this past two hours. i'm katy tur. "deadline: white house" is up next. ♪ hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in washington d.c. three weeks of high-stakes hearings for more than a dozen witnesses spanning thousands of pages of testimony. and next week the impeachment inquiry moves to the next phase, the house judiciary committee will hold its first day of public hearings as it prepares to draft articles of impeachment. so we thought today would be a good day for a reset, a closer look at how we got here, both the testimony that confirmed those urgent credible warnings from the whistle-blower and the timeline itself for the ukraine saga. starting last spring on april 21st, president zelensky was elected on a platform of anti-corruption, much to the

delight of american foreign policy experts. he represented a new day in ukraine, a country still struggling to overcome its crooked post-soviet past. not to mention armed conflict with russian-backed forces, for which ukraine was receiving american funding. so it's no surprise zelensky was eager to forge a relationship with the u.s. and soon found the main artery of communication with donald trump was rudy giuliani. may 20th, two very important things happened. first, president zelensky officially takes office. he had reportedly spent time leading up to his inauguration consulting with advisers on ways to tip-toe around the relationship with giuliani so as not to interfere in u.s. politics. neither trump nor pence attended his inauguration. the whistle-blower says trump wanted to see how zelensky chose to act in office. the second thing that happened that day former ambassador marie yovanovitch fearing for her

safety as she later testified left her post in ukraine. she says there was a concerted campaign against her carried out by donald trump and rudy giuliani. >> i was shocked and devastated that i would feature in a phone call between two heads of state in such a manner where president trump said that i was bad news to another world leader and that i would be going through some things. so i was -- it was a terrible moment, a person who saw me actually reading the transcript said that the color drained from my face. i think i even had a physical reaction. i think -- well, even now words confound me. there's a question as to why the kind of campaign to get me out of ukraine happened because all the president has to do is say

he wants a different ambassador. and in my line of work, perhaps in your line of work as well, all we have is our reputation. so this has been a very painful period. >> now by may 20th, giuliani and trump were already creating a cloud of unwarranted, unfounded suspicions around joe biden and his son hunter insisting that as vice president biden forced out a ukrainian prosecutor in order to bury an investigation into a gas company named burisma with which hunter biden was financially involved, he was on their board. they had also embraced a whack-a-doo conspiracy theory, it was ukraine not russia that hacked private emails from the dnc. it was under that backdrop that zelensky takes office. may 23rd, trump's shadow foreign policy team was created.

george kent would testify. mick mulvaney deputiesed rick perry, gordon sondland and kurt volker, the three amigos to run a back-channel policy process with rudy giuliani. the president's personal lawyer made clear to sondland trump wanted public declarations from ukraine that it would investigate burisma, the bidens, and potential meddling in the u.s. election by ukraine. june 13th, rather noteworthy interview with the president. >> your campaign this time foreigners, if russia, if china, if someone else offers you information on an opponent, should they accept it or call the fbi? >> i don't think there's anything wrong with listening. if somebody called from a country, norway, we have information on your opponent, oh, i think i'd want to hear it. >> you'd want that kind of interference in our election? >> i think i'd take it. if i thought there was something wrong i'd go maybe to the fbi.

you go and talk honestly to congress men, they all do it, they always have. it's alled oppo research. >> july 10th, the blowup in the office of john bolton deep inside the west wing. it's one of the central flash points to the ukraine controversy. at one point in that meeting the ukrainians raised the issue of a promised white house invitation for zelensky. it was clear that that invitation depended upon those investigations. bolton ended the meeting and told his deputy fiona hill to tell a white house lawyer immediately and to go back and catch up with the group now situated in another room in the white house basement. she found them, heard the word burisma and ended that second meeting. a week later on july 18th officials on a secure video conference call learned that

mulvaney had placed a hold on $391 million in military assistance for ukraine. that was a red flag for people like ambassador bill taylor. that brings us to the july 25th call. the call at the center of the impeachment inquiry. zelensky whose country had lost 13,000 soldiers at the hands of the russians said ukraine was ready to buy more anti-tank missiles from the united states. trump responded i want you to do us a favor, though. and reiterated his desire for investigations. the pressure campaign seemed to continue for some time after that. much of the testimony we have seen so far has served to full in those timelines. zelensky's team reportedly scheduled an interview for mid-september on cnn in which president zelensky would announce investigations to please trump and to unfreeze the military aid. but it never came to that because on september 11th after lawmakers started asking about that mysterious hold on aid for

ukraine along with reports about a whistle-blower complaint coming forward, donald trump finally releases the aid. so that's what we know about the ukraine saga, at least for now. a series of what will likely be impeachable acts originally brought to light by the still unnamed whistle-blower. but since that complaint was filed powerful witness testimony has overwhelmingly corroborated just about every line in the original complaint. so let's listen to how people near the center of the controversy describe what did they saw to the house intel committee over the course of two weeks of hearings. >> i encountered an irregular informal channel of u.s. policymaking 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.

>> mr. giuliani's requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a white house visit for president zelensky. mr. giuliani demanded that ukraine make a public statement announcing the investigations of the 2016 election dnc server, and burisma. mr. giuliani was expressing the desires of the president of the united states, and we knew these investigations were important to the president. >> it was very apparent to me that that was what rudy giuliani intended, yes, intended to convey that burisma was linked to the bidens. he said this publicly repeatedly. >> was there a quid pro quo? as i testified previously with regard to the requested white house call and the white house meeting, the answer is yes. >> we have a robust interagency process that deals with ukraine that includes mr. holmes, it includes ambassador taylor, this

includes a whole load of other people. but it struck me yesterday when you put up on the screen ambassador sondland's emails and who was on these emails. and you said these are the people that need to know that he was absolutely right because he was being involved in a domestic political errand. and we were being involved in national security foreign policy, and those two things had just diverged. so he was correct. and i had not put my finger on it at the moment, but i was irritated with him and angry with him that he wasn't fully coordinated. and i said to him i think this is all going to blow up, and here we are. >> and, mr. vindman, you were treated to a july 10th meeting in the white house where you heard ambassador sondland condition a white house meeting on that, investigations that you thought were unduly political. i believe that's how you described them. you went to nsc council and you reported it, right? >> right. >> did your boss -- i mean

ambassador bolton tell you that giuliani was, quote, a hand grenade? >> he did, yes. >> what do you think he meant by his characterization of giuliani as a hand grenade? >> what he meant by this was pretty clear to me in the context of all of the statements that mr. was making publicly about the investigations that he was promoting, that the story line he was promoting, the narrative he was promoting was going to backfire. i think it has backfired. specific instruction was that i had to go to the lawyers to john eisenberg, our senior counsel for the national security council to basically say he told me that i am not part of this, whatever drug deal, that mulvaney and sondland are cooking up. >> what did you understand him to mean by the drug deal that mulvaney and sondland were cooking up? >> i took it to mean investigations for a meeting. >> did you go speak to the lawyers? >> i certainly did. >> everyone was in the loop.

it was no secret. everyone was informed via email on july 19th, days before the presidential call. >> i found the july 25th phone call unusual because in contrast to other presidential calls i had observed, it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter. >> i was concerned by the call. what i heard was inappropriate. and i reported my concerns to mr. eisenberg. it is improper for the president of the united states to demand a foreign government investigate a u.s. citizen and a political opponent. it was also clear that ukraine pursued an investigation into the 2016 elections, the bidens and burisma, it would be interpreted as a partisan play. >> while ambassador sondland's phone was not on speakerphone, i could hear the president's voice through the earpiece of the phone. the president's voice was loud and recognizable. and ambassador sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time presumably because of the loud volume. i heard president trump then

clarify that ambassador sondland was in ukraine. ambassador sondland replied, yes, he was in ukraine and went on to state that president zelensky, quote, loves your ass. i then heard president trump ask, so he's going to do the investigation. ambassador sondland replied that he's going to do it, adding that president zelensky will do anything you ask him to do. i asked ambassador sondland if it was true that the president did not give a expletive about ukraine. ambassador sondland agreed that the president did not give an expletive about ukraine. >> what did he say that he does care about? >> he says he cares about big stuff. >> did he explain what he meant by big stuff? >> i asked him, well, what kind of big stuff? we have big stuff going on here like a war with russia. and he said, no, big stuff like the biden investigation that mr. giuliani's pushing. someone at a lunch in a restaurant making a call on a cell phone to the president of the united states.

>> what did ambassador sondland tell you that he told m mr. yermak? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted. >> in hindsight i now understand that others saw the idea of investigating it. i saw them as very different. the former being appropriate and unremarkable. the latter being unacceptable. i should've seen that connection differently. had i done so i would have raised my own objections. >> your staff at least gleaned from those conversations that the ukrainian embassy was aware that there was some kind of a hold on the assistance. >> sir, the way i would phrase it is that there was some kind of an issue. >> and so i think that president

zelensky, any president, would, you know, do what they could to lean in on a favor request. i'm not saying that that's a yes. i'm saying they would try to lean in and see what they could do. >> based on questions and statements i have heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country for some reason ukraine did. this is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the russian security services themselves. i refuse to be part of an effort to legitimize an alternate narrative that the ukrainian government is a u.s. adversary and that ukraine, not russia, attacked us in 2016. >> how could our system fail like this? how is it that foreign interests can manipulate our government? which countries' interests are served when the very corrupt behavior we have been criticizing is allowed to

prevail? such conduct undermines the u.s., exposes our friends, and widens the playing field for autocrats like president putin. our leadership depends on the power of our example and the consistency of our purpose. both have now been opened to question. >> that was just some of the so far undisputed and irrefusible evidence democrats laid out during the impeachment inquiry. the question now though, is it enough? have they made their case against donald trump? we are ask our friends neal katyal and jeremy bash to answer that question. next our conversation with george conway, a fierce critic against trump. and remembering some of the most memorable images of another time. we will be right back. me we will be right back.

it only becomes more entangled. unaware that an exhilarating escape is just within reach. defy the laws of human nature. at the season of audi sales event. 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. ♪ itso chantix can help you quit slow turkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye.

when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix. [ dramatic music ]ing ]

[screams] elliott. you came back!

as the house judiciary committee prepares to take the baton from the house intelligence committee, what can we expect next, and have democrats made their case? our friend jeremy bash is here with me. we bring in the former acting solicitor general of the united states, now author of the new book "impeach: the case against donald trump." neal, we will start with you since your name is on literally the book about it. has the case been made, and what are your predictions for this next phase? >> yes, i do think the case has

been made. and, nicole, that's why i wrote the book as a sort, definitive account as to kind of some of the material you've been talking about for the last few minutes, and as well some additional material that just shows, you know, if you take the standard of impeachment that our founders used in 1787 and you ask is the president putting his interests over the interests of the american people, the answer to that, just from the transcript of the july 25th phone call alone, reveals the answer to be yes. so, i think the evidence is incredibly strong. the question is what's congress going to do about it? and i think this next week the house judiciary committee is going to start that process by asking what is an impeachable offense, what is a high crime and misdemeanor? and then from there begin the process of drafting the articles of impeachment. jeremy, it strikes me that donald trump benefits from, one, lying about everything and, two, oversimplifying everything. what is the truthful but simple

version of the case that neal describes in the book and that's been made? >> well, the president invited actually pressured, actually demanded, a foreign country to interfere in our election. that undermines the coming election, the 2020 election. so how can we say, nicole, that, oh, let's just let this go till next november because we are a mere 11 months away from the next presidential election? that's the election that the president was trying to rig. and, second, if you care at all about national security, the president was undermining our national security by saying to an ally you can't get our military assistance to defend yourself in the face of russian aggression until you help me with my political ambitions for the next election. >> neal, one of the things that's so stark and the three of us watched every minute of the testimony, but even if you just caught the highlights on the local news, it's clear that everybody knew something was wrong. john bolton, the national security adviser, called it a

drug deal that described rudy giuliani as someone who was going to explode on everybody. officials sent their deputies to the white house counsel's office. what is the knowledge of criminality and the knowledge of wrongdoing from the highest levels of the white house, the president say to you? >> it says this looks like almost an organized crime enterprise in which everyone around the boss knows exactly what's going on, and the boss knows what's going on as well, and is hoping that his aides don't flip on them. i think jeremy is absolutely right. the central allegation here is the president cheated in the 2020 election by going and trying to seek help from a foreign government. forget about quid pro quo, all that stuff. that's all there too. that's all gravy, as we think about yesterday's meal. but it's not actually -- it's a much simpler case than that. and so then the question is, you know, what are these witnesses saying? these witnesses are saying,

look, at the time we were worried about this, as you were saying, drug deal and the like. so the evidence here is really suggestive of the real problem, and new reporting this week in "the washington post" suggests that other people who we haven't even heard from yet were all trying to come up with a justification, like chief of staff mulvaney when the whistle-blower allegations happened they tried to almost backdate and try and come up post hoc with a rationalization kind of when the president did when he'd pick someone and it turned out to be wrong they would just edit that out, reverse the tape, do something else to make it look like he knew all along the right answer. they are trying to do that here. i don't think it's going to work. >> one of the most stunning things, jeremy, is that with some white house scandals you try to figure out how high up it went, what did the president know and when did he know it. one of the things that came through, really most dramatically, from gordon sondland's testimony, was that

trump was directing the black op. trump was directing the extortion of ukraine. what do you think it says that trump is now directing all of his deputies to refuse to comply with congress which could be more criminal exposure for those deputies? >> well, one of the articles of impeachment may turn on obstruction of justice. and who has been ordering the obstruction of justice, it's obviously the president here in this case. but i think your point, nicole, your fund penfundamental point poor president, he got bad news or bad briefings from his staff. no, he was the one who was advancing the lie. let's not call it a conspiracy theory. it was a lie. he was advancing the lie that it wasn't russia who helped him in the 2016 election, was ukraine who helped who knows. and the president was the one who was advancing that, and the

president was demanding that other people fall in line. >> and, you know, neal, what's so amazing is here we are, the testimony has come and gone. not a single republican denies any of the evidence against donald trump, not a single republican disputes the facts as they are that donald trump held up military aid to get dirt on the bidens and to reopen this crackpot conspiracy theory about 2016. what do you make of the way they are attacking this process, and do you think it's working? >> so you're absolutely right, nicole. there is no substantive defense of what president trump has done. they are not trying to defend his conduct. they are just trying to attack the process. and i think the attacks in the process are frankly kind of silly. they are saying, oh, we don't have all the rights of a criminal defendant, and so on, you know, haven't been able to call every witness we want. that's because we are at the indictment stage in the investigation. at the senate trial he will have

the right to call all the witnesses he wants. and they say you don't have first hand witnesses that corroborate all of the whistle-blower's account. well, first of all you do have a lot of trump administration officials over the last two weeks, people that trump appointed corroborating all of this. number one this is factually not right, but, number two, to the extent that there are missing witnesses. that's because of something this president did, which is to gag every executive branch employee from giving information to the congress of the united states, not just their testimony but gag every email, every document, and so on. and that is why i think jeremy's right that obstruction of justice and this is the third article i try and lay out in the book what the three articles are going to look like. i think that has to be the third article. because this president is virtually committing a crime against the american people, not allowing the truths to come out, not allowing any of his employees to come and testify. >> and speaking of crimes, jeremy, there is a criminal

investigation that overlaps with the impeachment inquiry around sort of one key gray area if you lay those circles. and it's rudy giuliani. rudy giuliani under criminal investigation by the southern district of new york, where could we see these two probes intersect? >> well, i think it's clear that there is something to investigate with respect to rudy giuliani's business interest in ukraine. clearly he was trying to get some business transaction done there that would profit him. and in exchange in order to sweeten the deal for that transaction, he was saying i can fix issues for you with the president. and he was using his role as president trump's private lawyer such as it was, in essence to line his own pockets. and i think we may find out in time although not in time for this set of impeachment votes, the extent to which money was a motivator for rudy giuliani's actions. >> and it certainly suggests that people like mike pompeo may have some questions to answer as that investigation circles sort of higher and higher up the

chain of command, what rudy was promising and to whom, right? >> i think there's a big question facing the president's entire inner cadre of advisers which is how did you acquiesce to the president, rudy giuliani, carrying out not just in a regular policy channel, but fundamentally an illegal one, maybe an unconstitutional one. >> we love the book. congratulations on the book. it's called "impeach." most people have bought it already. that's why it's number one. but if you're one of the seven people who hasn't, it's not too late. neal, thanks for spending some time with us. thank you, jeremy. when public testimony into the impeachment of donald trump kicked off, there was one voice we wanted to hear from, one of the most unlikely critics of the president, george conway, on his horror and his shock that donald trump's gop. that's next. s gop. that's next. donald trump's gop. that's next. donald trump's gop. that's next. donald trump's gop. that's next. donald trump's gop. that's next. at donald trump's gop. that's next. d trump's gop. that's next. .

it could only be in the era of donald trump that one of the

president's most searing critics with one of the most notorious accounts on political twitter could be a lifelong conservative republican with a very familiar last name. george conway, who has wittingly or unwittingly become an expert in truman conduct predicted just as the ukraine scandal was beginning to unfold that donald trump would come to end up right in the middle of the impeachment inquiry. conway, along with our friend and his, neal katyal, writing this in "the washington post." quote, it is high time for congress to do its duty in the manner the framers intended, given how trump seems ever bent on putting himself above the law, something like what might have happened between him and ukraine abusing presidential authority for personal benefit was almost inevitable. on the opening day of public testimony, george conway joined us in studio for an exclusive interview. he has resisted appearing on television until now. i asked him to describe for us what it was that trump did that's impeachable.

>> there are two ways to look at it. the first way is the holistic view. and the holistic view is that when you become president, you raise your right hand and you swear to faithfully execute the office of the president of the united states and also the constitution provides, it uses those words faithfully execute, in reference to faithfully execute the laws. and when you take on that duty, and the framers really took oath seriously. you are promising to take that awesome power that's being thrust upon you and use it for the nation's benefit and not for your own benefit. and the problem with donald trump is he always sees himself first. trump is all about trump. and that's why he was inevitable, he'd get himself into the soup once again. that's what this is all about. he is using the -- he was using

the power of the presidency in its most unchecked area, foreign affairs, to advance his own personal interests as opposed to the country's. >> there is emotion in your voice, not when you talk about donald trump but when you talk about the country. what are your concerns about the country? >> my concern about the country is that so many -- i mean, we talked in that op ed, neal and i, about the congress needing to do its duty. and the president not doing his. this is about the country of people doing the right thing by the country and not by their party. and this is about telling the truth about what really happened and not about party loyalty. this is about putting a country, a law, truth, above partisanship.

>> are you disappointed that republicans don't seem to see it that way? >> i am horrified, i'm appalled. and if you had told me three years ago that it would come to this, i wouldn't have believed it because i don't think -- i mean, you could not have imagined -- i don't think i could have imagined the president, any president, engaging in this sort of conduct. >> if you're alone with a republican you spent your career in republican legal causes. you now are bosom buddies with national katyal. [ laughter ] >> who'd have thunk? >> but the arguments you make aren't political. >> the case is take that republican hat off and look at it literally. or look at what you would have done if donald trump were a democrat. would you be making these

ridiculous arguments about process, about -- think of the other arguments they are making that, oh, he's just -- corruption -- >> zelensky didn't know it. >> right, he didn't know it or it wasn't corrupt. he was really talking about corruption. i mean, all of these things that they don't really believe or couldn't possibly believe. i mean, if barack obama had done this, they'd be out for blood and they'd be right. >> neal, we have talked about this moment. you guys sort of share a legal theory when it comes to donald trump. barry mccaffrey calls it sort of his extra judicial basket of sins. what does it say that there is a bipartisan outcry today about what is clearly abuse of power? >> i guess i am the optimist in

this relationship. >> someone has to be. >> and i probably am because of this man's conduct and other people like him because the constitution is about politics. it's a creed for all of us. it doesn't matter what your political party is. and to have george and other people stand up and say this is not what the country is about. and there is a real simple way to do it. >> like we teach our law students, just flip the parties. pretend, as george says, it's a democratic president in a republican congress. we can all do this, it isn't hard in our minds. i think more and more people will do it. i think it says something pretty profound about our constitution that when you have two people like us who disagree on so much but can say, hey, there are some core values here, and what we're going to see for the next two months implicate those core values, a president who is putting his interests over the american people, i think the

american people can come around to that. >> it's so basic and elemental. in this case the oath of office preceded a speech known thereafter as american carnage. but we are alone among civilized nations when we swear people in to public roles. we swear to the constitution. >> right. and the framers took oaths, and i can't stress this enough. maybe you deal with it in your new book. they took oaths very, very seriously. much more so than we do today. it's not just a formality. when you took an oath back in the 18th century, you were taking it before god. you were taking on something that was very, very special and you feared for your character and your reputation if you violated that oath. and it was something -- it was

something very special. and what the presidential oath is, is -- and frankly it goes to almost any public office -- is you are taking on the obligation to act on behalf of the people and not act on behalf of yourself. and, again, that's the problem with trump. trump always puts himself first. you saw it with, oh, the doral wanting to have these foreign leaders meet at the doral. you see it with the mueller investigation. the mueller investigation was about what russia -- it wasn't really about trump as such, but because of trump being trump he made it about himself. it was really stupid for him to do that. it didn't have to be about trump. but because he is so self-obsessed, it became about trump because he tried to quash the investigation. if he had just shut up about it and not tweeted witch hunt 600 times and not just played golf

for two years, there wouldn't have been a whole volume two of the mueller investigation showing that he had obstructed justice. and the point there is he was trying to stop an investigation that was looking into what russia had done to the united states. his duty as president was to stop what russia was doing to the united states. he did not give a hoot about that. and that, to my mind, was also an impeachable offense. frankly, even just as bad as what we are talking about here. and i think it's actually equally easily explainable as an impeachable offense. >> wow. >> it's a privilege to be sitting here with all of you. and i just want to ask you, george, what brings you here today? is it the degree of alarm? is it this moment? is it the history of impeaching a president? >> look, it's the moment. i don't even frankly watch, no offense. i don't even watch -- >> none taken here.

>> i don't even frankly watch much television, news. i get my news online mostly. i watch television mostly for sports. and i don't frankly want to be on television. but this -- i just don't get why people can't see this and why people are refusing to see this. it's appalling to me. >> coming up, former white house photographer pete souza who's turned shade into a political art form. stay with us. art form stay with us we made usaa insurance for members like martin.

an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa he borrowed billions donald trump failed as a businessman. and left a trail of bankruptcy and broken promises. he hasn't changed. i started a tiny investment business, and over 27 years, grew it successfully to 36 billion dollars. i'm tom steyer and i approve this message. i'm running for president because unlike other candidates, i can go head to head with donald trump on the economy, and expose him fo what he is: a fraud and a failure.

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®.

non-gmo, made with naturally sundown vitamins are all sourced colors and flavors and are gluten & dairy free. they're all clean. all the time. even if sometimes we're not. sundown vitamins. all clean. all the time. he was a chief white house photographer during the obama years, pete souza. now he's got an instagram account with more than 2 million followers, i'm among them. and he's been called the presidential -- professional troll of donald trump. here's an example of why. after trump compared the impeachment inquiry to a lynching, he posted this. the kkk uniform in the

foreground obama conducting an interview in the background. souza writes this, you are not worthy to use the word lynching to complain about your own political troubles that you alone have caused. it is a disgrace. now the good news, souza has updated his book, appropriately called "shade." coupled with headlines and tweets from the trump administration like this one from "time" from last november. president trump faces backlash after cancelling world war i ceremony appearance due to rain. and then this photo of obama at the world war ii ceremony without an umbrella. president obama clearly delighted with the cute kid wearing a witch costume.

he is here with his best selling book. everyone i know loves it. i love it. i love your pictures. but i want to just establish for people that don't know the intimacy between a president and his or her photographer. >> i think the best way to describe my job is i was there for all the different compartments of his life, not just for the social events or the big meetings. but also with the family, just kind of everything that a president of the united states experienced i was there for. so i crossed all those different compartments of his life. >> so, eric draper was george w. bush's photographer. and like you are saying when a president goes in to comfort a family member who's lost someone serving our country or after a mass shooting, you were with the president after newtown. i was with president bush after the tragedies during his presidency. you see their humanity. not to put you on the spot.

but i wonder what you think donald trump's photographer sees. >> well, i think we saw that after the shootings in ohio and texas when he wanted to make a point that he was treated like a rockstar when he was greeting the families. that's not what a president is supposed to do. you are there to represent the country. you are the consoler in chief. it's not a game. it's not are people taking pictures with you? it is to comfort people that are hurting, victims of mass shootings or hurricanes or tornados. we just don't see that. >> i want to talk about some of your photos because you convey in an image what those of us who try to do this for job failed to conjure up with words. this was president obama at nato. and you can just see the ease of his relationships with our allies. i think donald trump's had some sort of war of words or spat

over something with everyone in that image. and this you put up after donald trump had a particularly tumultuous nato summit, right? here he is looking at his watch. i think that was a summit where he shoved aside the leader of montenegro. >> yeah. and i think the picture from the nato summit where he is joking with angela merkel was just such a contrast. and it really showed the relationship that he had with a lot of our allies. that is so different than what we see today. >> and the images that you put up with president obama and vladimir putin tell a pretty different story. talk about those. we have some of them. >> well, you know, i do these presentations, public presentations. and when i show these images with president obama and putin, i usually say something like this is how you should talk to the russians.

>> this is how you do it. [ laughter ] that's exactly right. i think that something else that everybody in the country was attracted to was the family. and this is one of my favorite pictures of president and mrs. obama. how are they to photograph? did they seek out privacy when they were together? or was it easy to capture images like that? >> i think it was fairly easy. the thing that i love about this picture is this is on inauguration night and he's obviously taken his jacket off and put it over her shoulders because it was cold inside of this freight elevator at the washington convention center. then you see the staff, they are trying not to look. they are trying to make it look like they are not paying attention while they are sharing this little private moment. >> and the rest of us have to play this fun game with can you believe we are doing this? do you remember anything about what was said that night?

>> i mean, you can just imagine, this is his first day as president. he is just hours before taken the oath of office. now they are about to begin this journey. for me the most important images were the small moments from not big events that would happen on some days and not happen on other days. but you had to be ready to make those images. and i think they tell you so much about him as a human being, as a person, what kind of a person is president obama? and i think it's those small moments that reveal that. more so than, you know, the big staged events. >> what do you think having photographed both of them? what do you think the obamas feel watching joe biden run for president? >> you know, i can't determine

exactly what they're feeling. i think they love joe biden. >> they were really friends. right? >> they love joe biden. they -- they love the bidens. i mean, jill biden was a partner with michelle. military families. doing everything they can to help military families. they had a strong relationship. it was unwavering. they -- they -- they love the biden family. the biden grandkids are friends with the obama daughters. so it was -- it was everything that you think it was. >> pete souza staying with us. when we come back, i ask about one of the most important and unforgettable photographs from the obama years. we'll be right back. thousands of women with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of the body, are living in the moment and taking ibrance.

ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer, as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole, and shrank tumors in over half of patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs that can lead to death. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including trouble breathing, shortness of breath, cough, or chest pain. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance.

yeah. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. con liberty mutual solo pagas lo que necesitas. only pay for what you need... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

wayfair's biggest black fridis now on. ever yes! score unbelievable savings. like living room up to 70% off. storage solutions from $9.99. and area rugs up to 80% off.

plus, tons of limited-time mystery flash deals. and free shipping on everything when you shop from thanksgiving through cyber monday. and we're just getting warmed up. our black friday blowout is happening now through december first. shop the event of the season, only at wayfair.com. you know, obviously, i was in the white house on 9/11. and i -- i -- it's still hard for me to look at the images. >> i can imagine. >> obviously, i'm so glad they were -- they were captured. with this image of the situation room the night of the bin laden raid, can you talk about that picture? >> sure. you've got the most important people in the executive branch of our government all gather in this room at the same time. you see the tension and anxiety on their faces. their decision to launch this raid had already been made. it was a risky decision. and now, it's up to those special forces guys on the ground. and they're monitoring this as

it happens in real time. and yet, despite the fact that they are the most powerful people in our government, there's nothing they can do to affect the outcome of what's taking place. of what they're witnessing. and i think that's what accounts for the tension and anxiety that you see on their faces in that moment. >> it's a pleasure to meet you. i'm such a fan. i'm so glad you keep these images out there and circulating. i found with my old boss and even more so i'm sure you feel this because he's our most recent president. but people -- people need to -- to see them and be reminded of what's normal. right? >> right. >> thank you so much. thank you. the book is "shade." go get it if you are one of the six people in america who doesn't already have it. we'll be right back. we'll be ri, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion.

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

that does it for our hour. thanks to you for watching. "mtp daily" with chuck todd starts now. welcome to friday. little food coma. welcome to a special post-thanksgiving edition of "meet the press daily." i'm chuck todd here in washington. hope you are enjoying the holiday. and we're thankful you've decided to spend a little time with us today. look, we're not going to bombard you with angry debate. we've got an exciting hour for you ahead. a fun one. one that's going to make you think. focusing on what matters most to the people who matter most. you, the voters. amid this historic impeachment inquiry, the upcoming presidential primaries, at the end of the day, it's about you guys. this hour, we're going to talk