry kissinger for george kent. you know, looking at secretary -- under secretary kent and ambassador taylor, you sort of saw the ghosts of dean

atchison and lovett up against the guys on the republican side, these contestants from "the apprentice." you had a cultural clash between the wise men of the old era and these wise guys, and i think that's a hugely revealing cultural point here, is that they were playing by a certain set of rules and it was about memos and it was about listening when they were in the room with foreign leaders and trying to execute american policy over parties -- presence of different parties. wholly a universe many of us were accustomed to, not always right, you know. vietnam, not so great, you know. so the long history of this is mixed, but that's what human nature is like. >> right. >> but you had this world of

facts and policy and the kind of -- i don't want to overplay the dignity part, but a dignity about and a seriousness about the american experiment up against guys who were talking about conspiracy theories that i found myself googling. they went pretty much to the same places. so my own sense is the facts are the facts, whether congressmen and senators are going to say, you know what, this is what it is. that's where we are. >> still ahead on "morning joe," president trump calls it perfect. democrats call it impeachable. republicans would like to call it something in between. that's their strategy. clearly problematic. it is next on "morning joe." ♪ ♪ ♪oh there's no place like home for the holidays.♪

♪'cause no matter how far away you roam.♪ ♪when you pine for the sunshine of a friendly gaze.♪ ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ the united states postal service goes the extra mile to bring your holidays home. at verizon, we're building the most powerful 5g experience for america. that's why the nfl chose verizon. because they need the massive capacity of 5g with ultra wideband, so more screaming, streaming, posting fans... can experience 5g all at once.

this is happening in 13 stadiums all across the country. now if verizon 5g can do this for the nfl... imagine what it can do for you. - [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. 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. i'm about to capture proof of the ivory billed woodpecker. what??? no, no no no no. battery power runs out. lifetime retirement income from tiaa doesn't. guaranteed monthly income for life. nooooo!

guaranteed monthly wat t. rowe price, hundreds of our experts go beyond the numbers to examine investment opportunities firsthand. like a biotech firm that engineers a patient's own cells to fight cancer. this is strategic investing. because your investments deserve the full story. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today. ambassador bill taylor tied acting white house chief of staff mick mulvaney to the quote

irregular diplomacy team actively working between washington and ukraine. >> i encountered an irregular, informal channel of u.s. policy making with respect to ukraine, unaccountable to congress. a channel that included then-special envoy kurt volker, u.s. ambassador to the european union gordon sondland, rick perry, white house chief of staff mick mulvaney and, as i subsequently learned, mr. giuliani. >> in fairness, this irregular channel of diplomacy, it is not as outlandish as it could be, is that correct? >> it is not as outlandish as it could be, yeah, i agree. >> the second member of the irregular channel is ambassador sondland, who is senate confirmed, ambassador to the eu. so his involvement here, while, you know, not necessarily part of his official duties as the ambassador to the eu, certainly

is not outlandish for him to be interested and engaged pursuant to the president or secretary pompeo's direction, correct? >> it is a little unusual for the u.s. ambassador to the eu to play a role in ukraine policy. >> okay. you know, it might be irregular but it is certainly not outlandish. >> yeah. ambassador taylor left completely speechless. >> oh, my god. >> on that one. >> jonathan lemire, the defense is going well for the republicans, is it not? >> yeah, i mean -- >> in a sort of washington general sort of way. the globe trotters are only beating them by 103 points and crushing the clown who, again, placed his money on the washington generals because they do. >> they are. there's only so many you can lose in a row i suppose. no, you're right. i think it was representative of what we've seen from the

beginning of this entire impeachment inquiry, that the republicans have really struggled to defend what happened. the facts are not on their side. they're left grasping for conspiracy theories. devin nunes spent the first minutes of his opening statement in the fever swamp of the extreme right, trying to push back on some of this stuff. we've seen the president ordering republicans in the house and senate not to fight on process, to suggest quid pro quos, maybe it is not the best scenario and it is not the best solution and certainly not impeachable. instead to defend what he did on its merits and that left a lot uncomfortable. the president himself attempted to take the position that he was too busy to pay attention, despite the fact he tweeted and retweeted about three dozen times during the day when he spoke to reporters twice at the oval office alongside president erdogan of turkey. he said that he was -- he tried to project the idea he was attending to the people's business and therefore was not focused in on what was happening

on the other side of pennsylvania avenue. according to our reporting though there certainly has been some frustration among white house allies, among the president and his confidantes, thinking that the republicans missed an opportunity yesterday, that it wasn't a great day for them. they certainly are aware that the career officials, these decorated officials who are sort of hard to malign, they worked for both republicans and democrats, carried the day with their respect abiliability, witr note taking and strong commitment to american foreign policy. >> just does republicans no good to try to trash these foreign policy professionals. donald trump, too busy to watch. yeah, also he doesn't watch "morning joe" anymore. hi, donald. how you doing? >> oh, goodness. don't trigger him. >> reverend al, it seems to me, rev, if these republicans were intelligent, if they read

books -- but they promised they're not going to and we have no reason to doubt their word, do we? but if, rev, they -- they had sense, any common sense, they would have followed the advice of one of the president's most aggressive defenders several weeks ago who said, listen, he did it. all right. everybody knows he did it. the evidence is going to come out that he did it. yes, there was a quid pro quo. yes, donald trump shook down the ukrainians to get dirt on joe biden. okay. let's just admit that up front and say, okay, yeah, he did it, so what? it is not impeachable. that's not -- i mean that is the sum of the republican's argument because they've been fighting this and talking about hearsay and talking about how it was a botched burglary, talking about -- no. it has been drip, drip, drip, drip, drip.

instead of just admitting that the president did extort the ukrainians and go from there, but they haven't done it. they've mishandled it, and every day is a new revelation. every day is a new embarrassment. every day it is another reason for more americans to suspect donald trump should possibly be impeached and removed from office. >> that was the most startling thing to me about yesterday, is they seemed to go back to try to defend what is clearly indefensible. it would have been a much better strategy to go with, as you said, where they had said, yes, he did it but it is not impeachable, it doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable act. they went all the way back to try to unprove what is clearly evident to have happened. to act like the ambassador miller would have just fabricated that a staff member was in a restaurant and heard

what they heard, if you going to lie you don't need to go through a staff member in a restaurant. it was so elaborate that clearly the american public looking at this man that personifies dignity telling this story, you would have to believe it. because if you were going to go through telling some fairy tale you certainly wouldn't have an elaborate fairy tale like that. it would have been much better for them to say, yes, he did it, but it doesn't rise to the level of a high crime or misdemeanor and let's move on. they're trying to now insult the intelligence of the american people, and i think it is going to backfire on them. and to bring jordan in, who was supposed to come with all of this bombast and fire and whistles and he failed to do it. it was absolutely a flop for them. >> coming up on "morning joe," from the house intel committee congressman joaquin castro is our guest. first, his party's leader in the house, steny hoyer, is standing by. he joins the conversation next on "morning joe."

g joe. make fitness routine with pure protein. high protein. low sugar. tastes great! high protein. low sugar. so good! high protein. low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein. the best combination for every fitness routine. and you know what they isay about curiosity. it'll ruin your house. so get allstate and be better protected from mayhem, like meow. ...i felt awful.... ...because of my psoriasis. i was covered from... ...head to toe with it. i was afraid... ...to show my skin. every time i moved my arm... ...my skin cracked and bled. it really hurt.

then i started... ...cosentyx. that was four years ago. how are you? now, i don't really think about it. see me. cosentyx works fast to give you clear skin that can last. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting... get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections... ...and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine, or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. see me. i look... ...and feel better. ask your dermatologist if cosentyx could help you move past the pain of psoriasis. ♪ i can shine. ♪ i'mma do what i'm made to do. ♪ built for excellence. you start from the foundation up. the excellence is reaching dreams and chasing them at the same time.

in connemara. right! connemara it is! there's one gift the whole family can share this holiday season, their story. give the gift of discovery, with an ancestrydna kit. hi honey, we got in early. give the gift of discovery, yeah, and we brought steve and mark. ♪ experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment.

there is one witness, one witness that they won't bring in front of us. they won't bring in front of the american people. that's the guy who started it all, the whistle-blower.

>> i say to my colleague, i would be glad to have the person who started it all come in and testify. president trump is welcome to take a seat right there. >> wow. joining us now the majority leader of the u.s. house of representative, democratic congressman steny hoyer of maryland. joy has the first question for you, steny. >> always great talking with you. thanks so much for being with us. this arms for political dirt deal has been redeuced uced by republicans to a couple of silly arguments but i wanted to have you respond to them, which is that the arms were sent to ukraine and they ended up having no dirt dug up on joe biden, basically no blood, no foul. what do you say to that defense? >> well, there was a foul but it didn't result in an injury and it didn't result in an injury because the -- mr. zelensky,

president zelensky clearly did not want to pursue it, was being put in a very bad spot because, after all, the president had a lot of money, hundreds of millions of dollars which he needed to defend his country and his people from russian aggression. so the fact that it was not successful ultimately -- and, really, it was not successful because the whistle-blower blew the whistle. it was not until after that whistle was blown that the money was released. so the rationalization that somehow this is okay because the object of the -- of what i believe to be the criminal behavior was not ultimately affected, it is sort of like the conspiracy to bank -- to rob the bank, go in the bank to get money and it happens there's no money there and, therefore, the bank although it was broken into, guns were put in a

teller's face, it was not a crime because there was no money there. it simply doesn't hold water. the fact of the matter is what the president did, what the president's people did, what giuliani did was to involve themselves in what i think was a criminal enterprise to extort and bribe the president of ukraine for ends which the president wanted to get to, which was to, a, pretend that ukraine was somehow involved in the effort to undermine the american election in 2016, which has been debunked and, two, to get him to look at the bidens for his own political purposes. 80% of the american people think that was wrong, and i think that the republican defense that somehow, well, it didn't happen, yes, they tried to do it. >> right. >> yes, they did everything they could to force them to do it but, by the way, they failed, does not absolve them of

responsibility. >> good to see you this morning, it is willie geist. >> hi, willie. >> we have seen a ton of testimony. the transcripts are out from the closed-door depositions at the capital yesterday. we had two witnesses in public testifying to what they had said in private as well. have you seen enough, leader hoyer, to convince yourself that donald trump should be impeached? >> willie, i would urge every member to wait until all of the evidence is in. as you know, a judge in a trial says to the jury, look, don't make a conclusion until you hear all of the evidence, both the prosecution or the plaintiff and the defense side, the closing arguments. reserve your judgment and consider the evidence as a whole. i think that's equally applicable to members of the congress of the united states. >> so you haven't seen enough. >> -- to make a very weighted decision. i have seen a lot, and obviously i have opinions on the weight of the evidence, but i'm going the reserve and i'm going to urge

every member to reserve their judgment until we hear all of the testimony and the committee makes its recommendation on the evidence that has been adduced at that point in time, and then make a decision. i think that's the proper way to go. but there is no doubt that there's an awful lot of smoke. >> hey, steny, it is claire here. >> hi, claire. >> i'm first to admit i miss my friends on the hill, but i'll tell you one thing i don't miss, and that's the shutdown dance, government shutdown stuff we go through. it seems like it is just as common as buying christmas gifts but at the end of every year we are in this bad place. what is trump doing at this point to either facilitate funding the government or not fund the government, and are you feeling the fact that they have sidelined mulvaney completely, that mulvaney is, i guess, off in his office, you know, playing games on his ipad because it doesn't appear that he's in the mix in terms of the power center

at the white house anymore? >> well, if in fact mulvaney has been sidelined, that's good news for the american people. it is good news for the congress, because mulvaney has been as a member of congress and in the administration a very negative figure as it relates to fiscal responsibility in pursuing and accomplishing that which we have to accomplish, and that is every year we have to fund government to make sure that government can continue to serve the american people. so that's good news that he is sidelined. we'll see whether that's the case. but, unfortunately, as you know, claire, the house of representatives passed 96% of the funding of government by june 26th. that's over three months ago. unfortunately, the senate just last week but long after the fiscal year began passed four relatively noncontroversial bills but has not agreed upon the amount of money that will be spent by each committee so that the house has done its job a long time ago, ready to go to

conference, but the senate didn't act until after the fiscal year on any of its bills. so we are way behind. this is a terrible thing to do to the government, to the american people. it is a bad way to operate the congress. i don't blame the american people for being frustrated and angry at us. i'm frustrated and i'm angry that we haven't gotten this done. that's why we did our work on time in the house of representatives, but, unfortunately, the senate -- and in my opinion mcconnell was waiting on an okay from the white house -- >> right. >> -- to proceed. mulvaney did not want to proceed. the fact that he's sidelined now perhaps will give us some room for progress. >> leader hoyer, john lamire. switching back to impeachment proceedings, it was called for the whistle-blower to be subpoenaed and to testify. the president called for the whistle-blower to be identified repeatedly. my questions for you on this matter, where do you stand should the whistle-blower be part of the proceedings and what

will the democrats do if the whistle-blower is perhaps identified, perhaps by a congressman in open session? >> first of all, from the president's initial comments that the whistle-blower was like somebody that committed treason and you know how we treat people who commit treason was a blatant, terrible effort to intimidate the whistle-blower, witnesses and other whistle-blowers who might be inclined to come forward because they know information. i think it was a despicable action by the president which has been pursued, unfortunately, by so many of the republican members, a distraction to the whistle-blower. the whistle-blower heard something. i make the analogy, and you see all of these criminal shows and your listeners and viewers see these stories where somebody hears something. they don't know what happen but they hear somebody say something happened, a criminal act happened. so they call an anonymous tip

line. why is the tip line anonymous? because the witnesses are afraid that there will be kickback for them, blowback, danger to them if they out somebody who has committed criminal behavior. that's why the whistle-blower is protected under our statutes. that's why every state almost has a statute which says you cannot intimidate witnesses. it is a crime to do that. in my opinion it is tantamount to trying to intimidate not only this whistle-blower but every other future whistle-blower who may know wrong doing. why we have that statute is to encourage them to come forward so our government can be honest. we say if you see something, say something. let's not intimidate people from doing that. >> all right. house majority leader steny hoyer. thank you very much for being on the show this morning. >> you bet. >> thank you up next we discussed republicans tried to argue yesterday that the president did nothing wrong because aid to

ukraine eventually got delivered. congressman joaquin castro tore that argument apart. the congressman joins us next on "morning joe." [ applause ] thank you. it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ ladies and gentlemen mini is a different kind of car. for a different kind of drive.

♪ ladies and gentlemen for the drive to create a new kind of family car, that became a new kind of race car. for the drive to rebel, zag. for the drive that's inside you. and inside us. that's the drive under the hood of every mini. because every mini is... for the drive. ♪ for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions

and lung inflammation can occur. talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. i'm part of a community of problem solvers. we make ideas grow.

from an everyday solution... to one that can take on a bigger challenge. we are solving problems that improve lives. to one that can take wheeveryone is different.ta, which is why xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data, or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to other top wireless carriers. save up to $400 a year when you switch.

plus, get 50% off when you buy any new lg phone. xfinity mobile. click, call or visit a store today. the defenses that were put up by the republicans were fundamentally ill logical and incoherent. i mean one defense was, hey, they actually got the money, the ukrainians got the money and zelensky didn't make a statement. but the fact of the matter is that it was the ask that was illegal. the second point that they tried to make was that the -- these witnesses didn't have firsthand communications with the president of the united states. well, the reason why we don't have testimony of firsthand communications with the president of the united states is because the white house has been blocking that. other than that there were just a lot of irrelevancies. >> conservative attorney george

conway making a rare television appearance yesterday here on msnbc. joining us now, congressman joaquin castro, a member of the intelligence committee and vice chair of the house foreign affairs committee. great to have you on this morning. >> thanks for having me. >> so what stood out to you yesterday? you had a pretty incredible moment where you kind of debunked the obvious, but overall your takeaway from what was revealed yesterday, what really builds the case toward impeachment? >> well, i think the most revealing thing was evidence of that conversation where someone overheard the president talking to ambassador sondland about the biden/burisma investigation, and we're going to have a chance next week to talk to that person and to bring ambassador sondland in and ask him about that conversation. so i think that was probably the thing that we're most interested in seeing for next week. but overall i think the hearing yesterday affirmed the testimony that we've taken, which is --

that we've heard, which is that president trump abused his office, used his power of the presidency to try to benefit himself politically and to try to take out a political rival in joe biden. i didn't hear anything coming from the other side that would dissuade that idea. >> congressman, it is willie geist. i'm curious of your assessment of ambassador taylor and undersecretary kent as witnesses. the republicans on the other side tried to paint them as star witnesses. they tried to get them to weigh in on the question of impeachment, on whether or not they believe the offenses were impeachable. they never crossed that line. they said, we're here as fact witnesses. you had seen their testimony before in private. how did they do in public? >> i thought they both did very well. i think they came across as earnest, as people of integrity, as people not trying to put their fingers on the scale either way. i think both mentioned during the course of the hearing it wasn't their job to make a ruling on impeachment, that's

the job for congress. so i think they both came across very strong and very well. >> so i just want to clarify because this staff member -- i think it is david holmes who overheard this phone call. is he testifying privately tomorrow or next week? >> yes, to be honest with you because of the rush of yesterday i didn't get a chance to see the full schedule, but i know he is coming in. and so he is coming in pretty soon. i need to check exactly when. >> all right. jonathan lemire. >> congressman, speaking of other witnesses who will be testifying in public, could you give us a preview of what you anticipate hearing from the ambassador tomorrow who said she was the victim of a smear campaign orchestrated by, she believes, the white house and members of the president's family, but also next week gordon sondland, ambassador to the eu, who seems to have played a pivotal role in this and was at the end of the phone call that mika just mentioned, what are you looking to hear from both of them? >> you remember yesterday ambassador taylor spoke about

two tracks of diplomacy, the regular track which is the state department, the people that work for government, and then what he called an irregular track which was led by rudy giuliani. rudy giuliani and company were trying to force the ambassador out of her position, which they did successfully. once she was out, then i think they really got to work on behalf of president trump in trying to help him cut that deal to get the bidens investigated. so i suspect tomorrow with ambassador yovanovitch we're going to get to hear how they basically ran her out of town and everything else she may know about the role rudy giuliani or others were playing in that. and then next week with ambassador sondland, that's going to be a very important interview, a very important public hearing because, remember, he came in and he revised his testimony when it seemed to become clear, as i said at the time, that he may have perjured himself. we now have additional information that he may know or may have had a conversation

directly with the president of the united states that the president may have asked him to get those investigations done on the bidens, to get the burisma investigation done. so ambassador sondland can expect i'm sure from the committee to be asked very directly about that conversation, and we expect that he is going to tell the american people the truth about what he knows. >> all right. congressman joaquin castro, thank you very much. we will be watching this all play out. still ahead, in his first interview as a presidential candidate former massachusetts governor, duval patrick, appears to try to thread the needle between joe biden and elizabeth warren and bernie sanders. we'll bring you those comments next on "morning joe." ambassador taylor, in your decades of military service and diplomatic service representing the united states around the world, have you ever seen another example of foreign aid conditioned on the personal or political interests of the

president of the united states? >> no, mr. goldman, i have not. . 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. ♪ 25 cent boneless wings at applebee's. ♪ born to be wild... born to be wild...♪ get 'em while they're hot. ithere's my career...'s more to me than hiv. my cause... and creating my dream home. i'm a work in progress. so much goes into who i am. hiv medicine is one part of it. prescription dovato is for adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment and who aren't resistant to either of the medicines dolutegravir or lamivudine. dovato has 2 medicines in 1 pill to help you reach and then stay undetectable. so your hiv can be controlled with fewer medicines

while taking dovato. you can take dovato anytime of day with food or without. don't take dovato if you're allergic to any of its ingredients or if you take dofetilide. if you have hepatitis b, it can change during treatment with dovato and become harder to treat. your hepatitis b may get worse or become life-threatening if you stop taking dovato. so do not stop dovato without talking to your doctor. serious side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, liver problems, and liver failure. life-threatening side effects include lactic acid buildup and severe liver problems. if you have a rash and other symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis b or c. don't use dovato if you plan to become pregnant or during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy since one of its ingredients may harm your unborn baby. your doctor should do a pregnancy test before starting dovato. use effective birth control while taking dovato. the most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, nausea, trouble sleeping, and tiredness. so much goes into who i am and hope to be. ask your doctor if starting hiv treatment

with dovato is right for you. - [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. 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. 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.

we have a really talented, really gifted, and a very hard-work wing a hard-working and hard-sacrificing field of democratic candidates, many my personal friends. but we seem to be migrating on the one camp sort of nostalgia, let's just get rid, if you, of the incumbent president and we can go back to doing what we used to do or, you know, it is

our way, our big idea or no way. neither of those it seems to me seizes the moment to pull the nation together and bring some humility. >> that was former massachusetts governor duval patrick after announcing his entry into the democratic presidential primary race this morning. joining us now global business columnist and associate editor of "the financial times" rihanna ruhard, author of the new book, "don't be evil, how big tech betrayed its founding principles." she also wrote an op-ed in "the washington post" entitled, hav. 2020 will be a litmus test for capitalism. joe? >> claire, mccaskill, i want to ask you quickly about the clip we just saw we duval patrick.

it was, of course, duval going after elizabeth warren and joe biden. it is very interesting that if you look at where he could have an impact in the early states, he was an eight year governor in massachusetts, certainly new hampshire is a boston media market. he could have an impact on elizabeth warren there, he could also cut into joe biden support next week because as reverend al said earlier today, when he gets into the church he is unlike anyone else in the race. he has the ability to speak and the cadence of a preacher. >> i think in their war room they have new hampshire and south carolina. but i might point out that joe biden was leading in the last poll in new hampshire. what he is basically saying is i

can do what corey booker hasn't done. and i can do what kamala harris hasn't done. they have both been in south carolina. he has to become very familiar and trusted by voters. and right now duval patrick was a great governor, a good guy, and i think the bane capital stuff was tricky, but he doesn't have that trust level that joe biezen has and getting that in a short period of time is a high bar. >> i will tell you what, it is snot just about race, obviously, if it kamala harris and coreybooker -- this is a frustration of barack and

michelle were having because they weren't having an impact among early voters. the voters believed they could win. let me ask you about your piece about capitalism. you say that the 2020 election be a referendum on capitalism. one of the richest men in the world talking about jumping into the race and now a venture capitalist from bain capital also talking about being a last minute field. how are the new entries going to impact that race. >> you teed it up kind of well. we spend a lot of time talking about race and identity and sclasz an issue. and the fortunes of citizens versus corporations. one of the points i'm getting across is the last 40 or 50 years have benefitted large

corporations. they benefitted china, they benefitted places where capital can flow and find cheap pllabor but they have not benefitted a lot of middle class and working americans. one of the things that elizabeth warren has going for her is that felt experience that wait, the system is not working for me and it is funny when she, a few weeks ago was up against mark zuckerberg, i felt like this was an existential conflict. they represent the apex of the last 40 years of let money and data move where they will. you have warren coming in and she is not alone across the aisle. you have marco rubio saying a lot of the same things. we need government involvement. >> so the title of your book is "don't be evil." that is the famous corporate

mantra of google from the early days, where have the social media companies gone wrong and drifted away from that idea of being a public good. >> one of the most interesting things i found while reporting in the book is the first paper that they did in 1998 and they actually had a paragraph at the end of that paper says you know what? search engines that are monetized by advertising, those will be problematic. we will be in conflict with users and citizens best interests. they knew that back then. so i get so upset when i see people going up on the hill saying we're so sorry we could not possibly have imagined in is a 20 years from you to utopia t

disto distone. >> and this is another thing where i see a see a lot of coming together. these companies don't have the trail road -- politically 100 years ago, i think you will start to see a consensus. you can't own the network and own everything on the network nap is just patently uncompetitive. >> since 2000, big companies, and also china. talk about that. president xi was at a summit in south america. building alliances, talk about how china stepped into this political moment. >> the biggest foreign policy issue going, china is rolling out a infrastructure program called one belt one road. and that is not just about building real things, but rolling out tech standards not

just through asia but into europe. you europeans, germans, italians, that creates a whole new alliance. it is a bipolar or tripolar world. can the chinese pull the europeans into their system, that has massive foreign policy implications. >> we all know that trudonald tp is a market watcher and thinks too much of what the market is doing as a reflect on him, everything is a reflection on him, right? so talk a little about the market with the extreme politics of today and how the extreme politics on trade or some of these issues around capitalism, what is going to happen to the market in this era of this tribalism. >> up with of the things you

see, every time there is a little good news about china, and all of us that match the markets say -- watch the markets, and we know there will be a trade deal. we have known for deck saiades wall street and main street are totally disconnected. will we see a collapse in confidence that leads to a market correction and if you start to get not even a technical recession or people feeling like a recession, i think that really changes things for the president. the book is "don't be evil" how big tech betrayed founding principals and all of us. great to have you on. time now for final thoughts. >> you know, mika, the hunt for evidence in the mueller report,

the mueller investigation, the drum beat, yeah -- it was hard to figure out figure out trump's coordination with the russians on getting this information leaked from the dnc server. we're finding out this week where some of the secoconnectin points are. but what is happening on capitol hill now, with the impeachment inquiry is very simple. it is trump trading arms for political dirt, and republicans can try to talk about it all they want, but it was extortion for arms for political aid. tomorrow will will be another witness, ambassador marie yovanovitch. she will tell the story of why he was run out of her job

because she would not do her job. >> pay attention to the facts, they matter. >> the seriousness cannot be under stated. it is extortion, it is a crime. and they can say that the outcome is baked in, it still matters, it matters for the m history books. thank you, hi there, i'm stephanie ruhle, this is thursday november 14th, house lawmakers getting a chance to catch their wret today and put political spin on today's six hour hearing before preparing for the hearing this time tomorrow. if you were looking for a single block buster headline out of one day, you're going to have a tough time finding one. look at that across the board. wildly different interpretations. but the