rick wilson, elise jordan, john, most of all to you for watching. i will be back at 9:00 a.m. for the duration, you don't want to miss this tomorrow. "mtp daily" with the fabulous katy tur in for chuck starts now. welcome to monday. it is "meet the press daily." good evening. i'm katy tur in new york in for chuck todd and we begin tonight with breaking news in the house impeachment inquiry. moments ago, house intelligence committee announced david holmes who delivered some damning close-door testimony about a presidential phone call involving ukraine will now testify publicly later this week as part of the impeachment inquiry. holmes told house investigators during his deposition on friday

that he overheard the president tell one of his top diplomats, gordon sondland, that he wanted to know if ukraine's president had agreed to quote, do the investigation. which, in this context, was a clear reference to an investigation into the bidens. holmes testified that sondland told him point blank that president trump did not give an ex-playtive about ukraine and that he only cared about quote big stuff like investigating the bidens. in addition to the damage that testimony may do to the president's case, sondland is now facing questions about whether he may have lied to congress. holmes' testimony directly contradicts sondland's october deposition where sondland testified he could not recall being part of any effort to investigate the bidens. and he could not recall any conversations with the state department or the white house about that matter. holmes' testimony contradicts both those claims raising the stakes that much higher for

sondland's public hearings on wednesday. holmes' public testimony will now follow the very next day. sondland and holmes are just two of nine witnesses now scheduled to testify publicly this week alone. the coming onslaught of public testimony comes as new nbc news reporting has learned that president trump has been fuming at his state department. mike pompeo, specifically, for hiring diplomats whose testimony now threatens to bring down his presidency. that is according to four current and former senior administration officials. the impeachment investigation has begun to snowball on the president to such an extent that he is now claiming he's strongly considering testifying as part of the inquiry. in a moment, i'll talk with the top democrat on the house intelligence committee about the latest developments and what the democrats' strategy will be for this potentially make or break week. but let us kick things off with the latest from my nbc

colleagues. hans nichols is at the white house. and jeff bennett is following the latest on capitol hill. jeff, sondland's testimony on wednesday, potentially, going to be extremely significant. not just for the president but for sondland himself. roger stone was just convicted of lying to congress. how might that factor into what sondland will say? >> right. well, i can tell you this. you have republican mark meadows who as you know is a close ally of president trump, meadows says that sondland is the wild card because neither democrats nor republicans know precisely what he will testify to. now, as you mentioned, sondland is a key player in all of this. he has emerged in a number of witness testimony. not just having a direct line to president trump but also being a direct conduit for this -- this pressure campaign. working alongside rudy giuliani to help form this shadow ukraine policy to put pressure on ukraine's leaders to open these

investigations that might be politically beneficial to president trump. so as you mentioned, he's already had to amend his testimony once. initially, he said that to his mind there was no quid pro quo or extortion scheme. but once that testimony was contradicted by other witnesses, he had to go back and say, yes, that he does, in fact, believe there was a link between the delivery of that military aid, the offer of the white house meeting, and the demand that the ukrainians open the investigations. he's also said in his close-door testimony that he didn't know that hunter biden was affiliated with briurisma. it's hard to see how that stands up give the tapestry house investigators have before them. >> let's just put on the screen the difference between what sondland has testified to and what holmes said in his close door deposition in his opening statement. sondland in his testimony october 17th said i recall no discussions with any state department or white house official about former vice president biden or his son. nor do i recall taking part in

any effort to encourage an investigation into the bidens. now, david holmes testified last friday, i then heard president trump ask, so he's gonna do the investigations? this is the phone call that he says he overheard between sondland and the president. and that sondland replied, he's gonna do it, adding that president zelensky will do anything you ask him to. more color in that but we'll leave that out. i asked ambassador sondland if it was true that the president did not give a blank about ukraine. ambassador sondland agreed that the president did not give a blank about ukraine. sondland stated the president only cares about big stuff, biden investigation. so in holmes' testimony, he says sondland said the word biden, which again, jeff, would contradict this idea that he didn't know that burisma and biden were the same thing. >> right. and -- and let's talk about david holmes because if the sondland stuff is confusing to people, the david holmes testimony, katy, for democrats is a slam dunk. i talked to a source familiar

who says that holmes told house investigators that this isn't just his account. he says there were two other people at the table who were overhearing that conversation. so there are, presumably, two other people who could back him up on this. his testimony is potentially crippling and damaging for president trump on two points. both on -- one on the substance, right? president trump says he was concerned about corruption but yet you have holmes saying, at least by way of sondland's telling, that president trump only cared about the big stuff. only cared about the investigations. the other thing is that republicans keep trying to focus us on the finer points of one or maybe two phone calls. but this timeline shows that president trump, even after, the day after that july 25th phone call, he was checking up on it. and that matters because house democrats have said time and time again that these phone calls did not exist in isolation. that this was a coordinated pressure campaign that started in the spring with the ouster of marie yovanovitch, carried

through the summer. and apparently, now president trump was following up a day after to make sure the ukrainian officials were opening the investigations precisely as he wanted them to. >> so on friday, hans, the president went after marie yovanovitch as he was testifying in front of the house intel committee. sondland is somebody who is much closer to the president. he donated a million dollars to his inauguration campaign. if everyone is to be believed that's testified so far, he and the president had a close relationship. he was on the phone with the president. in his text messages, he says he was on the phone with the president. how is the president reacting to sondland's testimony? and do we have any indication that they've had any interaction lately behind the scenes? have there been any conversations between the two at all? >> no, we don't know that. and i should be very clear on that. just to add sort of the just reporting on the wild card aspect of this, remember when sondland initially came here, he flew here from brussels and then he decided not to appear. actually, he was asked not to

appear. and then he changed his mind and realized that he was under subpoena. and then decided to appear. remember, there's that strange exchange of letters. so he is one big wild card in all this. we'll see how the president reacts. you're right to say that the president can't quite have the back and forth like he did with marie yovanovitch because remember the president's initial comments on marie yovanovitch was that she sounds like a fine lady. she seems nice. in general, he had talked about never trumpers. there's no way you can couch sondland on that although in some ways, he fits the more technical definition of a never trumper, and that is a republican that was working against president donald trump in the primaries. he then changed course, donated a lot of money, and bought himself an ambassadorship. so he's obviously one wild card. the other wild card the president wants to put up there is himself. and he's raising the prospects. i don't want to use testify. i don't even want to say that he'd be deposed. he is talking about answering questions, claiming that he'd be open to having some sort of exchange of letters with congressional investigators. >> how seriously should we take

that, hans? or is that just a tweet that he fired off in anger? jim jordan said he doesn't anticipate seeing him in an open hearing. >> i'd listen to his congressional allies on this because they sometimes have a better sense of where the president wants to go politically. his own staff doesn't seem to know. and they're basically tossing up their hands as well saying, well, we'll see where he comes down on that. it's an interesting suggestion. and the president does this on twitter, right? he publicly mulls things or at least pretends to be publicly mulling them. even in the way he couched his language, he says it is something i'll consider. so in a way, the president's trying to insert himself back into the conversation because what the president wants the conversation focused on is just the phone call. all this other stuff, they say that isn't directly relevant because it's removed from the president. they feel that the phone call and the call logs that we have of those two conversations, the memos, the transcripts, they feel that's defensible and that's what the president wants

this conversation to be going forward. >> it's interesting, hans, because in the phone call, he says directly we need you to do us a favor, though. which a lot of democrats point to and say you don't need anything else other than that phone call where the president himself told zelensky he wanted those investigations. >> if the president's impeachment hinges on the word though, i think that's a fight they feel they're in better position to. as someone who lives on cable television, i make a lot of awkward transitions. the line from the white house is that was just the president attempting to make a transition from one of the part conversation to the other. but, you know, i guess it depends on the meaning of though, though. >> yeah, i guess and the meaning of is. let me ask you one other question about what happened over the weekend. the president visited walter reid. it was an unannounced visit. they said it was to start phase one of his yearly physical. past physicals have not had different phases to them. past physicals have been scheduled. what do we know about what was happening? and -- and when do we expect to see the president in person again? >> we -- we'll see him tomorrow

and nbc news pool. so we'll get a lot of interaction with him. we know the white house has spent more time cleaning this story up than they have trying to prepare for it because in the past, they've just put it on his official schedule. the president is going to walter reid for his annual physical and it hasn't been that big of a deal. this was cloaked under secrecy. there's hush hush to it. it was unannounced. the trip was shorter than his previous ones and that raised all the speculation. then you saw stephanie grisham on fox news saturday night. you have the president tweeting trying to say everything is fine but in a lot of ways, this is a little mini scandal of their own making. >> certainly raises a whole lot of questions. hans nichols, thank you very much. and jeff bennett, thank you as well. let's now go to congressman mike quigley, who is joining us from the capitol hill. mike quigley, are you there? congressman, are you there? i don't think the congressman is with us. congressman, can you hear us? >> i can in just about a second when the person next to me stops

yelling. sorry. >> it gets loud there in the hall. >> it's not accouncally perfect. fire away. >> hopefully, you can hear me now. let me ask you this. what are you hoping to get out of david holmes' testimony, public testimony, on thursday? >> i think the thing to take away from it is the president of the united states didn't care about ukraine. that's why this policy went forward. all he cared about was the investigations. and in that conversation, he referenced sondland saying he only cared about the big things. well, obviously, there's a war going on there, which is a pretty big thing that influences not just our ally but the entire region and, frankly, our own national security. so this puts it in perspective. >> you're getting a little taste right now by the way of what it's like to be a reporter at a political rally. even a trump rally. not being able to hear yourself think, let alone talk when it's so loud. >> this room wasn't built for

acoustics. >> gordon sondland is supposed to testify on wednesday, congressman. are you expecting him to show up? >> i -- i do. and i expect him to tell the truth, as we do with every witness who testifies. when you testify to congress, you're testifying to the american people. last week, roger stone was convicted on all seven counts and he lied to congress. he's gonna pay the price. a message for anyone testifies. again, when you talk to congress, you're talking to the american people and they deserve the truth. but i do expect the truth from ambassador sondland. and i -- i do think -- i guess the point is it's never too late to tell the truth. it's never too late to do the right thing and i encourage him, based on all the subsequent testimony we've heard, to come forth. take a deep breath. start over and tell us exactly what took place. did we miss anything else? are there any other conversations he had with the president? or any other conversations with others that would be instructive

to help us understand what really took place? >> what if he tries to plead the fifth? is he allowed to plead the fifth in front of congress? >> that -- that train has left the station. ambassador sondland, the american people have a right to know exactly what took place. you started with that testimony. you amended it. and i -- i still believe he has the opportunity to straighten out this given the clear, consistent testimony of almost everyone else who's testified. you know, you take the president's call record, his original words in the whistle-blower's complaint. these witnesses have spoken virtually with one voice. and i think you continue to see that and i encourage ambassador sondland to be part of that consistent, truthful voice. >> are you taking the president seriously when he says he's considering testifying? would you accept written answers for him? or do you think this is just bluster? >> look, i suspect that if he

does, he'll bring his tax returns with him. and the next day, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy will come and testify as well. the fact of the matter is we saw all too well with the special counsel's report that the president was not forthcoming on that. he refused to testify there. in my wildest dreams, he doesn't. but as speaker pelosi said, he is more than welcome. if he wants to come forward and help us understand that phone call. why was he pressuring an ally at their most vulnerable time for personal, political gain? so he's certainly welcome. i take him at his word. i don't necessarily have a lot of hope that'll actually happen. >> i was talking to congressman ras kin a little earlier today on my 2:00 p.m. show and i asked him when he expects house judiciary to take the reigns and he says he expects to get the evidence and the testimony from the other committees intel and oversight, et cetera, in the next couple weeks. either over the thanksgiving holiday or maybe right after

that. is that timeline the same timeline that you're working under? >> you know, it -- there has to be some flexibility as we understand. obviously, you've seen testimony change and additional people come and testify. one witness leads us to additional information, which really helps you want to learn more from another witness. so it all builds upon itself. but i think that's a proper flow of time. everything is still on the table. those decisions will be made once we finish this week's testimony. >> can you please tell me who that was doing the interview beside you? i'm dying to know. >> yeah. we'll leave the names anonymous to protect the guilty. >> congressman quigley. congressman, thank you very much for joining us. we appreciate it. >> sure. anytime. >> and we will be right back. great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you?

maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

you're having one more bite! no! one more bite! ♪ kraft. for the win win. lashmakes every lash fullyrom maybsensational.ork. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect. lash sensational. only from maybelline new york.

in the past hour that david holmes, the embassy official who

overheard ambassador sondland's call with president trump will testify publicly this week. and has four state department employees prepare to come before the house impeachment inquiry this week, secretary of state mike pompeo did not offer the most throated offense of the two who testified last week. today, pompeo wouldn't even say taylor's job is safe. >> there are a lot of questions about why you have not chosen to speak up publicly in defense of your employees, including those who testified before the impeachment inquiry. >> i always defend my state employees. it's the greatest diplomatic court in the history of the world. >> i'm curious if you think ambassador taylor has been an effective envoy of that policy and if he's going to remain in his job or if the president has lost itself in him. >> state department's doing a fantastic job. i think we've delivered in a way the obama administration has not delivered on ukraine. thanks, everybody. have a fantastic day.

>> would not answer that. joining me now for more on the impeachment inquiry and the upcoming testimony, jonathan lamb beer a. susan dell pers yoe. and basil, democratic strategist and former executive director of the new york state democratic party. welcome, everybody. i think it's pretty notable that mike pompeo wouldn't say the president has confidence in ambassador taylor. they're sending a pretty clear message to those who are agreeing to testify evensuoena. >> sure. every one of them has come under withering criticism from the president on twitter. we saw it in real time on friday when the ambassador was up there testifying. he went after her on twitter and then that was then read into the record so we had her real-time reaction to it, which was a really powerful, powerful moment. he has gone after -- he went after taylor over the weekend, as well. he went after deputy secretary of state. he has went after the mike pence

aide, jennifer williams was on the call. who testified behind closed doors in the last couple of days. yeah. the markups are there. this white house is basically saying if you testify, you're crossing us and you're potentially going to be out. pompeo amid reports some tension between the secretary of state and the president because of these career diplomats who have testified against trump. but he certainly, today, if the president was unhappy, he was sort of conveying that. >> it seems to be across the republican party right now. mike pompeo is not gonna back up ambassador taylor. he didn't back up marie yovanovitch when she was being targeted as a -- in the smear campaign. that's what she testified to. now, ron johnson who has made trips to ukraine, has met with president zelensky, sent a letter to devin nunes and jim jordan saying it's possible that alexander vindman, who is going to be testifying this week as well of the national security council, fits the profile of an administration official who is quote never accepted president trump as legitimate.

how despicable and disgusting and what ever happened to johnson or johnson? that's obscene. this man has served our country in war. he has served us in a diplomatic war. he does his job every day. puts on his uniform. how dare you? that -- i -- i -- it makes me so angry because, yes, it's wrong to go after these witnesses. he also want -- the president also wanted to add firing his inspector general, by the way, on to that. >> yeah. but i think the larger issue is that they're trying to paint anybody who says something that doesn't line up with what the president's narrative is, is somehow a never trumper even if that person works for the vice president. even if that person is -- is a veteran, person who served honorably, worked in the national security council, was not a political appointee. or even when they are a political appointee like ambassador taylor was. he was an appointee of mike pompeo. >> if you disagree with donald trump on any level, it does not make you a never trumper. it makes you someone who has a disagreement with the president.

it makes you a patriot. that's what we're supposed to do and celebrate in this country. the president is going to go after you and try to use it in a threatening way to show they're loyal to him which is really what's so despicable about pompeo. he's just doing this to keep donald trump happy. they will do whatever it takes and the fact that the -- the republicans in the senate and the house cannot even stand up for people who have been fighting for this country is really disgusting. >> they're not defending him as vociferously on the merits. they're starting to do that here and there. but republicans are not defending the president on the merits. instead, they are trying, in a lot of cases, to tear apart the witnesses. or to ignore the witnesses entirely. >> well, i think it's two things. one, to everybody's point before, if you look at ambassador yovanovitch's body language after that tweet was read into the record last week, that told you everything you needed to know, number one,

about the -- the -- the challenges facing a public servant in terms of doing their job and doing it extraordinarily well. and i don't expect any republican honestly to come to anybody's aid. that's long past. but i think that the political theater has become really important and if you don't pay attention to anything, i'd throw this one point out. a member of congress from upstate new york attempted to sort of challenge adam schiff in the hearings to try to get her voice heard. and in trying to create that sense of -- that -- that confrontation, her challenger in her race right now, tedra cobb raised a million dollars over the weekend. and that says to me that not only are people paying attention but there are folks that are trying to mount a substantial resistance, again using that word resistance, to all that they're seeing through these hearings and with these republicans. but again, i don't expect the republicans to change at all. >> i do want to ask about elise

stefanic. thank you. i pronounced it correctly. she's -- comes from an interesting district. it's a new york district. it's one that has very deep red elements to it but it's one that has some very blue elements as well. she was seen as a moderate who might be open to impeachment. what does it mean to have her turn and -- and then lash herself so closely to the president? i know you're talking about the donations but we've seen donations like that flood in across the country from outside of districts and it doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to sway an election. but why do you think that -- that she's decided to cozy up? >> well, i think she's representative of where the republican party is right now. they're still with very few exceptions, mitt romney perhaps and a couple others, they're willing to latch themselves to this president. they still feel even a district like this, like new york state district or a purply district, they think that is still what the base wants. and they're afraid of defying him. they're afraid of -- of crossing him. and i think that he is also

really leaning on. he and the white house have really leaned on his allies in congress. and she is certainly not as close to him as, say, jim jordan. but wants him out there mounting as robust a defense as possible. devin nunes sort of delved into conspiracy talk right in the beginning and people in the white house were rather unhappy. they thought jordan was more effective. but the president, as you know as well as known, is his -- his view of loyalty is someone to go on television and defend me. and particularly to do that in -- particularly to do that in a televise hearing. >> she did it as a stunt. she didn't necessarily -- maybe she's worried about a primary. i'm not sure. >> but it's also auditioning for some other job. >> let me ask about this. mitch mcconnell. he appears to be writing off any chances of impeachment conviction. he says he doesn't see any way the democrats are going to get 67 votes in the senate to convict the president. that would be a number of republicans. do you think it's a foregone conclusion that he will be acquitted in the senate?

if it gets to that. >> if i had to look at the snapshot today, yes. but that doesn't mean this week's testimony won't start changing numbers. we're seeing that -- >> what needs to happen for those numbers to change? >> they basically need to catch -- they have to have direct connection to the president. >> is that gonna make a difference? isn't there a direct connection right now? >> but there's also one other thing that's going to be interesting that we haven't seen. we haven't seen the ad campaign. we haven't seen the narrative come out, like for example, with cavanaugh. you know, that was probably the biggest televised hearing we've had in some time besides mueller. i think you're going to see both sides of the aisle creating their own narratives on television ads and really telling the story. and that's what's probably gonna be -- end up being more persuadable than anything else. but mitch mcconnell needs to see that maine's in trouble flipping, colorado, couple other states. >> that's what i think is important if mitch mcconnell feels he can't win seats.

that, i think, is the only thing that gets republicans to vote to convict the president. other than that, you know, mcconnell's not gonna move. >> all right, guys. we're going to come back to this. jonathan, susan, bazle. you guys are all sticking around. next up, he's a key witness into the democrats investigation in the hold up of security aid to ukraine. what will gordon sondland say when he testifies in the impeachment inquiry? and what if he says nothing at all? i thought i was managing my moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. but i realized something was missing... me. the thought of my symptoms returning was keeping me from being there for the people and things i love most. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira can help get, and keep, uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts so you could experience few or no symptoms. 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, control is possible. there's a company that's talked than me: jd power.people 448,134 to be exact. they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room. it's easy to move forward when you're ready for what comes next.

at fidelity, we make sure you have a clear plan to cover the essentials in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. and on the way, you'll get timely investment help to keep you on the right track, without the unnecessary fees you might expect from so many financial firms. because when you have a partner who gives you clarity at every step, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. (honk!) i hear you sister. that's why i'm partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual check-up, and be open with your doctor about anything you feel - physically and emotionally. but now cigna has a plan that can help everyone see stress differently. just find a period of time to unwind. a location to de-stress. an activity to enjoy. or the name of someone to talk to. to create a plan that works for you, visit cigna.com/mystressplan. cigna. together, all the way.

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. lashmakes every lash fullyrom maybsensational.ork. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect. lash sensational. only from maybelline new york.

sondland doesn't show up? or gordon sondland pleads the fifth and doesn't offer much? >> that's entirely possible. i'm sure that his attorneys are advising him on exactly what he might say or not say given the increasing clarity of the legal risk he might be putting himself in depending on how he testifies. >> welcome back. that was democratic senator chris coons on what to expect or perhaps not to expect during eu ambassador gordon sondland's highly-anticipated public hearing this week in the impeachment inquiry. there are so many questions swirling around sondland. the wall street journal reports e-mails, a paper trail show sondland was keeping top officials, including mick mulvaney and energy secretary rick perry up to date on his efforts on the ukraine investigations. sondland testified that he did not recall discussions with any state department or white house officials about former vice president biden or his son, nor

do i recall, he said, taking part in any effort to encourage an investigation into the bidens. on wednesday, the eu ambassador will certainly face tough questions about his previous testimony. his newly-revealed e-mails to administration officials and a phone call to president trump that he did not disclose during his deposition. so let's turn to former u.s. attorney and now msnbc contributor barbara mcquade for a closer look at the legal issues facing ambassador sondland. barbara, always good to see you. it seems like there's a lot of -- there are many ways that gordon sondland could be in some real trouble. the wall street journal now reporting on e-mails that show him keeping white house officials, like mick mulvaney, up to date. that seems to directly contradict what he told congress a couple weeks ago or a month ago. >> yes. he's in a awkward position because not only did he testify contrary to some of the things

that are coming out now once. he already offered a correction to his testimony. he provided a written statement that said now that i've heard the testimony of some other witnesses and my memory has been refreshed, i want to correct the following things. and now, more information is coming out that contradicts his initial testimony. it's kind of awkward when even the corrected testimony needs to be corrected. you know, there's a famous phrase by william shakespeare that says the truth will out. ultimately, the truth comes out and so when you try to spin these things, you have to know that there are other witnesses and there are documents and e-mails. and so people who try to lie, ultimately are caught up when the truth comes out. >> what is his lawyer advising him tonight? >> you know, i think they are probably having a serious discussion about whether to invoke the fifth amendment. that's of course the right against self-incrimination that says you don't have to answer questions if they might tend to expose you to criminal liability. the problem for gordon sondland

is that he is likely already waved that privilege with regard to most of the questions he's likely to be asked. you can't answer the questions and then later say, oh, i want to invoke my fifth amendment right. if you have talked about the subject matter, you have waved it as to other questions relating to the subject matter. >> so any question asked about whether he had a conversation with the president, about whether he knew that the president wanted investigations into biden, all of those things are fair game and he would not be allowed to plead the fifth on those? >> yes. now, if he were to slice it thin and say, for example, this phone call that has recently been disclosed relating to the call he took in kyiv about the investigation, if you were specifically asked about that call, he may be able to invoke it there. depending on how thinly sliced they're going to allow him to go on it. but i think he's in a heap of danger if he starts playing cute with that. the democrats might allow him to

invoke it. of course, their only remedy would then be to go to a court to try to compel him to testify. and so it might be a battle they just don't want to pursue. but i think he's on some shaky ground legally about whether he can invoke his fifth amendment right at this stage of the game. >> that phone call he did not disclose, just so everyone knows. is there a chance you think, barbara, that he just doesn't show up tomorrow? >> i don't think so. i think the fact that he has come a couple times before makes it difficult for him not to show up without being in contempt of congress. so if he doesn't show up tomorrow, it really just delays the day of reckoning and so, you know, if he's not ready, if there's some other reason not to show up. but i think that he'll at least show up and if he invokes the fifth amendment, it would be only to limited amounts of questions, not to the whole thing. >> i keep saying tomorrow. i mean wednesday. my brain thinks it's tuesday even though i do this show every monday. i should know better. >> understood. >> what if he says i don't recall? >> i -- i think that is likely

to be the safest bet. if you look even back at the prior testimony, he was very careful to couch many of the things he said in terms of not recalling. that is much more difficult for someone to prosecute a lie because it's -- it's almost impossible to tell what was in someone's mind. it may be that a jury doesn't believe that you didn't recall something when you've had so many instances where you were involved in it. but that is likely what his lawyers are saying is, of course, you know, advising him it's difficult to prove what you do or don't recall. and so if -- if he comes in and testifies, my guess is there's a lot of -- you'll hear that phrase an awful lot. >> let me ask you this. the trustworthiness, the credibility of the witness. republicans will likely say he's already changed his story once. why should we believe him now? how effective is that when so many others have testified -- testified consistently about his interactions with the president? >> yeah. so if he decide to come clean and say now i did shade the

truth in the past or i wasn't complete or i wasn't remembering everything and now that i've spent some time thinking about it, i'm going to tell you everything. i think for a witness who has demonstrated some credibility issues, the way to rehabilitate his credibility is through corroboration. and so he needs to tell a story that is consistent with the stories we're hearing from other witnesses and the paper trail, what is in the e-mails and the text messages. and so i think he does have some value as a narrator to help link those dots. but only if it's consistent with the other testimony and documentary evidence. >> the best part about this story is that we get to show that video of jeff bennett doggedly trying to get ambassador sondland to answer questions. right here. this video last time he was testifying on capitol hill. and his lawyer trying to bat jeff bennett away and bennett telling that lawyer, you're a well respected attorney. you know there is freedom of the press. so i love seeing this video of jeff bennett. i love the opportunity to put it on the screen. barbara mcquade, also love having you. thank you very much. and up next, there is a new

leader in the 2020 pack. maybelline new york. makes every lash fully sensational. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect. lash sensational. only from maybelline new york.

why fingerstick when you can scan? with the freestyle libre 14 day system just scan the sensor with your reader, iphone or android and manage your diabetes. with the freestyle libre 14 day system, a continuous glucose monitor, you can check your glucose levels any time, without fingersticks. ask your doctor to write a prescription for the freestyle libre 14 day system. you can do it without fingersticks. learn more at freestylelibre.us you can do it without fingersticks. lashmakes every lash fullyrom maybsensational.ork. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect.

lash sensational. only from maybelline new york. let me tell you something, i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio and so much more. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more. i'm proud to be a part of aag, i trust em, i think you can too.

welcome back. tonight in 2020 vision, we've got another new poll showing pete buttigieg leading the pack in iowa. and just like last week's poll, buttigieg has surged to the top among the pack. among likely iowa caucus goers. in this new des moines register/cnn poll, buttigieg is at 25%. he has a nine-point lead over warren who is in second place at 16. biden and sanders are tied for third at 15. buttigieg has risen 16 points since the last poll in september. warren and biden have both fallen. and while we're also getting a look at where potential 2020 candidate michael bloomberg stands among those likely caucus goers, as well. and it is not good. his net favorability in iowa stands at negative -- negative

39. 19% view bloomberg favorably versus 58% who see him in an unfavorable light. on the opposite side of the spectrum, buttigieg is on top with a net favorability of plus 56. and while he is not officially announced he is running, bloomberg did something this weekend that all but confirms he will be getting into the race. he made a major reversal speaking at a black church in brooklyn. bloomberg apologized for the much-criticized stop and frisk policing policy he advocated when he was mayor of new york city. we've got a lot more on the 2020 race, including another loss for president trump at the ballot box. that's next. ♪ hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ]

[ loud squawking and siren blaring ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

hey allergy muddlers... achoo! ...do your sneezes turn heads? try zyrtec... ...it starts working hard at hour one... and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. zyrtec muddle no more. lashmakes every lash fullyrom maybsensational.ork. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect. lash sensational. only from maybelline new york. wwithout it, i cannot write myl tremors wouldname.xtreme. 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. our shared love for louisiana is always more important than the partisan differences that sometimes divide us. and as for the president, god bless his heart. >> welcome back. that was louisiana democratic governor john bel edwards saturday night with a little bit of southern shade for president trump. moments after he beat his republican challenger eddie rispone to win a second term in a state president trump won by 20 points. bel edwards is now the second democrat this month to win a gubernatorial race in a red state. his election is another defeat

for the president who traveled to louisiana three times to campaign for rispone. it's also another sign republicans are losing ground in the suburbs and that right there could spell trouble for trump in 2020. the panel is back. john, susan, and basil. all right, guys. john bel edwards. is he a bell weather for 2020? >> not necessarily, no. you hit -- you hit the point of the trend that is concerning for the white house. the suburbs idea. that he is -- it's not just in louisiana. we saw it in kentucky, as well. we saw it on, you know, in election night a few weeks ago where he had trouble outside of cincinnati. he had trouble outside of philadelphia and so on. if the republicans lose in the suburbs, that's a problem for trump. the louisiana race is a little bit of -- perhaps. this is a very conservative democratic governor. out of step with the national party on most issues. i mean, it speaks perhaps the president's capital a little bit. but also the lack of good advice

around him. there's very few experienced campaign hands along -- along with the president now. i mean, jared kushner and brad pascal are the most seasoned. i mean, for instance, bevin in kentucky, it's a pretty unpopular governor there. >> just advice, don't go there. don't bother. don't stick yourself into that. >> right. there's no need to put your neck out there for this one but he did anyway. in part, people around him have said because the president just likes rallies. he likes doing that. and he had such faith in himself, he look ted numbers and said, well, look, these are deep-red states. i carried both kentucky and louisiana by a ton in 2016. surely, i can get these guys over the finish line. because you might end up vetera would say these aren't the races you want to associate yourself with. >> he also motives turnout in the suburbs we know. when he shows up and does those rallies, people show up in the suburbs. they also show up in the cities. we've seen record turnout in kentucky, in louisiana among

african american voters, in urban voters. so that's a big play. donald trump is forcing that turnout, which should be really concerning to a lot of other republicans because in the case of louisiana, it was a conservative democrat. >> to motive the people to vote regardless of who the democratic nominee is. speak of democratic nominees, almost nominees, or not even almost nominees, almost contenders to be a nominee, mike bloomberg made a pretty big signal over the weekend that he wants to jump into the 2020 race. you worked for mike bloomberg's reelection in 2009. we can get to that third part in a second. that is controversial. do. >> you think -- does this mean he is running? >> i'm still not sure that he is rung. >> why would he apologize for stop and frisk when he never apologized for. >> most politicians don't apologize for policy decisions they make. this was a bit of an aberration in and of itself. but if he didn't, it's a

non-starter. you have african americans who weigh very heavily in this race. if he's got any strategy in mind at all to get african american votes, to siphon them away from joe biden, which i don't think he does or try to pick up some of the votes that went to corey or kamala harris or others in the lower tier, you're not going have a conversation without that actual apology. it needed to happen. but i don't know he gets votes. >> it's a crude comparison, but was this his birtherism moment when donald trump apologized for birtherism on the campaign trail? i'm not saying they're the same candidate at all. but that moment? >> they're not the same candidate. i don't know that it's that moment, honestly, because when you're -- because the damage that was done with stop and frisk, birtherism was targeted to a black president and the black community, no question about it. but stop and frisk put a lot of people in jail. stop and frisk actually harmed, separated families and took black men in particular off the street. even the apology as necessary as

it was, it doesn't undo what was done. >> no. >> having said, that having said that, if you look at the democrats that have been trending at the top of the ticket, at the top of the leaderboard, they all have problems with respect to criminal justice and communities of color. so i don't want questions about electability to cloud this very important issue, that i'm still waiting for a candidate to have a really solid -- >> theirs are farther in the past, though, for the most part. for the most part, they're farther in the past. they're not kamala harris. but for the most part, they're not farther in the past. let's put the numbers up on the screen. this is who stop and frisk affected while bloomberg was mayor here in new york city. 80% of people stop for black or latino people. 88% of people stopped were innocent. >> that's right. >> and they said this was not being targeted -- they said this was being targeted in dangerous communities, but they were targeting people in less dangerous communities as well, and it was not white people being stopped.

it was black and latinos. >> that's absolutely right. they never stop anybody on park avenue. absolutely right. that's why again, not defending it, he needed to apologize. >> but i wonder how it plays with the demographic in the country. does it matter? >> the nypd started curtailing the practice while he was in office. that's true. >> there was a lawsuit? >> sure. he was also a public defender of it. he defended it earlier this year. this looks like a very politically craven decision. whether it matters to the electorate or no, i'm not sure. there doesn't seem that much of an appetite for bloomberg, at least not right now. >> the nypd targeted, was surveilling mosques. he rammed through that third term. i'm sorry. i know you worked on it. the popularity went down. >> i get it. >> he has a lot of political liability. >> which i just want to quickly get to, which is one of the reasons why this morning i woke up, saw that story and wondered if he was really running. because you're letting that story run out there. get it out of the way early? >> then you the negative 39 in iowa that we saw in the polls.

maybe this really was to test the water, because these numbers, i think he's getting more backlash than they ever anticipated on a whole host of issues. and to come in with -- you're supposed to enter a race on a high note and defining yourself. and now he is being defined, which is hurting him. >> in the commercial break, bloomberg always a no no to talk about. but you were mentioning his 2001 candidacy and why people should not count him out because of what happened there. >> one of the things he did, his ability to target voters was tremendous. he was reaching out to people who were left-handed, had a dog and drank coffee at 3:00 p.m. he knew who those people were. it was a list that every republican wanted. so he is used to type of targeting. don't forget the tens of millions of dollars he spent on every town for gun safety that is a big deal. that data that they have to do outreach. everyone has technology, yes, and can usual social media, but

not everyone can use it the way he knows how to. >> susan del percio, making a great point to end the panel. jonathan, basel, thank you. we're two days away from the debate hosted by msnbc and "the washington post." rachel maddow, kristen welker and ashley parker, they're all mod rate. watch wednesday at 9:00 p.m. eastern. i cannot wait. we will be right back. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect. lash sensational. only from maybelline new york. there's a company that's talked than me: jd power.people 448,134 to be exact.

they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room. 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. lashmakes every lash fullyrom maybsensational.ork. our fanning brush volumizes every kind of lash... ...for a sensational full-fan effect. lash sensational. only from maybelline new york. hey. ♪hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today.

that will do it for me. chuck will be back tomorrow with more "meet the press daily." in the meantime, "the beat with ari melber" starts right now. ari, big week. >> big week. we have a lot in this show. i can't wait to banter with you on a less busy night. katy tur, i'll see you soon. >> bye. the white house is bracing for another week of impeachment hearings. even more accounts than we heard just last week. eight separate witnesses will face off. that includes the most high-ranking trump official who initially backed donald trump's ukraine plot. ambassador gordon sondland. he faces the impeachment probe after famously revising his testimony to ultimately be more incriminating against his boss, president trump. well, tonight i have a special report that we've been working on with everything you need to know about the man who might be the most pivotal witness in these whole hearings. that's coming up tonight. also new developments on how impeachment investigators are going after trump for allegedly lying under oath. but our top story now on this eve of