love america, mamas, don't let your babies grow up to go to standed for or harvard law school. >> graduated top of his class at harvard law school, the most honorable person, mike pompeo. >> that's quite a day. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, december 5th along with joe, willie and me we have national affairs analysts for nbc news and msnbc co-host, executive producer of show time's the circus, john heilman. former chief of staff at the cia and department of defense, nbc news national security analyst jeremy bash is with us. "new york times" reporter and msnbc national security analyst michael schmidt not pictured yet, he's undercover this morning. and nbc news correspondent heidi joins us with new reporting this morning. >> what a day yesterday. >> what a day. it was quite something to watch. >> we could talk about the split screens, right? >> yeah. >> the split screens.

yesterday the split screen was the president leaving -- >> getting mocked on the world stage. >> -- and rushing out of the united kingdom. >> really stamping his way out door. i guess he was angry. did he leave early and stormed out? >> as "the new york times," willie, said it was bad timing for him and his staff was shocked that he did it. they want the te wanted the sou bite and the 70th anniversary of nato and it would have been good for the campaign if they had that split screen. instead, the split screen are professors taking apart just the republican legal defenses for donald trump and the other side of the split screen are world leaders literally, literally laughing and mocking donald trump. >> and that's why the president didn't hold the news conference.

the traditional end of nato news conference. he says it's because he held separate news conferences with all the world leaders in those pool sprays which became press conference tlars part conferences, that part is true. but he was asked about that video we saw of the leaders laughing at president trump, prime minister trudeau confirmed, by the way, a few hours ago that they were talking about donald trump. >> they were in fact -- >> there had been some speculation but they were laughing about it. but what gets under donald trump's skin more than anything, this goes back to the 1970s and '80s in new york, being mocked. there he was being mocked on the world stage. >> i thought he had a famously thick skin? >> no. >> hardly anything gets to him? >> no. let's get right to it. >> we begin with that more than eight-hour impeachment hearing on capitol hill yesterday where three of the legal scholars called to testify by democrats told the committee responsible

for drafting articles of impeachment the house judiciary committee that president trump undoubtedly committed impeachable offenses arguing that the president's conduct regarding ukraine is exactly what the founders had in mind when they carved out a path for removing a president. >> if we cannot impeach a president who abuses i had office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy. we live in a monarchy or dictator shic dictatorship. >> if you can conclude that he asked for the investigation of vice president biden and his son for political reasons, that is to aid his re-election, then, yes, you have bribery here. >> the impeachment power requires this committee, this house to be able to investigate presidential misconduct. and if a president can block an investigation, undermine it, stop it, then the impeachment power itself as a check against

misconduct is undermined completely. >> it's really incredible watching them spell out as it pertains to the constitution one plus one equals two. >> it's very straightforward, wasn't it? >> but republican ranking member doug collins. >> the auctioner in? >> yeah. >> have you noticed? >> he's fast. >> talks real fast, nobody can see it he's talking about georgia bulldog, i love georgia bulldog the other night you can't impeachment him because -- i don't know but it just don't mean -- bulldog -- you can't impeach him. >> sold. >> sold to the sucker in tvland that actually thinks because i talk a little faster i must be saying something that makes sense. >> it was hard to watch. >> but, no, he don't. >> here he is. here's doug collins taking issue with the notion that people can surprise what the founding fathers would have done. >> this just keeps getting more amazing. i think we just put in the jury

pool the founding fathers and said what would they think? i don't think we have any idea what they would think, in all due respect with that because of the different times, different things we've talked about. but also to in some way inswin wait a lifelong with a lot of people listening that the founding fathers would have found president trump guilty is just simply malpractice in this -- with these facts before us. that is just simply pandering to a camera. that is simply just not right. i mean, this is amazing. we can disagree, what's amazing on this committee is we don't even disagree on the facts about the we cannot even find a fact right now. >> hey, leonard how are you? >> what are you doing? >> i'm talking to leo. >> leo. >> yeah. i got bad news for you. no, joe scarborough borrow, we live down the street from you. >> don't -- okay. >> we just found out, leonard, that you can't figure out what the original intent of the

founders were of the constitution. yeah, close it down. you going to shut it down today? >> i'll bring cookies. >> we'll bring cookies. all right, thanks. >> what was that. >> leonard leo, federalist society, you know. >> sorry, he's just -- >> you know, original intent, organizationalists, originalists, they hear all about original intent, right? i can get a witness? that's all they're about. that is all they're about. and now these republican clowns are saying, well we can't figure out -- we have what the original intent is. number one, when they're not doing that, what are they doing? they're quoting vladimir putin talking points. this is -- this is the most desperate defense. just throw whatever you want at the wall. >> it would be great to play that collins thing the next time a conservative judge went before

the supreme court there's a discussion about original intent and honor the framers in their interpretation of the law. >> i think the key moment was when turley said if the president had done these things that would be impeachable and the blood drained from the face of everybody and the republicans on the dais. because what the factual predicate and the intelligence committee had shown that he had done all those things and the report showed he had done those things. they thought turley was going to argue the law. he said no, the law is clear. if he's done these things, it's impeachable. >> he was doing his best. let's hear turley trying his best to give the republicans what they want. take a listen. >> it's not wrong because president trump is right, his call was anything but perfect. it's not wrong because the house has no legitimate reason to investigate ukrainian controversy. it's not wrong because we're in an election year. there is no good time for an impeachment. no. it's wrong because this is not

how you impeach an american president. >> i've been critical of the president in terms of crossing lines with the justice department. i think that has caused considerable problems. i also don't believe it's appropriate. but we often confuse what is inappropriate with what's impeachable. you know, many people feel that what the president has done is obnoxious, contempable, but contempable is not synonymous with impeachment. >> that's a good try. >> it is a good try. >> he's doing his best. but he said the call was anything but perfect. he had to sneak that in there. >> not perfect. but michael schmidt, it seems that jonathan turley's argument was you republicans, your best argument is that this impeachment drama means to drag out much, much longer, that this hasn't gone long enough. the investigation must go longer, it must go deeper before you're ready to impeach this president. i'm not so sure that's something

that donald trump would want to hear. >> i think the reality is much different. it seems like both sides have made up their minds, even coming into yesterday, and they made up their minds about the facts and the democrats have made up a timetable and on that's a short timetable. and we might as well, i guess, just move it along, you know, i guess in their view. the democrats have punted on a lot of the important witnesses that they could get because they want that timetable to be moved up, not wanting to get a resolution on the litigation they have going in court or not hearing from john bolton and not getting as many people as they can from around the president. so while turley talking about a longer timetable and the need for that, the political realities are both parties are that the minds are made up and that on impeachment the question of impeachment i think is pretty set. >> and what's interesting i

thought about professor turley's argument, remember he was called by republicans, the other three were called by democrats, was not that president trump should not be impeached, he was talking, again, about the process. that you still had more to prove and maybe he should be impeached but we're not there yet is what he said. >> this is about -- we're about where we were during the clinton impeachment. >> yeah. >> and if you take the republicans' argument that democrats have been, you know, moving towards impeachment from the time he got elected, i mean, we're three years in. so -- >> how much time do you need. >> peter baker says this will be a record fast impeachment but it depends how you count it. the clinton it was 72 days after an inquiry. it's been 71 days since pelosi had the inquiry and they've been pursuing impeachment since the day trump was inaugurated in that sense we're 1,088 days in. >> the three other witness who's were there for the democrats are not alone in making that, no,

professor turley, there's plenty of evidence already, this isn't moving too fast, we've got what we need to prove high crimes and misdemeanors here. >> i think what we have here that we didn't have during the clinton impeachment is we have the president admitting to everything. i mean, you can go back, he's admitted to trying to influence ukraine, china your can go down the list. he's admitted to everything. it would be -- >> think selling get over it t-shirts. >> it would be as if bill clinton walked out of the white house or had incentive saying i didn't have sex with that -- it would be like him going to -- yeah, i lied about sexual harassment and the sexual harassment lawsuit, get over it. that's what's happening here. >> and mick mulvaney literally said get over it from the white house podium, john. >> it seems like the other thing that's different, and i think the import of the three democratic witnesses yesterday was they said over and over again, this case is -- to go back to the founders, literally, in every sense this is the

tailor-made case for what the founders meant to protect against when they installed impeachment in the constitution. that's the big difference between clinton. in the clinton case people said the president lied, by lied about sex and that's not something the founders cared about. that was not an abuse of power, abuse of office. it was perjury, eventually we came to the conclusion. >> and i can point something out? just because i keep seeing it every day. let's be very clear. and, again, we probably should have just censured it. but bill clinton lied about sexual harassment, committed perjury in a sexual harassment lawsuit. >> yes. >> the united states supreme court disbarred him. >> yep. >> and the arkansas supreme court disbarred him. i don't bring that up to refight impeachment. in fact, i wish we would have just censured him. i'm just saying i get so tired every day, if democrats want to make an argument, they can make a better argument than that. that's like some of the ferguson arguments i hear that just

aren't true. you've got much better arguments to make than that one. >> i think you would disagree, joe, even for those who pursued impeachment in '98, there are a lot of people that think in retrospect it was legitimate to impeach him for lying in a sexual harassment case, that was inappropriate behavior on the part of the president. but no one argues that that was what the frame hers had in mind the constitutional provision for impeachment was designed to excel presidents for office for that kind of a lie as opposed to what donald trump did. which is, as we all know, jarm minute said the facts are not in dispute, imporetuning a foreign opportunity to do an investigation. >> you don't want the president of the united states committing perjury and being disbarred. >> you do not. >> and it's a legitimate question. but like i said before, in

retrospect, i think we kwould have just censured him. but this case hits the four corners of what our founders wrote about impeachment, what james madison wrote, the father of the constitution, what everybody wrote about impeachment, it could not be a tighter fit where a president is getting a foreign country to help him in a domestic campaign and using american military might to extort them. i mean, my god. it's -- the fact pattern is, again, it just hits all four corners of what the founders said impeachment was about. >> and that's why we still get all these tiresome off the record behind the scenes. republicans know he did something bad. they know, they sat and they listened for two weeks to these nonpartisan witnesses explain exactly what happened and that's why you see all thoois theese distractions and arguments not

based on the facts. heidi, the democrats questioned the witnesses about three articles of impeachment. let's listen. >> you testified the president's conduct here immaterial pla indicates three categories of high crimes and misdemeanors. abuse of power, betrayal of the natural interest and corruption of elections. is that right professor karlan? >> yes, it is. >> and professor feldman and professor gerhardt, do you agree? >> yes. >> yes, sir. >> any one of these actions alone would be sufficient to impeach the president according to the founders, but is it fair to say that all three causes for impeachment explicitly contemplated by the founders abuse of power, betrayal of our national security, and corruption of our elections are present in this president's conduct, yes or no, professor feldman? >> yes. >> and professor gerhardt? >> yes, sir. >> and professor karlan? >> yes. >> you all agree. are any of you aware of any other president who has essentially triggered all three concerns that animated the

founders? >> no. >> no. >> no as well. >> mr. chairman, it's hard to think of a more sentiment and i yield back. >> that's shows how it could be laid out by democrats. >> what wur seeiyou're seeing i lawmakers laying out what i've reported was the abcs of impeachment, which explains why this case and this impeachment of the united states president is different from anything that we've seen in the history of this nation. because in this case, as you -- as joe and john are discussing, trump meets all three conditions laid out by the founders, not just one. abuse of power, which it comes to using his office for personal gain. "b," betrayal of our nation's national security interests. and "c," corruption.

corruption of our electoral process in a way that -- in the worst way, actually, that is designed to try to keep himself in power. so these lawmakers were very much trying to explain to the american people and the takeaway here is that this is unique because the president has violated all three of these. and that is why you saw such powerful and even at times emotional testimony from those constitutional scholars that, hey, if this doesn't merit impeachment, then nothing does. and then secondly, talking about what the consequences of this will be and why impeachment was put into the constitution. because if corruption of an election is taking place, inherently you cannot have another election serve as the remedy. and that is why the founders in essence wanted to put impeachment clause into the constitution. >> you know, it's fascinating, too. we're talking about just bad news yesterday for the

president. what about the finding, i think "the washington post" wrote the article that barr's hand-picked prosecutor that was going to prove all these right-wing conspiracy theories, that he had been flying all over the world for has come back and now he said, i can't prove that. of course we all knew that beforehand. >> he doesn't have any evidence to support. >> we all knew that. but he had no -- who was it durham? >> john durham. >> john durham went back to the ig and said, sorry, got nothing for him. people said as part of his own upcoming report, michael horowitz' office asked intel agencies and john durham whether they had any evidence, whether a maltese professor acted as an intel spy according to the post? the agencies said no.

>> yeah, so barr's own justice department career prosecutor john durham who's got a long record of investigating sensitive intelligence matters, he's concluded that this conspiracy theory already debunked is, in fact, not accurate, it's not true, it's never been true. and, you know, i think the key thing here is that what the inspector general at the justice department michael horowitz has been doing is calling around to all the intelligence agencies saying is there any evidence to support the fact that the obama administration spied on the trump campaign illicitly? o obviously this was approved by article three judges, but is there any evidence of this? and the answer so far that we've heard is absolutely no. >> let's be clear about the import of this. the president of the united states for the last year has been saying this ig report is going to prove that all of his conspiracy theories about what barack obama did about the deep state, about jim comey, about andrew mccabe and lisa page and

peter strzok and all the people who are trying to take him down, this report was going to prove he said it over and over again, it will be the biggest political scandal in the history of the country, worse than watergate. that report is due out on monday. you think donald trump is having a bad month on impeachment, which when this report comes out which is basically going to say all of it's false, all of its fiction, none of these things happened, the president of the united states -- i just want people to remember how much weight the president put on this report. and now you see bill barr trying to basically say well maybe we're not going to release it on monday. ba, ba, ba, ba, ba. there's move a foot now to try to quash the report by the ig, by the attorney general not surprisingly given the past bill barr of trump's lackey and henchman. the attorney general is like it's not going to say what we thought it was going to say, maybe we're not going to release the report at all. >> and don't forget john durham

is a guy that was hand picked by barr. they were flying around the world together to capitals to find something that john durham has said he has not found. and we have confirmed the reporting that durham found nothing to indicate that this professor was, in fact, a u.s. intelligent plant to get the trump investigation rolling as some republicans have claimed. michael schmidt -- >> we can way off this conspiracy theory. pizza gate. i guess we'll have everybody investigate pizza gate next. >> ukraine meddling. >> the russians have already got the talking points to the republican conference. they're following it up so, yeah. >> michael, how much stock has the president and also attorney general barr put many this ig report? as john points out, the president is looking at this to exonerate him again, but it looks like the person that attorney general barr picked to find a conclusion about this conspiracy theory that the maltese professor was a plant by

the cia to draw somehow the trump campaign into this story was not true? >> yeah, so this raises those bigger questions that sbar going barr is going to have to contend with in the coming weeks which is why does john durham exist? if the specter general is going to say that the fbi investigation of the trump campaign was not corrupt and we know that the cia did not set up the fbi to begin that investigation, then what is durham doing? if all of these issues have been looked at by the inspector general and this is an inspector general who has not been nice to jim comey, he's not been nice to andy mccabe, he's not been nice to the fbi. if he's going to give the fbi largely a clean bill of health on the basics of the investigation, then why does durham exist? durham exists because there's something larger that we don't know about that he's looking at? or is barr simply just finding a

way to placate the president and tell him that there is something else that he's looking into? >> it could actually be -- >> winner r winn, winner, every to placate the president. >> of course. >> even now michael, i'm saying we may not even release this on monday. and barr doing what he did with the mueller report where he twisted, wretched the words from their proper context to try to put it in the best possible light for donald trump. >> look, i think bill barr has shown himself to be one of the more capable cabinet secretaries the president has had, and he really seems to know how to harness his own power. >> capable of what? >> at doing what the president wants. >> okay. >> and you have to wonder why is it that he is doing this? why is he pushing this? and as reporters, that's a real question that we need to focus on. >> jeremy, have you known in

your adult life, because i can't think of -- i was still playing tee ball during watergate. i heard john mitchell was not a great -- well, in the words of michael schmidt, capable. holderman, capable. but some of the most corrupt. but i -- this isn't a leading question, but i don't -- i can't think of anybody in a cabinet secretary, in a cabinet post that's ever operated in bad faith to the degree that the current attorney general's operating in bad faith. just like historically corrupt. >> no. and republicans yesterday during the panel will bring it back to the hearing were excoriating witnesses for results analysis. i think you see that at the top of the justice department above all. >> the stupidity of some of those -- even they're stupid or they're willfully lying. >> it was hard to watch. >> you're picking "b"? >> i'm picking both. >> i'm picking both.

>> there's behind the scenes they've got to be sweating. >> but to talk about no facts, where are the facts? you know, but this wasn't about facts. these -- these people were talking about the law. they were not -- none of them were fact witnesses. and then you had others, this guy from florida, i forget his name. >> oh, yeah. >> i forget his name. >> yeah. >> anyway, mustache, beard, i think. but he was going on. and they just say things like, oh, you look at the mueller report and if you look at the mueller report -- oh, you know, obstruction of justice, yeah, no, nothing there either. >> nope. >> it's okay. >> yeah. and i've seen, like, respected op-ed writers say this. let me just say this one time. >> okay. >> there are ten instances where donald trump likely committed

acts of obstructing justice that would land you or me in jail. robert mueller said he's president, he couldn't indict him. i mean, you can say that, but you cannot just summarily say, oh, russia collusion? there's no russian collusion. obstruction of justice? there's no obstruction of justice. wrong. these people have not read the report. >> no obstruction, nor collusion. >> you look at the conclusion of the mueller -- that's as horrifying as the obstruction part of it. no, are you -- no obstruction, no collusion. >> but seriously, do you guys think they're really dumb, they didn't read the report, or you all think it's bad faith? >> they're listening to trump. if trump says no obstruction, nor collusion, they parrot no obstruction, no collusion. >> are they all up there playing to donald trump? is that all they're playing to? >> it's got to be. >> they're playing to their

constituents, what are they doing? >> they're playing to donald trump and they're afraid if donald trump turns on them ifally it hu it will hurt them with their constituents. >> is there no middle ground there? >> if you have any principles, there would be, maybe. >> jonathan turley hit the middle ground. he tried his best. >> sometimes he said things -- i love jonathan, jonathan's been on the show a lot. sometimes he said things that embarrass me, that were just factually inaccurate, legally inaccurate that were just false. it was, you know, i love him, i asked myself those several times. why is he doing this? what's this about? what's this -- even if you're a republican witness. >> what was interesting about him though is he came out and said i don't vote for donald trump, i don't particularly like donald trump, i'm paraphrasing, i'm not a supporter of donald trump. he believed he was there on the facts saying this was not yet

impeachable. it's hard to not reach that conclusion after listen together tem of the past couple weeks. >> i think turley's argument in order to make this case, when it comes down to it what his view is to really make this case, and get to the point where he'd be satisfied, you'd want to hear from bolton, mulvaney, pompeo. that's the basic -- that's his basic posture. but there may still be -- >> right. >> he's right. but what can you -- >> that's his point of view. >> hold on. but what do you want to mare? do you want to hear somebody say that there was a quid pro quo? because we're already there. >> i know. >> do you want somebody to say they spoke with the president and he directed them? because we're already there. >> i'm not taking his position i'm just saying i think that is his position. >> but i'm saying, what else can a fact -- >> what does he want? >> i know. >> -- fact witness bring up? >> we have all the facts here. >> and the president doesn't deny the facts. >> he's not denying the facts. >> the president's angry at the republicans who are saying that the facts are in dispute.

the president thinks -- the president has admitted to every fact and he's proud of it. you can't handle the truth. >> so look with he tweeted. trump campaign, heidi, is selling get over it t-shirts. so they're going to make money. >> the president -- >> on this. >> the president's fine with the facts. >> get over it, navy tee, it's $30. >> they had a meeting yesterday where adam schiff said don't go anywhere where are i might need you on the 21st or the 22nd, we're not waiting for john bolton, we're going to have a vote. >> michael schmidt, mulvaney said get over it. i've always said that should be the republicans argument, they should say he did it, it's not impeachable. >> we don't like it. >> if you want to censure him, that's fine. but the republican party would have helped themselves from the very beginning by not making fools of themselves every single day by saying, yeah drer. maybe he shouldn't have done it but it's not an impeachable

offense. you don't overturn 63 million votes because the president acted badly. but they can't get there because donald trump won't let them. >> well, on the question that you guys are talking about about bolton and other evidence and the timing here is that is there anything that would change republicans' minds? it seems like the democrats have concluded the assistance no. >> right. >> so because of that, let's just move as quickly as we can and move the process along, because we think that's the best thing coming into 2020. but because of that, it's not operating like a normal investigation, so you don't get to see the totality of everything they could get because a lot of it's tied up in litigation. so while you say you're right, maybe to a lot of people there's nothing that will change their mind because, you know, they have enough evidence to believe the president did this, there is the question of if bolton were to testify and say, look, in my 40 years of government i never seen anything like this and lays out whatever, would that change republicans' mind? >> no. >> i guess the calculation is no.

>> michael schmidt, thank you. >> we already know that. again, just -- okay, john bolton, he wants to make a lot of money, fine. we're in america. ching ching. but, we already know without him coming to testify when a guy says in the middle of a conversation -- >> i don't know why we need michael bolton? >> michael bolton? >> i think we definitely need michael bolton. >> he could bring his guitar and his piano. >> john bolton. >> oh. >> he's got the haircut. >> boy, that haircut. >> they could come in a company. >> that's '90s about the tbolto >> you know when john bolton says this is a drug deal and immediately tells everybody, go talk to the lawyers now, that is the equivalent of pulling the fire alarm. so we can all pretend that john bolton would -- i mean, democrats, republicans, we know where he stands. >> it's the thing that schmidt

said is the most important thing here. nancy pelosi and adam schiff, not necessarily all democrats, but pelosi and schiff who have the whip hand on this have decided that there ask nothing, no piece of evidence that would move republican votes in the senate. donald trump is going to be acquitted in the senate. i think they're probably right. >> did michael bolton play piano? just saying. >> i bet he could play. it's not his featured talent but he -- >> he sings with a pained, loving way. time go to break. michael schmidt, thank you very much. still ahead on "morning joe" there are was a time that barack obama had the crowd laughing at donald trump during the white house correspondents' dinner. there was a time that the united nations laughed at donald trump during the general assembly. and now there's the time the entire world, world leaders laughed at donald trump at the nato summit. great. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. is that michael bolton? is that michael bolton without my medication, my small tremors would be extreme.

without it, i cannot write my name. i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month. prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop. join us in fighting for what's right. laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit!

i said sit! we don't see who you're against, through or for,rs, whether tomorrow will be light or dark, all we see in you, is a spark we see your spark in each nod, each smile, we see sparks in every aisle. we see you find a hidden gem, and buying diapers at 3am. we see your kindness and humanity. the strength of each community. we've seen more sparks than we can say. about 20 million just yesterday. the more we look the more we find, the sparks that make america shine.

before we talk about tax-s-audrey's expecting... new? -twins! ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan.

bill and i are sitting with george and laura bush.

then he started on that speech speech, which was so bizarre. that's when i got really worried. carnage in the street and the dark dispopian vision. i was sitting there like just wow, couldn't believe. and george w. bush says to me that was some weird [ bleep ]. >> that's still good. and bill fighting his poncho and having fun with it. >> what are you going to do? >> maybe we didn't evolve of this policy, but come on, willie, how much do we miss -- >> that story has been widely reported and it was mice to hear secretary clinton confirm that he did believe the american carnage speech at the inauguration was quote, some weird stuff. >> mike barn knack wiicle joinse table. >> also joining us, correspondent for g.q. magazine, julia yaffy.

her latest piece, trump is waging war on america's diplomats. how he's politicizing our embassies. >> sounds like you wrote that article. >> no. julia has reporting to go along with this but you felt it yesterday watching the president, julia, getting mocked by world leaders and really making an utter fool of himself and the united states of america at the nato summit storming out. tell us about what you found out and what you wrote about. >> whew. well, it's interesting that this was happening in london. >> yeah. >> how long you got? it's interesting that this was happening in london because as i found out in my reporting about a year ago, our number two at the london embassy, one of the most important diplomatic posts we have in the world awith one f our most important allies was fired by woody johnson who was a

political appointee by the president, heir to the johnson and johnson fortune, owner of the new york jets, fired the number two at the embassy who was a career foreign service officer simply because he mentioned barack obama in a speech that he gave to british college students. go ahead had the let that sink? >> mike. >> we've got that in london at the embassy, but back here in washington, d.c. at the state department, could you speak to the crippling of the state department in terms of people nobody ever hears about, the pe people to keep that department functioning and servicing embassies around the world? >> well, there's fewer and fewer of them. we found some numbers that hadn't been released before that just in the first two years of the trump presidency almost half of our most senior diplomats have left the state department either in the foreign service either because they were pushed out or retired. diplomats, american ambassadors who were coming back to the

states, you know, according to state department rules they're given 90 days to get a different job in the state department or they have to retire. and the only option that trump administration gave them was they could review four-year requests for the hillary clinton emails or they can retire. and a lot of people had to retire as a result. about a third of our jobs abroad in the foreign service sit empty. we have about 20 ambassadorships that are not filled. of the ones that are filled over half of political appointees, which is the highest never ever recorded. the previous highest number was 37%, and that was during the reagan years. and these people are often political novices and they run into the kind of things that donald trump ran into in london, is professional diplomats from our adversaries and our allies who just run circles around them and that's the best case scenario. >> and, jeremy, think about the

childish. he chpet chew lens because his picture wasn't put up in a timely way and then we find out it's the white house that had not sent the pictures out because donald trump hadn't found time to get his official portrait made. or saying to an ambassador, a professional, you know, by the way, god's grace and the time he took your father before he had to hear this story, was evident. saying to an ambassador, a professional, you know what? if wau if you want to keep your job, you need to tweet something nice about the president of the united states. i would have loved to have heard somebody say that to d dr. berzinski. he would have said, no, you must die. but the insanity of that. >> and temperature laid bare,

joe, what else is out there? where else is an irregular policy channel under way? where else has the president directed a foreign policy that's against u.s. security interests? i want to turn back to julia and ask you if your reporting has uncovered other placeors areas of concern around the world where either foreign policy is being corrupted, shaped, or undermined somehow by this dynamic that you report about. >> oh, sure. this is happening with some of our most important allies in germany, for example, when you have an ambassador who is just purposely throwing political bombs and angering our allies for no good reason just because -- you know, to own the libs back home. >> can you talk about that specifically? grenell went over and made such an embarrassment. i mean, it's just -- like i knew him when he was like a staffer on the hill. and he went over, stuck his nose in the middle of german politics, pushed like a -- wanted to push right-wing agenda

there. of course it's not like germany's not having a problem with right-wing nationalists right now. the recklessness of what grenell did is remarkable. >> yeah. and also, you know, i don't know if you've heard germany has had a problem with right-wing influence. >> exactly. >> maybe not something we want to push for. anyway, it's just -- but it's happening all over the world where, again, you have these -- the highest proportion of political -- politically appointed ambassadors, people who really believe in the deep state so, for example, woody johnson, our ambassador to london, one of our most important allies, firing his deputy because he mentioned obama in his speech. he felt that was evidence that he was -- this man was deep state, that he was treasonous. so with these people who really believe what they see on fox news and on twitter and they are not professional diplomats, they

don't know, you know, i heard of one politically appointed ambassador asking his state department employees what the difference was between the cia and the nsa. >> my god. >> i mean, you know who knows the difference between -- >> that's a good question. >> yeah, a good question if you're from -- >> you know who knows the difference between the cia and the nsa in the chinese, the russians. and, again, they don't have politically appointed ambassadors, they have people who know what they're doing who are career professionals, the exact kind of people -- and had this piece came out vir , i hav tell you my mentions were dead because it was a lot of trump folks saying good, this what we elected him to do. these people just want to -- >> wait, wait, you haven't muted gorka yet? >> he's blocked me. he's blocked me. he tweeted my -- he blocked me but he tweeted my article. >> did he really? blocked you but tweeted the

article. >> it's very special. >> that is. you can -- you should hang that on the wall. >> beyond all this, i'm just looking at one of the basic fact in julia's piece. a third of foreign service jobs be in overseas u.s. embassies and consulates are empty. 20 ambassadorships remain unfilled. we're three years into the administration. >> this was a plan. >> it's unbelievable. >> they said from the beginning the president, his son-in-law said from the beginning, we're going to run the world from here. we don't need people filling these positions. >> and history doesn't matter. >> so we know woody, right? you know woody? >> i don't know woody. >> he's very nice. >> you know woody, right? here's the thing about woody. like, he's a nice guy. he's a jeb guy. he was like, mainstream republican. and now he's acting like a stooge? like, oh, somebody said obama's name? it just shows you how much people are shape shifting because of donald trump's insecurities.

i mean, he was as mainstream republican, like as you get. and now he's shape shifting just like everybody else. because they see -- i mean, all these jeb people, how can you be a jeb person and then turn into a stooge for donald trump? >> there's a couple of other ambassadors, one of whom i personally know and have seen and spoken to since they assumed the ambassadorship of a major country. and there's an amazing similarity between woody johnson and this other ambassador that i'm referring to and members of congress and the house and senate republicans. they are. he pra fi he petrified of the president. >> no way to lead. >> but explain this. i get the members of congress, they're poor, they're stupid, they're politically naive. they've got a base there, they've got a base they're afraid of, i get all that.

woody johnson worth 10 "x" what trump is. >> he owns the new york jets. >> he's financially more powerful than trump. >> what's he need -- >> i get it. >> what's he afraid of donald trump for? >> hold on. mitt romney is in the senate right now. he could make such a huge difference. >> we need him. >> he has more money that he would ever need. he's re-elected senator in utah for right and wrong. he should be out every day, every single day when donald trump does something that weakens our democracy, he should be out. but he doesn't do it. it's a good question. woody owns the jets. you don't need to put up with this clown. >> he's the ambassador to the court of st. james. >> it's already on his resume. come home and coach -- don't put -- >> that's another question that's unanswerable. why hasn't he come home? i don't know. while they're there in that post they are afraid of offending the president. >> perhaps as alex says, the jets are terrible right now

maybe that's why woody continues in his position. >> he made a statement about ukraine, but i know what you're saying, come roon, speak up. >> we saw what happens to ambassador who anger the president. and i have to -- and the people i spoke to said that the departures from the state department are actually have picked up again since impeachment has started. people are kind of eyeing the exits, asking people look at their resumes, meet for informational interviews. they're looking at career diplomats being destroyed by legal bills, being vilified on fox news, being tweeted out by the president in these horrible terms. these are people who, you know, and i think the reason he doesn't like them is they didn't swear an oath to him, they swore an oath to the constitution, which i used to hear that that's what the republican party was really about, you know, strict interpretation, originalism. >> oh, no, no, that's out. that was out yesterday. >> yeah. >> yesterday it's not -- >> but doug collins said what? original intent?

what is this you speak of? hold on, let me get my constitution that i've been, like, shoving up people's noses for the past 20 years. that's what -- i'm carrying the constitution of the united states. i believe what it says. certainly the constitution's out. by the way, mitt romney, here's a great example. the president of the united states says article two gives me the power to do whatever i want to do, that's actually -- that's what putin would say. that's what erdogan would say. >> i'm calling ann. >> why wouldn't mitt get up and say, you know, that's actually not only ignorant, that's dangerous and does violence to madisonian -- >> let me ask you. i would think mitt romney is going to vote in the senate on impeachment? >> i think he'll vote to acquit. why? what does it profit a man if he gains the world but loses i had own soul? but here's the thing about mitt, he's already got the world zblaend knows the difference between right and wrong. >> and it's the same thing with woody. the thing i don't get with woody is can you imagine the power a

former ambassador would have, he came home, gets fired. he gets a mick phone and say i got fired and fill in the blank. hurts trump more than woody when he goes back to coaching the jets. >> owning the jets, not coaching. >> did i say coaching? well, he can do the whole ted turner thing too they'red so sow bad right now. >> i would take the jets but i'm a giants fan so i'm not in a position to do that. but mitt romney was the hope for a lot of moderate republicans and democrats. >> and still is. >> because of all the reasons you just laid out. he's got nothing to lose to stand up. and he has at times. but he hasn't been consistent about it. >> he's waiting for his moment. >> waiting for his moment? what's the moment. >> thank you, julia. >> trump is waging war won america's diplomats. >> and thank you for your patience while we talked about the jets. >> yeah, no, that was good. it was a good launch for -- >> and by the way, once she got

blocked by somebody who then posted her article. >> very good. >> that's incredible. >> it's one of those days. as the house judiciary committee moves forward with the impeachment -- >> if gorky did an anti-semitic remark which would not be off kilta for him, like so many other trump people have done when with julia through the years, that would be like the trifecta for julia. >> she'll come back for sure. president trump's personal lawyer rudy giuliani was in europe this week meeting with former ukrainian prosecutors who all played a role. >> whamt am i supposed to say here. >> anyway, promoting claims about former vice president joe biden. >> i can get off the bus? >> no, you can't. you've got to stay right here. >> "the new york times" reports that according to people familiar with the matter on tuesday, giuliani met with former ukrainian prosecutor

lieutena lieutenant senco and then he met with prosecutors including victor shokin and conston teen cue lec. >> has anybody told them there's an impeachment going on over these matters? >> he's on a mission. tooi times notes that helping one america news produce episodes of a documentary, documentary series promoting his arguments against the impeachment inquiry. heidi, you've written about these people in ukraine. >> is there like a mindfulness app for this? >> we need everyone down to -- >> we need a mindfulness app. >> everybody download calm right now, okay. >> for this age, just for politics. >> five minutes a day for mindfulness before you do the news. >> i need that. >> joe does it. >> i do not. >> heidi, you have reporting on these folks in ukraine. what's rudy giuliani doing there? >> it's hard to decipher what

he's going accomplish because these are his former accomplices. but they no longer have any power, mika. jiri who he reportedly met in budapest is the guy that trump was count tong connect dots on the bidens that just aren't there. he's the guy that rudy giuliani worked with to smear marie yovanovitch and to place those articles in the hill making up lies, fabricating absolute lies about her having, for instance, a do not prosecute list. trump was upset when zelensky fired him because he was his man. and in that july 25th call when you hear about a very good prosecutor, that was lutsenko who everybody else including all of the international constitution as well as joe biden thought needed to go in addition to victor shokin because we weren't prosecuting

corruption. i was talking to corruption experts in ukraine who say there's really no incentive now for lutsenko or any of these other guys to help rudy giuliani because their whole goal in engaging in this was to keep power. now that they're out of power, actually wrote an article about how lutsenko said, there was nothing there there. there was nothing illegal with the bidens, just forget about all of that. >> wow. okay. >> thank you so much, heidi. we grately appreciagreatly appr it. this is like walking back into a bolivian bank that they robbed months before. that's what giuliani's doing, going back to the scene of the crime. >> the strongest argument the democrats have about why impeachment should be the remedy as posed to waiting for the election, is because this is currently under way. what the president is doing is happening as we speak. if he's not checked, if his

abuse of power is not checked rerl continue to solicit foreign interference in the u.s. election and undermine the will of the voter. >> just making a dock in this -- >> yeah. >> meet the sun dance deadline. >> i think that was the actual -- >> thats that was the easter egg thing. >> you need to see narcos. >> yes. >> everybody seen the irishmen? >> yes. >> it was fantastic. i thought pesce was conspiracy ordinary. >> what about the two of them talking to -- >> oh, yeah. i thought that was actually pesce's best acting. it was so understated. it was so strong. it was unbelievable. saw the crown. anybody seen the crown this season? >> yes. >> i like it. >> what do you think. >> the guy who plays philip stole the show. >> amazing. >> i thought it was fascinating the first two years, mika wants to hear about this as much as she wants to hear about baseball.

the first two seasons were find and you had churchill and world war ii and these big huge events. this was about life and it was creeping and it was -- it was sort of -- it's about growing old is what it was. and the challenges of growing old and the challenges with your children, the challenges with just -- >> that's what the irishmen was. >> it was perfect for us, growing old. but i w >> but i was stunned by the writing, by the directing, by the acting. it was not the happy sort of ride the first two seasons were. which of course had some ups and downs as well. but you -- you're like, you know, this isn't as fun as the first two seasons. and every episode you said, my god, that is just so much better than anything i've seen. >> yeah. the prince philip character, though, really crystalized that family at least for me, for this one viewer, is the guy talented with a great background, he spent his entire life following

ten feet behind a woman that he was married to wondering, what could i have done with my life had i not -- it's sort of like me following my wife. >> i was just going to say, this is so true. >> all right. >> so many people call mike the prince philip of "morning joe." >> no, mike. i won't alaw this narrative even in jest because i know how much you do, especially for your children. >> he carries the bags extraordinarily well. >> coming up, house speaker nancy pelosi is expected to make a statement on the status of the impeachment inquiry at 9:00 a.m. we're going to be watching for that. plus, we'll be joined by the vice chair of the house judiciary committee congresswoman mary gay scan lon. "morning joe" is back in a moment. scan lon. "morning joe" is back in a moment. ur 70lb st. bernard pup, and my lack of impulse control, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier.

hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby! ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud.

careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com make family-sized meals fast, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby,

helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. we're bringing you in here today to testify on stuff most of you have already written about, all four, for the opinions that we already know out of the classrooms that maybe you're getting ready for finals in to discuss things that you probably haven't had a chance -- unless you're really good on tv watching the hearings the last couple weeks, you couldn't have digested the adam schiff report from yesterday or the republican response in any way. >> mr. collins, i would like to say to you, sir, that i read transcripts of every one of the witnesses who appeared in the live hearing because i would not speak about these things without

reviewing the facts. so i'm insulted by the suggestion that as a law professor i don't care about those facts. but everything i read on those occasions tells me that when president trump invited, indeed demanded foreign involvement in our upcoming election, he struck at the very heart of what makes this a republican to which we pledge allegiance. that demand, as professor feldman just explained, constituted an abuse of power. indeed, as i want to explain in my testimony, drawing a foreign government into our elections is an especially serious abuse of power because it undermines democracy itself. >> that was a t.k.o. in the first round. >> stanford university law photographer karlan taking issue with ranking member collins suggesting that she might not have studied the intel committee reports. hello, that was a big mistake. welcome back to "morning joe."

it's thursday, december 5th. that was a pretty incredible moment yesterday and a very important day. still with joe, willie and me, we have msnbc contributor mike barnicle. joining the conversation, former u.s. attorney now an nbc news law enforcement analyst chuck rosenberg. the house oversight reform committee kurt bardella is with us and political report forte msh post and msnbc political analyst robert costa joins us. he's the moderator. washington week on pbs. >> doubly bad for collins, nobody placed a bid on the "morning joe" mug at his auction. >> he -- >> he does speak way pace, doesn't he? >> get over it. >> congressman jordan has the same talent for speaking with speed. >> loudness, jordan, loudness. >> i think he had a rough day yesterday. >> what was your take yesterday, kurt? >> it's more the same with the republicans. if i speak loud enough and quick enough so that you maybe don't

hear the words that i'm saying because they're sory tic cue lo ridiculous maybe you want call me out on live tell vig. thankful lilt witness thankfully the witness disease so. not once in they any of these proceedings have they talked about the substance of the president. they talk about it's a rigged process, it's an unfair thing. >> you've done this before, but when they start talking process and act shocked and stunned and deeply sad, they did things behind closed doors, you have a quote every day i saw yesterday, i mean, whether it's jim jordan or whether it's devin nunes or whether it's the guy with the hair that used to run the committee, what's his name? >> gaudy. >> whether it was gaudy, they all have these quotes talking about the importance of keeping things behind closed doors and shamelessly they go out knowing

the quotes are out there. >> it's painful for me to sit there having been the guy that worked with these folks. when they actually went out of their way to expand deposition authority to give it to themselves when they were investigating barack obama. >> so chuck rosenberg, i think it was a strong day for the explanation as to high this entire scandal is a threat to our democracy. do you ayeah? >> agree? >> i do. it's happening now, so we need to do something about it. >> and who the victim is. because i think there's confusion. especially for people who are working and worried about, you know, tomorrow and getting their paycheck, there's confusion when you hear all this noise about who the victim is in this, what exactly the president did when he shook down a foreign leader for dirt on his political rival. the victim is the united states of america. >> we were victims of russian interference in the 2016 election. we would be the victims again in 2020 of interference by any foreign power. but you're right, mika, we are the victims of this extortion scheme because it was designed

to introduce foreign influence into our elections. >> i think that's important for people to understand. >> and, you know, we always talked while we're in the way back machine talking about bill clinton, we talked about the foreign influence, the foreign money, that bill clinton brought into the white house. he would have tea parties and have to explain to people what president's day is. in america we call this day president's day. and we went crazy, for good reason. but in this case, though, bob, bob costa, the republicans don't have the facts on their side so they're arguing process. yesterday we had a discussion on law, they didn't want to hear that as well. it does seem that they're just throwing everything up against the wall that they can to distract from the facts and the constitution and how the constitution defines impeachable

offenses. >> why this matters. >> do you know of -- can you report on any deeper strategy than that? >> the strategy at the moment for most republicans on capitol hill, i spent the day roaming around the building, is to move the attention and their focus to the senate. that the house is effectively over as a story politically, legislatively. they expect speaker pelosi at 9:00 a.m. to get the articles of impeachment. and then it's about pat cipollone meet with republican senators yet, because their strategy in the senate, joe, is essentially the same as it has been in the house, which to challenge the process to try to call chairman schiff or the whistle-blower or those types of people their targets politically as witnesses. >> on that point, kurt, so there were two pieces to yesterday. it was part of the impeachment inquiry, i understand why they wanted those law professors to make the case, why these were

impeachable offenses, i get. but there's also the political side and the public side of it, which was the case with the intel committee as well, you put them out in public so the american people can hear and decide. they fed, i thought, republicans into the argument that the president is trying to make that the entire process has been out to get him from the beginning by pointing out, you know, from these three law professors who they gave money to, president obama, hillary clinton, who they voted for, all those things. you had the unfortunate lame analogy that one them made to the president's son. when you take that in total, was this an effective day at pushing the ball forward and convincing the public that this is impeachable? >> i think realistically just like during the intelligence committee hearings, public opinion today is exactly what it was yesterday. and part of the reason why is because when you have these type of hearings, you need to have the big witnesses, the household names that the american people can actually tune in to and know who they are, not obscure law

professors or diplomats or career civil servants. this is why democrats need to use every ammunition they have possible to convince them that they need to hear from mick mulvaney, rudy giuliani, getting those people center stage, that's what's going to bring in the audience of the american people in a way we haven't seen yet and that's what would move public opinion. >> and it sounds like from what we heard yesterday from nancy pelosi and adam schiff, we'll hear an announcement at 9:00 this morning, they're not going to wait for these people. they want to get a vote before the end of the year. >> i think that's unfortunate. one of the complaints that professor turley had yesterday and i thought it was deeply illogical is that this process is moving fast and too narrow. if something bad happens you move quickly. law enforcement, if someone does something wrong we arrest them

and move quickly. this is ongoing so it's a threat. but the narrow part is what irked me. here's why. it's narrow because the white house has blocked access to subpoenas and witnesses. it's narrow by design, but not by the democrats but by the white house. so to criticize democrats for being too narrow in their inquiry misses the entire point. it's narrow because they have been blocked from getting access to these people that kurt so rightly points out we would like to hear from. >> so let's listen to what professor turley said. he was the one republican witness yesterday about this question of subpoenas. >> that's an example of what can happen if you actually subpoena witnesses and go to court. then you have an obstruction case. because a court issues an order. and unless they stay that order by a higher court, you have obstruction. if you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the

courts, it is an abuse of power. it's your abuse of power. you're doing precisely what you're criticizing the president for doing. we've burned two months in this house, two months that you could have been in court seeking a subpoena for these witnesses. it doesn't mean you have to wait forever, but you could have gotten an order by now. >> the house has the sole s-o-l-e power of impeachment if the doesn't need to go to a court for approval if the doesn't need to go to court to get its subpoenas enforced. when the president receives a subpoena or in this case mick mulvaney, mike pompeo receive a subpoena and they throw it in a drawer, they don't comply or challenge because the president told them to, that is the act of obstruction. >> by the way, mike, andy mccarthy was also on there who has been a defender of the president, steadfast defender of the president, he too struck down the argument by jonathan

turley saying, no, you can't -- you can't say that an article one power, let's go to an article three power to impeach an article two power. >> but isn't the reality, kurt, that it's versus -- it's the court versus the electoral clock? that's what's going on here. nancy pelosi is going to speak at 9:00. and the other odd ditty in this thing is in the american jury system, court after court after court, you have jury consultants who are hired to talk about jurors who are about to be empanelled. but in this case, realize have begged the jury. >> exactly. i mean, and joe just pointed this out. i'm thinking about what republicans would say if during the obama administration when they issued hundreds of subpoenas to barack obama if obama had said, you know what? i'm going to wait for a court to rule on whether your subpoena is valid or not, they would have lost their minds and impeached him right there. the idea that somehow congressional subpoena is no longer valid unless a court says

it is is one of the purest foleys i've ever seen. there's no legal grounds for it and constitutionally it is a complete violation of why they exist to begin with. >> but your committee had problems with getting the obama administration and the attorney general to comply, right? >> and when they did, we held them in contempt, sued them and the court upheld our congressional authority to issue those subpoenas, which is what any court will do and continues to do throughout all this entire process. what i wish democrats two a better job of is when republicans -- you heard this almost every single republican launch into a statement before asking a witness a question. they would go on how there's no first hand witnesses here. i wish that every democrat would respond if you want a first hand witness, i assume that you want to see rudy sitting here, pompeo sitting here, bolton silgt here a silting here and sitting here and if you don't sit down and shut up.

>> i believe that robert mueller who i have so much respect for, i wish he would have taken it to the supreme court on whether a president had to respond to a subpoena to appear as a witness. because i know the supreme court would have ruled that he would have. and -- >> i think you're right. >> -- the same thing with these article one challenges where the president of the united states is just eviscerating any oversight power by ignoring all these subpoenas. i wish they would just sit and wait, because one -- the d.c. circuit and then the supreme court would require every one of those administration officials, including bolton, to come and testify. >> and, by the way, think you're right, joe. you're seeing in the lower courts of the united states on subpoena issues and access to witness issues that the white house is losing every single case over and over. so i think you're instincts, your legal instincts are actually spot on. >> that's a shock. you know, none of my law

professors ever thought so. >> they would be proud today. >> but, you know, i can't see the roberts court saying, you know what? a president of the united states can tell the legislative bran top of branch to go to hell. he would never do it. >> if you yops go back to nixon where they voted 8-0, that while there's a thing called executive privilege, never the less it must give way to a grand jury subpoena seek documents and tapes and witnesses. in this case, the nixon white house complied. which is what we would expect a president of the united states to do. but it was an 8-0 decision. there's no question about the fact that the president had to comply with the grand jury subpoena. so i have no problem with people challenging these -- these ideas, these concepts in court. but it has to be done in good

faith and you have to comply. i also think, i agree with kurt, it should have happened sooner. it should have been done more quickly. >> right. >> ironically, one of the complaints against the mueller investigation was what? it was two tao sloo slow and to and now the complaint is that it's too narrow and too clear. >> and absolutely 100% clear. willie. >> we're hearing now the argument for letting this impeachment process play out to seek those witnesses like john bolton and rudy giuliani. but it sounds like adam schiff and speaker pelosi have a different view. what are you hearing on capitol hill about how soon they want to get this to a full house vote? >> they want to move this quickly, willie. based on my reporting they want to do it before the christmas holiday, before people leave in late december and try move this to the senate. and speaker pelosi and her lu lieutenants have been telling rank and file democrats that they should be aware that investigations don't just stop

because the house moves forward with impeachment. the house will continue to have oversight over the executive, can bring up trump administration officials to testify. but they want to start a senate trial knowing that the senate republicans will probably try to get this moving within five to six weeks out of the senate. and they don't want to see the house democrats, they tell me, the leadership aides and others who are familiar with this process, to overwhelm the 2020 democratic presidential race once iowa and new hampshire start coming around in february and march of next year. >> so, bob, that date they're talking about, december 20th for a full house vote on impeachment is two weeks from tomorrow. so we're two weeks out from a potential vote from the full house about this question of impeachment. what are you expecting nancy pelosi to say less than two hours now 9:00 eastern time on where they are in this process? >> she is going to say based on a couple conversations i've had this morning, that she has faith in jerry nadler, the chairman of the judiciary committee to draft

articles of impeachment and she may give guidance, if not explicit, i don't have reporting on that, about the timing. but she knows that december 20th is the day government funding is set to spire and she's trying to get the trade deal done at the same time. a lot on her plate. part of this today is trying to say she closed the book, house democrats are giving historical context for all of their efforts and they're continuing to move forward. most importantly for speaker pelosi her allies tell me so project to the country her seriousness. she wants to keep this as being cast as a partisan effort by republicans. >> you just had a piece that went up on nbc think, kurt, and you're exactly right. your argument is that from the very beginning democrats put themselves at a disadvantage by saying, we want to finish this by the end of the year. that allowed john bolton to tweet, oh, i have some really fantastic information knowing that the process wouldn't have

time to play itself out. because then he said i'll do whatever the court tells me to do. >> right. >> they've set an artificial deadline. it reminds me when we tell countries when we're leaving. we will be leaving afghanistan on such and such. the taliban is just sitting there waiting because you're setting an artificial deadline. here this is political obviously, not military. but when you set an artificial deadline, you play as you write in this piece, you put yourself at a disadvantage on a variety of fronts. >> right. i don't understand the logic of starting an investigation, and telling them, no matter what we're going to end it on this date. which is the reason why trump is use his authorities to try to slow walk this pro ves bauersce he knows they don't have the stomach to follow through. because he knows as the democrats say we want it done by december 20th. there's no reason why trump should produce those people and he thinks and democrats have telegraphed what they don't have the stomach to see this in 2020.

>> chuck, thank you very much for being on this morning. you can catch up on season two of chuck's podcast "the oath" listen for free wherever your get your podcasts or go to msnbc.com/the oath. it's amazing. and kurt bardella and robert costa, thank you both as well for being on this morning. still ahead, melania trump issued a rare statement concerning yesterday's impeachment hearing. white first lady weighed in. next on "morning joe." first la. next on "morning joe." ♪ limu emu & doug hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ]

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ us lives here. where we can be surprised by others. and ourselves. for a better us, donate to your local y today. the holidays are easier... when you can do this.. post this... and be there like this. so we give you that. and right now, buy a samsung galaxy s10 or note 10... and get one free. - [woman] with my shark, i deep clean messes like this, this, and even this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll

removes hair while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself. so why treat your mouth any differently? listerine® completes the job by preventing plaque, early gum disease, and killing up to 99.9% of germs. try listerine®. need stocking stuffers? try listerine® ready! tabs™. need stocking stuffers? investment opportunities beyfirsthand, like biotech.ne because your investments deserve the full story. t. rowe price invest with confidence.

what happened in 2016 was bad enough. there is widespread agreement that russian operatives intervened to manipulate our political process. but that distortion is magnified in a sitting president abuses the powers of his office actually to invite 14

intervention to the see why, imagine living in a part of louisiana or texas that's prone to devastating hurricanes and flooding. what would you think if you lived there and your governor asked for a meeting with the president to discuss getting disaster aid that congress has provided for, what would you think if that president said i would like you do us a favor. i'll meet would you and i'll send the disaster relief once you brand my opponent a criminal. wouldn't you know in your gut that such a president had abused his office, that he betrayed the national interest, and that he was trying to corrupt the electoral process? i believe that that evidentiary record shows evidence of that scale here. >> that was pamela karlan at yesterday's impeachment hearing. joining us now, vice chair of the house judiciary committee

democratic congressman mary gay scan lon of pennsylvania. what a day yesterday. thank you so much for scum thcot this morning. i do want to talk to you about the republican witnesses arguments, but first it seems to me like -- that the biggest challenge at this point would be to convince more of the american people about the crime that has been committed against america. i think there may be some mud willing yesterday. >> the purpose is to help people frame all of this information that's been coming out like a foyer ho fire hose coming out and around the world and say why does it matter to with america? it matters because it's eating away at the core of our

democratic process. >> and perhaps getting a better understanding across the board when you look at polls saying that the president should be impeached, there's a segment of the american population that does not see it and perhaps need a better understanding as to how exactly this was a threat to our democracy. do you think that the witnesses really laid that out yesterday? >> i think they did. and i think what you just heard from professor karlan really brought it home talking about how in your gut you know when it's wrong. i was at an event i think back over the weekend and i had someone come up to me and a gentlemen who said, look, i worked for my township, i was a municipal employee and if i had done the types of thing that this president had done, gone to someone and said i'm going to do you a favor, i'm not going to do my job until you do me a favor, he said, i'd be in jail. >> right. >> i think when people boil it down and look at what does that mean, you know, we have a constitution that has two critical protections to make sure we don't have a monarchy.

and the first is presidential elections. and the second is impeachment. and here what we've been talking about with this ukraine problem is that the president was undermining both of those things. he went to a foreign leader, he said give me some help and help me win my re-election, you know, by digging up dirt on someone. so there he's undermining our elections. but then he's saying you can't investigate that. you can't talk about that with congress and so that means we can't deal with the only remaining tool that we have, which is impeachment. >> so then what's the problem? why aren't you getting more republicans to at least stick up for america? why can't you get republicans to somewhat agree on what the facts are that you're putting out? >> well, it's really difficult. we saw it again yesterday. i mean, this continual spouting of misinformation, refusal -- we still have republicans who

refuse to read the mueller report. yesterday we had folks saying, including the chair or the ranking member of the committee saying, well nobody's had time to read the report released by intelligence committee. well, actually many of us had. >> so, congressman, we're going to hear from speaker pelosi about an hour or so from now, 9:00 eastern time. she should give us, we expect, some snapshot of where you are as a democratic caucus on the question of impeachment. first of all lar happens in your committee next week and more broadly, where are democrats? what will we hear from nancy pelosi? >> well, i mean, i think as a whole, as a caucus, we have moved to the position that we understand the threat to our democracy. some of us got there sooner than others. but at this point it's quite clear that there is a clear and present danger that we have work to do to preserve our democracy, and in particular we've got threats to our next election. we have a president who welcomed and used help from russia in the

2016 election. that's very clear from the mueller report. and now we have evidence that he's seeking outside help to address the 2020 election. so i think we're going to hear from the speaker, you know, that we are moving forward and i would expect that judiciary is going to continue to wrestle with, you know, what is the scope of the impeachment and we'll be hearing from other committees as to what they've found. >> and do you expect what we're hearing, that the full democratic house will vote, get a full house vote on the broad question of impeachment before the christmas holiday? >> you know, this thing has unfolded so quickly that i'm reluctant to predict anything. every day there's a new bombshell. but, you know, it seems as though that is the way we're moving. and it's not just the democratic house. there's at least one former republican who could join us. >> really? okay. well, let's hope you get more. vice chair of the house judiciary committee congressman mary gay scanlon thank you very much for being on this morning.

coming up, the trump 2020 campaign is fighting a congressional inquiry with themed merchandise. we've already shown you this $30 get over it t-shirt this morning. time magazine takes a deep dive into how the trump campaign is profiting off of impeachment. that is next on "morning joe." that ines xt on "morning joe." ♪ there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't.

♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena® but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there.

whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. the ups and downs of frequent mood swings can plunge you into deep, depressive lows. (crying) take you to uncontrollable highs. (muffled arguing) or, make you feel both at once. overwhelmed by bipolar i symptoms? ask about vraylar. some medications only treat the lows or the highs. vraylar effectively treats depression, acute manic and mixed episodes of bipolar i. full-spectrum relief of all symptoms. with just one pill, once a day. elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis have an increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements, may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks. metabolic changes may occur. movement dysfunction, restlessness, sleepiness, stomach issues are common side effects.

when bipolar i overwhelms, vraylar helps smooth the ups and downs.

all right. republicans yesterday latched on to a word play delivered by impeachment witness pamela karlan when illustrating a point about the difference between presidents and monarchs. >> contraritor what president trump has said, article two does not give him the power do anything he wants. i'll just give you one example that shows you the difference between him and a king. which is the constitution says there can be no titles of know biblt. so while the president can name his son baron, he can't make him a baron. >> so professor karlan later apologized for invoking the president's son in her testimony. >> i want to apologize for what i said earlier about the

president's son, it was wrong of me to do that. i wish the president would apologize obviously for the things that he's done that's wrong. but i do regret having said that. >> karlan's initial remark was denounced in a tweet from first lady melania trump who wrote, quote, a minor child da servees privacy and should be kept out of politics. pamela karlan you should be ashamed of your very angry and obviously biased public pandering and using a child do it. vice president mike pence at a campaign rally in michigan yesterday chastised democrats over karlan's comment. >> i don't know if you heard this yet, but i just heard backstage the impeachment hearings today reached a new low. you hear about it? i just heard that at the hearing today one of the democrats' witnesses actually used the president and first lady's 13-year-old son to justify their partisan impeachment.

[ booing ]. >> democrats should be ashamed. enough is enough. this sham impeachment should end and congress should get back to work on the issues that matter to the american people. [ cheers and applause ] >> there's only one person that should be ashamed, mike pence. oh my god. >> the trump campaign also release and official statement responding to karlan that reads in part, only in the minds of crazed liberals is it fun no, i drag a 13-year-old child into the impeachment nonsense. pamela karlan thought she was being clever and going for laughs, but she instead reinforced for all americans that democrats have no boundaries when it comes to their hatred of everything related to president trump. hunter biden is supposedly off limits, according to liberals, but a 13-year-old boy is fair game. disgusting. every democrat in congress -- >> okay, just stop. >> i'm just saying that they're

mad that -- >> what was the response to it? seriously? they're dragging this -- >> so george conway, husband of cell a ann conway added some perspective on twitter writing, quote, let's see now which side is making a fever-pitched big deal out of the rhetorical play on words baron and barren that. tells you who is making the president's son an issue and who is using a new low. >> she used, willie ar, a pawn, conservative outlets, conservative writers, conservative thinkers, you're talking about the "washington examiner" or whether you're talking -- i mean, you can go down the list said, come on. this was not a big deal. was it -- i think it was the examiner that said it was a bad pun? yes. was it embarrassing because it was calculating? yes. did she mean any disrespect to

the president's son? again, these are conservative outlets. and yet, how interesting if you're so horrified by this, that mike pence brings it up and says, i don't know if you've heard this or not, i don't -- i can tell you if somebody mentioned one of my children, you tamp it down. you just don't -- you don't. >> don't make it worse. >> drag the story through the mud and act shocked and stunned and people said -- by the way, melania trump, i'm still waiting for her to ask her husband to apologize for face shaming my wife, lying about my wife, saying that she was bleeding badly from a facelift, taking a personal conversation, a private conversation and she never -- never did anything. i think she actually attacked mika. and for her husband lying and face shaming and talking about, you know, seriously this is -- these people have no -- think about all the people that donald

trump has attacked viciously and melania trump has quietly sat by and said nothing. >> the best unless it's donald trump, her husband attacking people. a few things. i think a good rule we abide by including witnesses, keep the names of minor children out of your mouth. barren, sasha, molina, whoever's in your mouth, keep their names out of your mouth. that's a good place to start. i thought it was a lame pun that probably went over well in the faculty lounge in stanford, she tried it out in public, didn't work out. i think she apologized. another good rule is let's not put cav yachts in our apologies, if you feel like you did something wrong where are just apologize for it. >> we've all been there. >> but republicans are making much, much more of this. >> dragging it out. they're horrified that his name got put out into the public arena and yet what do they do? they spin the reend the rest of

putting his name out in the public arena. and melania goes into oh, she's very partisan. she's very unfair and partisan. >> if there was a way to calculate the outrage as a part of the gross domestic product, the trump administration, you would keep the economic boom running for years and years. they love to stir up and they get anything to sink their teeth no it, they like to make more of it than what it's worth. but i think your point is the most important out of all of these points, i agree with everything that willie just said. it's the case that donald trump through his own behavior has left all of them with no moral standing to criticize anyone for anything that resembles an attack. to be clear, the professor did not attack barren truon trump. how request you stand up with a straight face and complain about an attack by anyone related to

trump when you see the attacks that president trump has launched on so many people, the shaming of women, the fat shaming that he's done, the mocking of the -- >> by the way -- >> he has such a record of donald trump mocking people and criticizing them in the most harshly personal terms. how you work kcould work for th and say -- >> you brought up the fat shaming of -- >> a woman who accused of what rasing her. >> i never heard anything from melania for that. >> again, we all agree -- hate to see it when people bring it up. i hated to see it when they bring up amy carter or bring up one of the carter kids. >> chelsea. >> some horrible things were said about chelsea clinton. horrible things said about chelsea clinton when she was younger. the bush twins, i think they had some pictures of them from college that modern --

>> that's my girl. >> mom and dad would have preferred didn't get out. and you sit there looking at that time going, come on, high did you publish that? that was out of bounds. i get all this. but, again there are was a word play. she shouldn't have done it. just stay away. but at the same time the faux outrage coming from people who -- i mean, the guy has basically called me a murderer. i didn't here melania say don't do that? >> hard and fast rule, keep the kids out of it. >> keep the kids out. >> and also, listen, john referred to this, you could go on and on about the number of tweets and verbal explosions from the president of the united states about human beings in our midst. i always fall back on the con family who have lost -- >> exactly. >> a mom -- >> now let's get real. >> a mom and dad who lost their son in war. and he's -- >> where was melania for that parent? >> where has mike pence been from the start?

i mean, where has he been? what happened to him? why is he not shocked by the daily outrages? i mean, it's unbelievable. >> i'm sensing exemplar of christian values, that mike pence who works for donald trump? that one. >> joining us now, senior news correspondent at wbor boston and msnbc contributor kimberly atkins. and senior white house correspondent for "time" magazine, brian bennett. he's here with this week's cover story quid prodough, how trump's 2020 protesters from impeachment where he explains how the trump campaign has turned impeachment into a fundraising asset with facebook ads and use of social media. >> so explain that, brian. >> they're selling get over it t-shirts. what the heck is going on? >> well, it's the scale of the fundraising that is really dramatic here. president trump instead of walking back from impeachment or trying to tamp it down has -- his campaign has really leaned into it. within 28 minutes of nancy

pelosi launching the impeachment inquiry, they had made huge facebook ad purchases about impeachment and within three days have brought in $15 million in fundraising of small dollar donations. and that is almost as much as trump has spent the entire year on facebook ads. >> it's crazy. >> and that figure, that 16 million figure that trump has spent on facebook ads this year drarv drar dwarves other candidates. it's not new for candidates to take a controversy and try to fund raise off it and try to build their list. but what's different here is the scale of it. the sheer scale of it. >> yeah. you know, kimberly, it's interesting that we've been talking some time about how much money donald trump is going to raise. suddenly there's a democrat in the race who sneezes and more money than that falls out of his pocket. i speak, of course, of michael bloomberg. i've been hearing trump people talk about all the money they're

going to raise and all the money they're going to raise by the end of the year. mike bloomberg, that's like a rounding error. so i wonder if they're a little nervous inside the trump campaign about the possibility they just can't raise enough money to stay competitive with michael bloomberg? >> that may be a worry, but i'm not so sure. i think that the democrats and the dnc might be a little more worried here. i mean, recall in 2016 donald trump really didn't have a strong campaign apparatus, it was a very lean, unorthodoxed operation that relied mostly on his twitter account and him calling in to cable news shows. the wedding that happened after the -- he won the nomination was a shotgun wedding between his campaign and the rnc. you you can see they're working together in lockstep from the beginning a very well organized, a very well maintained machine that is not only raising a lot

of money, it's keeping other candidates off the ballot in key primary states. it is messaging. it is doing grassroots and person to person outreach. it's the kind of organized campaign that donald trump didn't have before. so if he was able to win with the message without having that apparatus, it seems that that campaign will be a lot more prepared to take on the democrats and what they're doing with the messaging over impeachment, just sort of seems like a dry run to that in trying to get their message out. >> so, brian, it's not surprising, is it, that the president would go out and raise money on this. argument effectively is we're at war. they're trying to take away what you voted for, 63 million of you, you voted for me, you wanted me to be president and democrats are trying to take that away from us. we need your money to fight this war. it's kind of what you would expect in this position. elizabeth warren is selling billionaire tears, mugs, whoever the boogieman of the moment is you raise money off of it.

>> what's dramatic here is the sheer size of the ads. you have this platform that was criticized for being used as a tool of russian intelligence during the 2016 elections and now trump has recognized the power of that platform, is investing a huge amount in trying to reach his voters. also we talked with a lot of trump voters, they get a lot of their news from their facebook feeds and from the campaign messages that are coming at them on their facebook feeds. >> all right. the new issue of "time" quid pro dough is out now. brian bennett, thank you very much. we appreciate it. and still ahead -- >> really quickly on barron, if i'm allowed -- i can say that name? >> sure. >> i'm going to say that name. just -- i don't know that we've ever told people this before, but we've seen melania with barron, you saw melania some time back. wonderful merge to bear ran and

barron s be barron is a sweet, sweet kid. but people would be surprised about how donald interacts with his children. very sweet, especially all the interactions with barron. very sweet. it's -- it's -- >> it's too bad. >> you see the combativeness of him out in public, but area you m know, i go back to something he said a long time ago, maybe in '15 where you know, he was talk about his kids and how polite they were in public and how polite and well manner and deliver chal th deferential to pickup peopeople. he said if that's the case, it's because of their mother who taught them well. i said donald, that's niefs you to s nice of you to say.

i said that's a side of you that people don't see. he said i wonder if i should put that in the campaign? but he's always had a deferential relationship -- a good relationship with the kids. i don't know the backstory, we just know what we sea saw over the ten years that we knew him. >> prior to assuming the presidency, the mayor in new york and barron was attending school in the upper west side of manhattan. i had a couple who had a child in the school and i heard multiple reports from people, she is 1,000% devoted to her son. >> 1,000%. it's her life. >> yes. >> there is no doubt about that. >> still ahead, mayor pete buttigieg has picked up some notable endorsements this morning from a few former obama administration officials. we'll talk about what that means for joe biden. and as we go to break, a lot going on at knowyourvalue.com. karine jean-pierre has a great

piece about networking which is an important piece of a component of a successful career. liz bentley on asking for a raise. and also we've had an amazing response to our piece, to my piece on the power of pets. >> it's really been moving. >> and our viewers have written in and sent in pictures. >> yeah. >> and you're going to read a few of them, including an incredible piece about a female german shepherd named mika. yep, there's another one. what i can say? >> willie, we have found that a lot of people are naming their female dogs mika. i don't know where that comes from. >> it's nice, i appreciate it, i really do. >> but i think nicolle wallace? >> it's actually an amazing piece. >> i think nicolle wallace -- >> she has one of her dogs named meek p mika. wait until you hear about this german shepherd. >> did you guys ever seestory. it is amazing. >> did you guys see this in it is not just dogs. there's a "usa today" story that

said the three most -- like the newest names, emerging names for girls -- >> for pets or babies? >> for people. reese. >> billie eilish. >> oh, i love that. >> and mika was number three. >> oh, really? >> reese witherspoon, billie eilish and mika. >> so i love all of the stories you sent in about your pets. we are now going to ask you for networking advice. if you have some good networking advice -- >> for the pets? >> no, for women at work and in life. >> do they know their value? >> i hope the pets know their value. >> do they show their value? >> oh, my god. send me your stories and advice at knowyourvalue.com and check it out. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. without my medication, my small tremors would be extreme. without it, i cannot write my name.

i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month. prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop. join us in fighting for what's right. here, it all starts withello! hi!... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone?

everyone. let's send to everyone! wifi up there? uhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your local xfinity store today.

♪ walk on by all right. 54 past the hour. this morning mayorbutte -- buttigieg has picked up new endorsements. reggie love is endorsing the mayor. >> oh, wow. >> in a statement love stated he believes buttigieg, quote, can galvanize a new electoral body that is a more accurate representation of what america actually is. love also noted buttigieg faces many of the same critiques his former boss faced. the nod from love comes at a key moment as the south bend mayor works to build support with black voters. buttigieg is also being endorsed by austin goolsbee, the chairman of economic advisers under obama and the former director of

communications for the white house office of health reform, linda douglass, is also set to endorse buttigieg. you know, he keeps moving the dial, kimberly atkins. you see pete buttigieg, you think, oh, he is too young. you see the trouble with the african-american community, but yet things keep opening up for him. >> yes. i mean he clearly is on a positive trajectory in the race. i mean a lot of -- a lot of what we see is about momentum, right? at different points you see different candidates have momentum and sometimes lose it. so far we have not seen that big dip in momentum with the buttigieg campaign that we have seen with others including elizabeth warren who sort of has been taking a fall lately in the polls. it is this way of trying to gale vanni -- galvanize the broad base.

these are obama folks endorsing him but you have barack obama's body man, somebody that worked on economic issues, different folks coming together, and it is the buttigieg's campaign and attempt to build that coalition. you are right. there are still issues that the campaign has. one is that he has been able to do things like fund raise enough, that it is strong enough to try to pivot and deal with those issues. i think it is a contrast with the harris campaign, for example. there just wasn't enough money to try to pivot and regroup. we have seen the buttigieg campaign regroup, and now it seems to be moving in a positive direction. >> so the candidate's just new to the presidential field, but over the past six months have put together a good organization. we've soon mccordy do it. elizabeth obviously was doing everything right for a very long time, and mayor pete. but it seems that mayor pete is the one that's got the staying

power, at least through december. >> he did a thing this father, which is very reminisce i.t. of wh -- reminiscent of what barack obama did in 2007 around this time, which if you remember he made a pivot toward a more moderate position. he had the good debate performance with a lot of contrast, again, the thing obama did before jefferson jackson did in 2007, that he gave a very obama-esque speech at that event with showing off the organizational might he had in iowa. at the same time because tv money kimberly mentioned, he wet ent wet-he went up on the air with those things. it has provided a lot of rocket fuel for him in the two key early states, but the question about african-american votes is still a huge question for the mayor. >> kimberly atkins, thank you very much for being on this morning. still ahead, we are about one hour away from what could be a major update on the

impeachment probe from nancy pelosi. she is expected to make a statement from the speaker's balcony hallway at 9:00 a.m., the same location where she announced the launch of the formal inquiry. we're back in two minutes with a packed 8:00 a.m. hour. ♪ ♪ ♪ experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment. 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. ♪

my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin

increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. all i got to say is if you love america, mamas, don't let your babies grow up to go to harvard or stanford law school. >> graduated top -- one of the top of his class at harvard law school. the most honorable person, mike pompeo. >> quite a day. good morning. >> oh, my god. it never ends. >> welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, december 5th, along with joe, willie and me we have national affairs analyst for nbc news and msnbc and co-host, and executive producer of "show time's the circus."

john heilman. former chief of staff at the department of defense, nbc news national security analyst jeremy bash is with us. "new york times" reporter and msnbc national security analyst michael schmidt, not pictured yet. he's under core this morning. nbc news correspondent heidi przybyla joins us again. >> what a day. >> what a day. it was something to watch. >> we've been doing the split screens. >> oh, yeah. >> yesterday the split screen was the president leaving -- >> getting mocked. >> getting mocked, ridiculed. >> on the world stage. >> and rushing out of the united kingdom. >> really stamping his way out tv do the door. did he leave early, he stormed out? >> as "the new york times" said, it was bad timing for him and his staff, of course, were shocked he did it. they wanted the picture. they wanted the sound bite. >> he wanted to go watch tv. >> they wanted the celebration

of the 70th anniversary of nato, and it would have been very good for the campaign and they would have had that split screen. instead, the split screen are professors taking apart just the remaining republican legal defenses for donald trump, and the other side of the split screen are world leaders literally, literally laughing and mocking donald trump. >> and that's why the president didn't hold the news conference, the traditional end-of-nato news conference. he said it is because he held separate news conference with the world leaders in the pool spray which became press conferences, that part is true. but he was asked about the video where we saw prime minister trudeau and others laughing. prime minister trudeau confirmed they were talking about donald trump. there had been some speculation but they were laughing about it. what gets under donald trump's

skin more than anything, and it goes back to the 1970s and 1980s in new york, being knocked. and there he was being mocked on the world stage. >> i thought trump had thick skin, nothing gets to him. >> oh, no. >> may be laughing too. >> they're all laughing. >> we begin with the more than an eight-hour impeachment hearing on capitol hill where three of the legal scholars called to testify by democrats told the commit responsible for drafting articles of impeachment, the house judiciary committee, that president trump undoubtedly committed impeachable offenses, arguing the president's conduct with ukraine is what the founders had in mind when they carved a path for removing a president. >> if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage we no longer live in a democracy. we live in a monarchy or under a dictatorship. that's why the framers created

the possibility of impeachment. >> if you can conclude he asked for the investigation of vice president biden and his son for political reasons, that is to aid his reelection, then, yes, you have bribery here. >> the impeachment power requires this committee, this house to be able to investigate presidential misconduct. if a president can block an investigation, undermine it, stop it, then the impeachment power itself as a check against misconduct is undermined completely. >> it was incredible watching them spell out as it pertains to the constitution one plus one equals two. >> it was very straightforward, wasn't it? >> but republican ranking member doug collins -- >> the auctioneer, have you noticed? he talks fast and nobody knows he's talks about georgia bulldog. you can't impeach him. i don't know but it don't make no sense to me, georgia bulldog

going to be there, you can't impeach him. >> sold! >> sold to the sucker in tv land that actually thinks because i talk a little faster i must be saying something that makes sense. >> it was hard to watch. >> no, new york cio, he don't. >> here he is. in would be fun to watch. here is doug collins taking issue with the notion people can surmise what the founder fathers would have done. >> this just keeps getting more amazing. i think we just put in the jury pool the founding fathers and said, what would they think, i don't think we have any idea what they would think in all due respect with this because of the different times, the different things we have talked about. but also to in some ways insinuate on live mike with a lot of people listening that the founder fathers would have found president trump guilty is just simply malpractice in this -- with these facts before us. that is simply pandering to a camera. that is simply just not right. i mean this is amazing. we can disagree -- what is

amazing on this committee is we don't even disagree on the facts. we cannot even find a fact right now -- >> hey, leonard. yeah, how are you. >> no, what are you doing? >> i'm talking to leonard. >> oh, leonard leo. >> yeah. >> leonard, i got bad news for you. we just found out -- no, joe scarborough . we live down the treat from you. >> yeah, don't. hi. okay. >> we just found out, leonard, that you can't figure out what the original intent of the founders were. yeah, the constitution. yeah, close it down. shut it. you going to shut it down today? >> i'll bring cookies! >> okay. cookies. thanks, guy. >> who was that? >> leonard leo, "federalist society." big original intent, originalist. i guess they're all fading, like the beatles playing guitars, they're all about original intent, right? >> yeah. >> can i get a witness. >> oh, yeah. >> that's all they're about.

>> yeah. >> that is all they're about, and now the republican clowns are -- are saying, well, we can't figure out -- we can't figure out what the original intent is, number one. of course, when they're not doing that, what are they doing? they're quoting vladimir putin propaganda talking points. this is the most desperate defense. >> we have michael schmidt now, by the way. >> it would be great to play that collins thing the next time a conservative judge is put on the supreme court and there's a discussion about original intent and how it will honor the intent of the framers in their interpretation of the law. >> yeah. >> but you can't do that. >> i think the key moment was when jonathan turley said if the president had done these things, that would be impeachable. the blood drained from the face of everybody on the republican side of the dais. >> yes. >> because of course what the factual predicate in the intelligence committee showed that the president had done all of those things. they thought turley was going to argue the law. he said, no, the law is clear.

if he has done these things, the law is that it is impeachable. >> he did his best. turley trying his best to give the republicans what they want, take a listen. >> it is not wrong because president trump is right. his call was anything but perfect. it is not wrong because the house has no legitimate reason to investigate the ukrainian controversy. it is not wrong because we're in an election year. there is no good time for an impeachment. no. it is wrong because this is not how you impeach an american president. i've been critical of the president in terms of crossing lines with the justice department. i think that has caused considerable problems. i also don't believe it is appropriate. but we often confuse what is inappropriate with what's impeachable. you know, many people feel what the president has done is obnoxious, contemptable, but contem contemptible is not synonymous with impeachment. >> that's a good try. >> it is a good try. >> he's doing his best.

he said the call was anything but perfect. he had to sneak it in there because it wasn't. >> not perfect. jonathan turley's argument was you republicans, your best argument is that this impeachment drama needs to drag out much, much longer. >> oh, my god. >> that this hasn't gone long enough. the investigation mug longer. it mug deeper before you're ready to impeach this president. i'm not so sure that's something donald trump would want to hear. >> yeah, i think the reality is much different. it seems like both sides have made up their minds even coming into yesterday, and they made up their minds about the facts and the democrats have made up a timetable, and that is a short timetable. we might as well, i guess, just move it along, you know, i guess in their view. the democrats have punted on a lot of the important witnesses that they could get because they want that timetable to be moved up, not wanting to get a

resolution on the litigation they have going in court or not hearing from john bolton and not getting as many people as they can from around the president. so while turley talking about a longer timetable and the need for that, the political realities of both parties are that the minds are made up, and that on beechlt timpeachment, t question of impeachment is pretty set. still ahead on "morning joe," as "the washington post" frames it william barr's hand-picked prosecutor tells the inspector general he can't back the right wing conspiracy theory that the russia probe was all a big setup by u.s. intelligence. >> oh, bummer. >> we will break that down for you next on "morning joe." mike bloomberg's never been afraid of tough fights, the ones that make a true difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby,

helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. there are things we would change about work.s message. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com it's how we bring hope to our patients- like viola. her team treated her cancer and strengthened her spirit. so viola could focus on their future.

cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. wean 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 laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit!

what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of. he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing. ♪ ♪ jingle bell ♪ jingle bell ♪ jingle bell rock

♪ jingle bell swing ♪ and jingle bells ring john dur han ham is the att handpicked because barr thought he would be the guy. nbc news has confirmed "the washington post" reporting that durham found nothing to indicate that this professor was, in fact, a u.s. intelligent plant to get the trump investigation rolling as some republicans have claimed. michael schmitt -- >> so we can wipe off this conspiracy theory, pizza gate. i guess they will have everybody investigate pizza gate next. >> ukrainian meddling. >> well, the russians have already got the talking points to the republican conference. they're following it up. so, yeah. >> michael, how much stock has the president and also attorney general barr put in the ig report? as john points out the president is looking to this to exonerate him again, but it looks like the

person attorney general barr picked to find a conclusion about the conspiracy theory that the maltese professor was a plant by the cia to draw the trump campaign into the story was not true. >> yes. so this raises the bigger question that barr is going to have to contend with in the coming weeks, which is why does john durham exist. if the inspector general is basically going to say that the fbi investigation of the trump campaign was not corrupt and we now know that the cia did not set up the fbi to begin that investigation, then what is durham doing. if all of these issues have been looked at by the inspector general -- and this is an inspector general who has not been nice to jim comey. he has not been nice to andy mccabe. he has not been nice to the fbi. if he is going to give the fbi largely a clean bill of health on the basics of the investigation, then why does durham exist?

does durham exist because there's something larger that we don't know about that he's looking at or is barr simply just finding a way to placate the president and tell him that there is something else, that he's looking into this. >> bing, bing, bing, bing. >> option b. >> winner, winner, chicken dinner. >> option b. >> that might have been it, michael schmidt. >> everything is to placate the president. even now him saying we may not release this on monday and barr doing what he did with the mueller report where he twisted, wrenched the words from the proper context to try to put it in the best possible light for donald trump. >> look, i think bill barr has shown himself to be one of the more capable cabinet secretaries the president has had, and he really seems to know how to harness his own -- >> capable of what? >> at doing what the president wants. >> ah. >> okay. >> and you have to wonder why is it that he is doing this. why is he pushing this?

as reporters, that's a real question we need to focus on. >> jeremy, have you known in your adult life -- because i can't think of any -- i was still playing t ball during watergate. i heard john mitchell was not a great -- >> well. >> in the words of michael schmidt capable. holderman, capable. but some of the most corrupt people -- this isn't a leading question. but i can't think of anybody in a cabinet secretary, in a cabinet post that's ever operated in bad faith to the degree that the current attorney general's operating in bad faith. just like historically corrupt. >> no. republicans yesterday during the panel, to bring it back to the hearing, were excoriating witnesses for results-oriented analysis. i think you see it at the top of the justice department above all. coming up on "morning joe," what's a fireable offense inside the trump administration? apparently simply mentioning the

name barack obama during a speech. chul au yaffee joins us with her new reporting. yaffee joins us wr new reporting. as a struggling actor, i need all the breaks that i can get. at liberty butchumal- cut. liberty biberty- cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ at chevy, we're all about bringing families together.

this time of year, that's really important. so we're making it easier than ever to become part of our family. that's why our chevy employee discount is now available to everyone. the chevy price you pay is what we pay. not a cent more. family is important to us. and we want you to be part of ours. so happy holidays. and welcome to the family. all: the chevy family! get the chevy employee discount for everyone today. - [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. shark iq robot deep-cleans and empties itself into a base you can empty once a month. and unlike standard robots that bounce around, it cleans row by row. if it's not a shark, it's just a robot. us. it's what this country is made of.

but right now, our bond is fraying. how do we get back to "us"? the y fills the gaps. and bridges our divides. donate to your local y today. because where there's a y, there's an us. laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit!

[ dramatic music ]ing ] ahhhh! -ahhhh! elliott. you came back!

bill and i are sitting with george and laura bush, and then he started on that speech, which was so bizarre. that's when i got really worried. that carnage in the street and the dark, dystopian vision, i was sitting there like, wow, i couldn't believe it. george w. bush says to me, that was some weird [ bleep ]. >> that's pretty funny. >> it is still good. it is still good. bush fighting his poncho and having fun with it. >> that was great. >> i mean -- >> what are you going to do? michelle was so mad. >> maybe we didn't love all of his policy, but come on, willie, how much do we miss him? >> that story has been widely reported and it was nice to hear secretary clinton confirm he did believe the american carnage speech at the inauguration was weird stuff. >> joining the table -- >> she confirmed it with verbs,

too. >> she did. >> she told the story well. it was well done. >> very well done. >> joining us correspondent with gq magazine julia yoffe. her latest piece is entitled "trump is waging war on america's diplomats" where she reports on how he is politicizing our embassy, alienating our allies and decimating the ranks of the foreign service. >> sounds like you wrote that article. >> no, actually. >> you say it every day. >> julia has reporting to go along with it. you watched him yesterday getting mocked and making an utter fool of himself and the united states of america at the nato summit, storming out. tell us what you found out and what you wrote about. >> it is interesting this was happening in london. >> yeah. >> how long you got? it is interesting this was happening in london because, as i found out in my reporting, about a year ago our number two at the london embassy, one of

the most important diplomatic posts in the world with one of our most important allies, was fired by woody johnson, who was a political appointee by the president, heir to the johnson & johnson fortune, owner of the new york jets. fired number two at the embassy, a career foreign service officer, simply because he mentioned barack obama in a speech that he gave to british college students. >> go ahead, mike. >> just let that sink in. >> yeah, julia. you got that in london. >> wow. >> at the embassy. but back here in washington, d.c. at the state department, could you speak to the crippling of the state department in terms of people nobody ever hears about, the people that keep that department functioning and servicing embassies around the world? >> well, there's fewer and fewer of them. we found some numbers that hadn't been released before that just in the first two years of the trump presidency almost half of our most senior diplomats have left the state department

either in the foreign service, either because they were pushed out or retired. diplomats, american ambassadors who are coming back to the states, you know, according to the state department rules are given 90 days to get a different job in the state department or they have to retire. the only option the trump administration gave them was they can review foia requests for the hillary clinton e-mails or they can retire. a lot of people had to retire. as a result about a third of our jobs abroad in the foreign service sit empty, they are not filled. of the ones that are filled, over half are political appointees, which is the highest number ever recorded. the previous highest number was 37%, and that was during the reagan years. these people are often political novices, and they run into the kind of things that donald trump ran into in london, is professional diplomats from our

adversaries and our allies who just run circles around them and that's the best case scenario. >> so we know woody, right? you know woody johnson? >> i don't know woody. >> he's very nice. >> here's the thing about woody, like he's a nice guy. he is a jet guy. he was like mainstream republican, and now he's acting like a stooge. oh, somebody said obama's name? it just shows you how much people are shape shifting because of donald trump's insecurities. i mean he was as main street republican as you get, and now he's shape shifting just like everybody else because they see -- i mean all of these jeb people, how can you be a jeb person and then turn into a stooge for donald trump? >> there's a couple other ambassadors, one of whom i personally know and have seen

and spoken to since they assumed the ambassadorship of a major country, and there's an amazing similarity between like woody johnson and this other ambassador i'm referring to and members of the congress in the house and senate republicans. they are petrified of the president. they tweet favorably about him when he comes -- >> but explain this, right. i get that members of congress, they're poor, they're stupid, they're politically naive. >> by the way, right here. >> none taken. >> they have a base they're afraid of, i get all of that. woody johnson is worth ten times what donald trump is. >> he owns the jet. >> he is financially more powerful than trump. what is he afraid of donald trump for? >> i got a better one than that. mitt romney, he's in the senate right now. >> yeah, what's the deal? >> he could make a difference. he has more money than he needs.

he should be out every day, every single day when donald trump does something that weakened our democracy, he should be out but he doesn't do it. >> why? >> it is a good question. >> woody owns the jets! you don't need to put up with this clown. >> but he's the ambassador to the court of st. james. >> it is already on his resume. come home and coach -- don't put up with it. >> that's another question. why hasn't he come home? while they're there in the post they're afraid of offending the president. >> perhaps as alex says the jets are terrible right now, julia. maybe that's why woody is in the position. >> he made a statement about the ukraine. come on, speak up. >> we saw what happens to ambassadors who anger the president. >> right. >> i have to end. the people i spoke to said that the departures from the state department actually have picked up again since impeachment has started. people are eyeing the exits, asking people to look at their

resumes, meet for informational interviews. they are looking at career diplomats being destroyed by legal bills, vilified on "fox news", tweeted about by the president in horrible terms. the reason he doesn't like them is they didn't swear an oath to him, they swore an oath to the constitution, which used to be what the republican party was about, strict interpretation, originalism. >> that was out yesterday. i don't know if you heard that. >> yeah. >> collins said, what, original intent? what is this you speak of? hold on, let me get my constitution i have been shoving up people's noses for the past 20 years. i'm karen cox here in the united states. i actually believe what it says. >> he does. >> suddenly the constitution is out of vogue. mitt romney, here is a great example. president of the united states says article 2 gives me the power to do whatever i want to do, that's actually -- that's what putin would say.

that's what erdogan would say. >> i'm calling ann. >> why wouldn't mitt get up and say actually that's not only ignorant, it is dangerous and does violence to madisonian. >> how do you think mitt romney is going to vote in the senate? >> i think a vote to acquit. why? what does it profit a man if he loses his own soul. here is the thing about mitt, he has the world. >> he knows the difference between right and wrong. >> the thing i don't get with woody, can you imagine the power a former ambassador would have if he came home, gets fired, has a bank of microphones and says, i got fired because, fill in the blank, and start laughing at donald trump. hurts trump more than woody. woody goes back to coaching the jets, stops humiliating him. >> did i say coaching? >> he's owning. >> he could do the whole ted turner thing right now, he could coach them too. >> i would take a shot at the jets but i'm a giants fan and

i'm not in position to do that, but mitt romney was the hope for a lot of moderate republicans. >> and still is. i think he will do it. >> he will be the one, because of the reasons you just laid out, he has nothing to lose to stand up. >> but he is waiting for his moment. julia ioffe, thank you very much. the piece is amazing. >> what is waiting for the moment? thank you, julia. >> trump is waging war on america's diplomats. >> thank you for your patience while we talked about the jets. >> still ahead on "morning joe," former secretary of state john kerry is standing by. he joins us next on "morning joe." without my medication, my small tremors would be extreme.

without it, i cannot write my name. i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month.

prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop. join us in fighting for what's right. a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena® ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home.

laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit!

36 past the hour. a live look at capitol hill right now. we are about 25 minutes away from what could be a major

statement from house speaker nancy pelosi on the impeachment investigation. the statement, expected at 9:00 a.m., follows reporting that democrats on the house judiciary committee have been told to stay in washington this weekend. joining us now, former senator and former u.s. secretary of state under president obama, john kerry. good to have you back on the show. >> really happy to be back. >> great to see you. >> are you going ask him? >> why aren't you running for president? >> because i'm doing this. i want you to see this. look at this. >> that's a presidential thing, mr. secretary. >> i want you to see that. >> where are you listed? >> we brought together an amazing group of people that will try to marry the grassroots and the top roots. >> yep. >> hasn't happened in america. part of the conversation on climate change has been polarized and we think that -- i mean we have an amazing group of people, republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives. >> look who? >> pass it to me. i will hold it up while you're talking and we will ask you

again, why aren't you running for president? >> why aren't you running for president? >> you tell us, who are we looking at here? >> wow, you have an incredible roster. >> you have jimmy carter, hillary clinton, bill clinton, madeleine albright, former secretaries of defense, chuck hag hagel, former prime ministers of countries like uk, gordon brown. you have foreign ministers, finance. the point is to bring together people who seem to have been separated from young people that are out in the streets screaming, where are the adults. >> exactly. >> we are trying to bring the adults to the table. >> here they are. >> we are trying to get it done. we have to change the entire discussion on climate change. a lot of people think, oh, it is ice melting up north, it is not going to affect me. folks, american citizens are dying of climate change already. mudslides, fires, floods, droughts, farms are being destroyed.

we spent $265 million cleaning up after three storms two years ago, one of the storms, harvey, dropped more houston on five days than goes over niagara falls in an entire year. >> let me stop you there, mr. secretary. >> yes. >> i remember i was with a republican, i got once every five year. i was with a hard-core republican about four or five years ago, and he works for an insurance company. he is an executive at an insurance company and he's the guy that looks at the tables, the tables. he said, let me tell you something he said, i'm a free market right wing conservative. he said, all i need to do is tell you the payouts that we have had on natural disasters over the past 20 years. >> right. >> he goes, if you don't believe in climate change, you are a fool. not only are you a fool, you are not being conservative with our resources or our money. this is a guy never voted democratic before. >> totally true. totally true. >> the bottom line is that it is

causing such damage to this country and the world. >> huge, huge. joe, i mean we used to be a country that believes in science. if you read a book by a harvard professor called "merchants of doubt" you will see there's a continuum of a strategy by people unfortunately on the right in america who have targeted common sense and science. they did it against rachel karson, against pesticide. they did it with nicotine, r.j. reynolds. they've done it with acid rain. they did it with flammable pajamas for kids. you see the same scientists, the same phony scientists who have been bought by big corporations who are sewing doubt in america and elsewhere in the world. we are the only country in the world that has the kind of deniers we have in the united states congress. what we're going to do with world war zero -- i ask people to go to worldwarzero.com. the site is being built up right now but we're going to have town

halls. we're going to iowa, to new hampshire, to ohio, to red states and bring generals and admirals. we have an admiral in the group who was head of policy and planning at the pentagon. he will tell you what the pentagon is doing to plan for what is going to happen with climate change. yesterday in london, you have leaders mocking the president of the united states openly, laughing at him, enough to send the president home early. just packs up and leaves. skedaddles. that's pretty extraordinary. >> so it makes -- >> and that president has said climate change is a chinese hoax. >> right. so let me ask you, you bring up china. there was a front page article in the financial times a couple of weeks ago that talked about all of the gains western countries have made over the past 15 years. we have made gains in cutting down carbon emissions. we have done some things right.

but then talked about if you just look at the new coal-powered plants that china is bringing on board. >> yeah, totally. >> it will wipe out all of the gains we have made in the west. >> that is correct. >> what do we do about that? >> get a president willing to confront china on that and not create, you know, a side show with respect to trade. but i mean look at what has happened on a global basis. other countries are moving to take the leadership on the technologies dealing with climate change. i was in iceland the other day. they developed a technology on deep drilling for geothermal. they're able to tap in to 400-degrees lava and use the heat now. iceland is 100% renewal, two items, geothermal and hydro. we have made incredible gains in solar. solar is 89% cheaper than it

used to be. solar is totally more competitive than coal, but we don't have a president who is bringing the chinese and the indians and vietnamese and indonesians and others to the place where they're getting rid of those coal plants and moving into alternative energy. >> is this group fine with nuclear? >> not everybody. in fact, we make the point in the ad. the language of the ad says, look, we're unlikely allies and we don't agree on everything. >> yes. >> but we do agree climate change is real and if we don't begin to treat it on a war footing we are not going to get it done. that's what is critical. we need a president who brings people to the auto dealers, the manufacturers need to be brought to the white house. have the best scientists in the world and then say what are we going to do to accelerate the deco decarbonization of automobiles.

>> who is the president that will do that? >> we will see. >> you have some with better platforms on this? >> it is too late obviously. >> for you this time, look at the calendar, you could do it. >> guys, i don't want to talk about politics in that sense here today. i will talk about the politics of climate change. the fact is -- and i think every one of you know it -- we can't afford to have impunity in the political system for people who simply aren't believing. what we're going to do with this group is all over the country try to change the discussion. we have $55 billion a year is spent on our children being hospitalized here in the united states because of environmentally induced asthma. 55%. people don't know that. it affects the health of every american, the quality of our air. this is really pollution we are talking about. many years ago we mobilized an earth day to make it clear to congress they had to vote the right way or they wouldn't be

there. we defeated critical members of congress and, guess what, we passed the clean drinking water act, we created the environmental protection agency of america. in the last election of president, only 55% of americans came out to vote. only 19% of young people voted in a presidential race. with this group we will have 10 million or more conversations, we will micro target. we will reach every person in america who believes in the issue of climate. for those close to being converted, we will try to convert them. we will try to get people to understand the value of making our democracy work by participating. there are all kinds of ways to do it. >> as you know, mr. secretary, climate change was a political loser. it wasn't that long ago that it polled at 1%, 2%. in the last few years, that number has come way up. how do you marry the young energy and young concern about what is clearly going on with leadership at the top, especially right now with people

who in some cases deny it is even taking place? >> that's what this group is -- that's exactly what we're going to do, willie. we're going to go out and have the conversation. we have young people on this thing. leaders of climate strike are here. i met with the sunrise folks. i met with the people that are part of climate strike. we have a young woman who is the leader of that as part of this coalition. the whole point is that young people have called us to conscience in our country. they've done the hard work of going out in the street and saying, "you adults are not getting it done." but you can't just scold. you have to translate it into the capacity to get things done. that happens when we marry the efforts of the top roots and grassroots, we create a political movement that is going to demand accountability from people who are in a position -- these kids who are demonstrating, they're fabulous, but they don't have a vote in the board room. they don't have a vote in congress, but they have the ability to change the politics

of the nation in the next election. we are going to work with them hand in hand. first of all, it makes this group completely different. there's no effort yet to do that, and i think it will change our national dialogue. >> let's translate it then. climate change means different things to different people depending on where you live, your age, et cetera. what are the top two or three things if we don't address climate change in a serious manner over the next decade, how would that change people's lives here in the united states? >> if we don't do it? >> if we don't do it. >> people will be paying trillions of dollars to undo the damage that is done by rising sea levels and disappearing living space. i will give you an example. southernful fchl. southern florida is going to have massive transition in place like miami and the lower delta. goes to louisiana, new orleans under threat. what happens with sea level rise?

the mangrove disappears completely. number two, there will be a change in the production of food. we have already had in parts of the world last summer, it was 125 degrees and people were dying just from the heat. you're going to have mass movement of people as the rivers begin to change, the flow of water. there will be wars and conflict over water. this is why the military is involved. the military understands that young men and women in uniform in the united states are going to be called on to go somewhere to protect american interests as people are banging on the door. you think migration or refugee problems are problems today? for europe, where we're pledged to defend europe and we have article five and nato, which president trump has been busy trying to dismantle, you're going to have -- if you think the migration a few years ago from syria and turkey changed the politics of europe, wait until you see what happens when the entire northern part of africa is uninhabitable.

millions are saying we want our part in life, we want to be able to eat and they're banging on the door of europe. this is going to change global politics in a dramatic way. >> it is happening in the united states. 20 years ago you would have members in congress from the west talking about the war on the west, talking about water rights. those battles are now coming east. the times had a story about florida in georgia and the battles there, talking about industries that are going away, ways of life being disrupted, again, because of climate change. >> joe, can i mention in terms of our country we don't even have an energy grid in the united states of america. we have great big hole in the middle of our country. you can't take energy from texas and send it to the north. you can't take wind power from massachusetts and send it somewhere else. here we are a country that went

to the internet. we're not building anything anymore. there's no national infrastructure program any of you could name at this moment and here we are screaming for the ability to have -- look at new york. i was in new york trying to get around. you cannot move in most cities in the world. >> you can't move. >> you can't. >> it doesn't work. >> where is the discussion about the infrastructure we need to do that? we have to build out the infrastructure for decarbonized vehicles. we have to change the way we are creating the power that creates the electricity. that's a massive job. there's a great book called "the engineers of victory" by professor kennedy. it talks about the things our parents' generation did to make sure we won world war ii. it was not certain allies would win going into 1943, so mid level decisions were madewin. upper level decisions were made that made it possible for us to win. that is exactly what we need to

do. >> hold that thought, if you can stay that will be great. up next, an old trump tweet for everything. we need a president that is not a laughing stock to the entire world. we need a truly great leader, a genius at strategy and winning respect. keep it here on "morning joe." (contemplative synth music)

- [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. shark iq robot deep-cleans and empties itself into a base you can empty once a month. and unlike standard robots that bounce around, it cleans row by row. if it's not a shark, it's just a robot. i'm a verizon engineer, and i'm part of the team building the most powerful 5g experience for america. it's 5g ultra wideband-- --for massive capacity-- --and ultra-fast speeds.

almost 2 gigs here in minneapolis. that's 25 times faster than today's network in new york city. so people from midtown manhattan-- --to downtown denver-- --can experience what our 5g can deliver. (woman) and if verizon 5g can deliver performance like this in these places... it's pretty crazy. ...just imagine what it can do for you. ♪ it's how we care for our cancer patients- like job. when he was diagnosed with cancer, his team at ctca created a personalized care plan to treat his cancer and side effects. so job could continue to work and stay strong for his family. this is how we inspire hope. this is how we heal. we love you, daddy. good night.

i love you guys. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. cancer treatment centers of america. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby, helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message.

world leaders caught on camera laughing about president trump. several world leaders mocking president trump. >> they're laughing at him. >> my administration accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of the united states. >> they are ridiculing him for being completely off balance. >> they say he is becoming increasingly isolated. something is very wrong. >> the world sees trump for what he is, insincere, ill informed. if we give him four more years we'll have a great deal of difficult recovering america's standing in the world and our capacity to bring nation's together. >> how does that play? >> i think one of the things that as this year comes to a close, the focus of -- obviously

democratic voters are focused on beating trump, but the lack of focus on this topic has a wandering primary season, joe biden bringing it back to what the facts are. >> secretary kerry, i'm just curious from your position now. you watch the nato summit, the one on one, the group of leaders as justin trudeau has now said they were laughing about donald trump. it reminds me of the moment of president trump standing in helsinki and john mccain is prompted to say it is one of the most infamous moments he had ever seen. we lost the recognition as a leader of the free world, which

is what we are. and the world without it is really a lot of things running and cascading out of control. you look at cyber. one of the greatest dangers that we face today. here this administration tried to negotiate a major cyber agreement. nuclear, you have countries now rebuilding and the president of the united states pulling out of the inf treaty, talking about more nuclear weapons. ronald reagan changed that equation. we went from 50,000 warheads pointed at each other and now we could go further. this is a very, very dangerous world, and to have our president being moxed by the leaders we rely on is unprecedented and it has meaning to every single

american. people should be deeply concerned about this. the constitution of the united states is at take right now. our democracy is at risk right here. and the issue of accountability of a president. that is on the table and i think we have not had it is more serious than what we lived through with richard nixon. i'll have more to say going forward, but it is dangerous. >> you travel the world for world war 0, we know that, you speak to foreign leaders that still respect you and your service to the country. what do they tell you are their worries and concerns that are so broken they can maybe not be repaired? >> they say this is an election

that is high takes fstakes for too. this is an ongoing unfolding crime in many ways. where the obstruction of justice continues. and if you look at -- look even if you go back to the mueller report on collusion, it -- what mueller found is that there was no conspiracy to commit collusion, but he found collusion, and moments after it is public, having just escaped the president of the united states turns around and does it with another country in a more egregious way. i think this will be a test. i hope they will remember this is about the constitution. not about party, presidency, or power. there is a lot more at stake. >> all right, we're enlisted,

are you? world war zero. everybody check it out. form former secretary of state, thank you for being here. thank you, hi, i'm stephanie ruhle, it is december 5th. any minute now speaker nancy pelosi will deliver a update on the impeachment inquiry. it also followed the first and only scheduled day of hearings. what do we know about this statement? >> stephanie, not much. she kept the contents fairly closely hold. they are waiting to decide what direction and speed the house will take