figliuzzi. jon. that does it for our hour. "mtp daily" with chuck todd starts now. "mtp daily" with chuck todd starts now welcome to friday. it is "meet the press daily." good evening. i am chuck todd here in washington where moments ago the white house sent a letter. actually, met a deadline. sort of. they sent a letter to house judiciary committee chairman nadler telling him -- this letter was in response to this deadline on whether the president would participate in the inquiry. well, guess what? 5:00 came and what and the white house did send a letter saying, no, they will not be

participating. they have sent the letter to nadler and it's not a surprise considering the president has indicated that he wasn't going to participate in any of these investigations in the house, let alone this investigation. he directed his aides not to cooperate. he's called it a hoax. so as big of a story as these impeachment developments are, they have surfaced a major issue looming over this country. that the prsz president's brand of bare knuckle when they go low, we kick 'em style of politics is spreading and it's being rewarded by the social media political basis. the consequence seems to be more anger and more moments like these in american political discourse. >> damn liar, man. let's do push-ups together. let's do whatever you want to do. >> i didn't say you were doing anything wrong. >> you said i set up my son to work in an oil company. isn't that what you said? get your words straight, jack.

>> do you hate the president, madam speaker? >> i don't hate anybody. i was raised in a catholic house. we don't hate anybody. not anybody in the world. >> as a catholic, i resent your using the word hate in a sentence that addresses me. so don't mess with me when it comes to words like that. >> people are having a crisis because of police violence. >> no. no. no. >> who chose these people as the black leaders? >> so tempers seem to be flaring as you can see on the left from biden and pelosi to buttigieg events and yes the current political environment has been fueled by this president. and led to an unusual number of republican lawmakers heading for the exit. he says the impeachment inquiry has left him quote, soul weary. and social media has made civility and compromise nearly

impossible. folks, as a country, we are growing further apart. growing number of republicans think democrats are unpatriotic. that's according to recent data from the research center. and it's all happening as we are barreling toward a pair of historic political events that may only divide us further. impeachment and of course the 2020 election. joining me now here in washington. politics reporter, msnbc contributor. betsy woodruff swan. and maria is msnbc contributor. we'll start with you. there's this -- i've always thought at some point, the sort of pugilistic nature of trump was, at some point, and we've heard it from some in the left going you got to fight harder. you got to fight harder. this is pugilistic nature is going to be answered with pugilistic nature. this -- this is gonna get messy. >> i think it's going to get very messy but i also think that's one of the reasons why the democratic candidate has to

be someone that shows connective ty with the american people. >> do they have to show toughness? >> yeah. but they have to show toughness that they are going ton a moral high ground. even what you saw with pelosi, like don't speak for me. when you say it's not hate. this is -- this is politics and this is about saving the country. she was trying to differentiate what a reporter was trying to put into her mouth. that's very different. >> for what it's worth, of the three examples, i found her to be the most i think eloquent of how to handle the situation. she went high. actually, when we're sitting here, she went high. the other two, that wasn't high ground. be it biden or the -- or the supporters. >> right. so you could argue that what the american people are looking for oh are folks that take the high ground. >> are they? >> it's -- >> i think that's a question i don't know the answer -- i mean, you're smiling, betsy. you see, i don't know. >> i don't know but this idea when we also say that the republicans feel one way and the democrats are feeling the other. we seem to believe that it's a country that's evenly split between these two parties. when, in fact, what you're seeing is a lot of defection

coming out of the republican party turning independent because they do not like this. >> that's true. >> that is -- that's a different analysis. >> look. i -- tom grace won't say it but i'm sorry. i believe tom grace was stay in washington if donald trump weren't president. >> that's possible. is it because of redistricting, not because of the president. so there are other reasons. and it's important to remember that there have been times of greater division and political violence in this country than we have today. in the late '60s, early '70s. what we have today is an interconnectedness where moments like that aren't confined to people who saw them in a town hall or experienced it firsthand or even described it in a newspaper. they're immediately shared globally. often, in not entirely flattering or not entirely accurate forms. as we've seen in some of these viral moments. >> well, i appreciate michael's hopefulness that this is -- this is not similar. there have been more violent times.

i agree. i do fear we are headed to violent times. >> it's an extremely tense and polarized moment. and this is something that is affecting not just the difference between republicans and democrats, which we all see very publicly. but also within the democratic party. and certainly, not to the same extent. but there are real sort of ideological tensions within that party as to what the party is supposed to look like. what the 2020 candidates are supposed to look like. and those tensions exist both on capitol hill and on the campaign trail. and i think part of the reason that we see, especially from former vice president biden, this almost hair-trigger response to the type of audience heckling that seriously every serious candidate gets. is that he is acting within not just within the polarization that exists in the country. but the tension within the democratic party and taking a ton of incoming from people who are also on his team. >> right. but i think the challenges that we are -- we already are seeing the -- the violence play out. sadly.

the fact that we had the el paso massacre that was connected to reiterating what the president -- >> political rhetoric. >> the synagogue. the shootings of the synagogues. the fact that -- >> let's not forget the congressional republican. >> right. and even sadly, though, the -- you know, the 11 pipe bombs that our politicians and members of the press received. all triggered disproportionately by -- >> all happened within the last 15 months by the way. >> exactly. so it's just that it's escalating and what we need is right now people taking the high ground to make sure we are cooling down the temperature. >> but my concern is the incentive structure in our politics now rewards what joe biden and donald trump, you know, that stuff. >> but they're -- >> they're not equivalent at all. but they're going to reward these moments. these moments get rewarded by this pugilistic base. that's my concern. >> every republican candidate in 2015 and 2016 who tried to

out-trump trump failed and looked badly doing it. i think what former vice president biden is doing right now. the sort of hair-trigger machismo. >> he tried that with jeb, right? >> he was a little better at it. >> was he, though? i think he wasn't. >> arguments about policy in a way i don't think we saw the vice president do. my point is it may be more effective to have somebody different coming against the president of the pete buttigieg. mike bloomberg. even elizabeth warren. >> mike bloomberg, though, it was very interesting. one of his rationales for coming in is he thinks trump's going to eat up this field. take a listen. >> i've said back in 2016, he is the wrong person for the job. he doesn't have the temperament or the ethics. the intellect to do the job. and i've watched and i said we just can't have another four years of this. and then i watched all the candidates and i just thought to myself, donald trump would eat

'em up. >> and michael bloomberg doesn't think donald trump has the appetite for him? >> it's amazing to me that after 2016, anyone feels comfortable confidently prognosticating how presidential elections are going to go. i think the one thing we know for sure is nobody has any idea how the 2020 general election is going to play out because it's really, really hard to poll the way voters behave in the trump era. the one piece of evidence we do have on voter behavior, the 2018 midterms is a repudiation of trump-style politics. a big part of the reason, and especially if you talk to these moderate freshmen democrats who are very much in the crosshairs, what they will say is a big part of the reason the house flipped was because they were able to reach out to republican female voters. to independent voters. to people who had only voted for the right for their whole lives but were frustrated not necessarily because of policy stuff from trump. but because they had to mute the tv when the president came on. >> no. the whole role model issue with this president and the fact that the hardest thing -- it is so difficult to be a parent in --

in the trump climate. with the president doing what he's doing. so joe biden was asked today whether he had any regrets about his confrontation. he did have one regret. take a listen. >> are you concerned that you're going to get more questions like the one that you got yesterday from voters on the trail? >> well, we've got over 2,000 people show up on this bus trip. no one's done it except that fellow. and so sure. look. i think that -- that it's gonna be part of what is the -- is the opposition's case. look. trump's already spending 12 million bucks to try to make the same message. send the same message. and there's nothing to the message. but any rate, i probably shouldn't have challenged him to pushups. >> look. it was interesting. your former pal, working pal, brendan buck sat in that same chair yesterday and said this was a great moment for joe biden. do you think it was? a moment that biden in particular needed? >> well, i mean, we're talking

about him, right? i mean i think the challenge is and this is where many of them can use a pelosi advisor. pelosi is building her own ring where she's inviting the president to come in to fight on her own terms. the next presidential candidate needs to figure out how do they fight on author otheir own term? >> she has struck a really interesting balance here. she has handled him better than any other adversary he's had. >> and when we -- when we talk about this idea even about bloomberg, i think what bloomberg brings to the table is that he can fight as a new yorker with trump. but he also actually has billions that trump -- and that -- and trump finds that incredibly intimidating. >> trump only respects money and power. but money in particular. >> and marinated in the new york media universe for years and bloomberg's been successful both in that universe and electorally in new york. i don't think this was a great moment for the former vice president. and i think it indicates -- >> i can't wait for you and brendan to have a debate about this. >> we'll probably talk about it pretty soon. i imagine he's tweeting as we speak.

because i don't -- i think that it's political malpractice that the former vice president and his team don't have a very sharp, very quick, and very dismissive answer on questions about hunter biden. he's -- they're going to come up again and again and again. all he had to say is trump so scared of me and go to whatever's next. you don't challenge people to push up contests every time they mention your son. >> i know our viewers are going to appreciate this. can't always pull a jack palance. see how many of you got that one. that is a real test of millennials. anyway, betsy, michael, theresa. stick around. up ahead, why the president's efforts to muddy the water on impeachment might be working. got some scary new research about how misinformation spreads, who spreads it, and why? and later the white house confirms they will not participate in the house's impeachment inquiry, spoiler alert. as the house judiciary committee gets ready to hear testimony from investigators on the evidence they gathered. evidence they gathered

upbeat music♪ no cover-up spray here. cheaper aerosols can cover up odors in a flowery fog. but febreze air effects eliminates odors. with a 100% natural propellent. it leaves behind a pleasant scent you'll love. [ deep inhale] freshen up. don't cover up. febreze.

welcome back. we've said it before and we'll say it again. republicans unified message may be helping them win the information war or say battle on impeachment. but it isn't just that the republicans are effectively messaging the existential threat that impeachment brings. they're also repeating the b debunked russian conspiracy theory that ukraine was the source and that reputation matters because it turns out it may not be the substance of their argument. but rather the repetition of it that matters. a recent study found that when people are exposed to the same false information multiple times, they become numb to it. so even if they know the information is false, they -- it just doesn't sort of register that way anymore. and people are more likely to share a fake headline if they had seen them again, again, even though they know the information is false. thinking it's harmless now. as "forbes magazine" put it, the more we see fake news, the less fake it becomes. disinformation is a danger to

democracy. joining me now, one of the lead authors of this study. daniel efron. he is associate professor of organizational behavior at the london business school. he is not a political strategist. he is not a political advocate. i want to make that clear. this is a total sociological thing that we're talking about here and the study you did. so i wanted to get that aside because everybody's going to want to, you know, try to find political bias or something here. so we'll start there. this was, frankly, not surprising, your report. it's just surprising how effective it is. >> yeah. i mean, the -- the effects that we see in the study are, you know, they're fairly small. but when amplified across the billions of social media users, it could cause a real social problem. >> meaning. so to me the best example was so you may know that it wasn't a conspiracy to kill john kennedy. but you hear about the conspiracy all the time. so you'll easily pass on

conspiracy theories about the kennedy assassination because it's so commonplace that people have conspiracy theories about the kennedy assassination. and then over a 50-year period, people start to believe maybe there are conspiracy theories behind the kennedy assassination. is that a better way of describing this phenomenon? >> yeah. well, there are two things that can happen when you repeatedly exposed to misinformation. one thing that can happen is you start believing it. you think maybe there's something to it. my research goes beyond this and i think it's actually a little scarier. that even when you don't believe misinformation, hearing it again and again can make you think it sort of seems familiar. it sort of feels truthy in my gut even though i know it's not true in my head so i'll give it more of a moral pass. >> you have just described some parts of the cable -- primetime cable tv news landscape or you just described how talk radio

works. which is my gut tells me this is probably why something happened. therefore, i'm going to say it happened this way. so what's the -- so does this mean the idea of truth sandwiches, for instance telling people what's truthful, then telling them the fake. then reinforcing the truth. does that at all mitigate this? >> yeah. that's a really good idea. so a concern about fact checkers is, you know, it's hard work. it's really important that people are checking all these facts. but if you start with saying here's a claim. it's false. you end up repeating the false claim and that can stick in people's mind. become familiar. even if they believe the debunking of it, they may think it's less unethical to share. truth sandwich, in theory, should help mitigate this. right? so you repeat the truth much more than you repeat the falsehood. the truth is what sticks in people's mind. >> so you may be starting to advocate the following, which is we shouldn't report false information even if our goal is to debunk it?

>> i'm not saying don't report false information. but i am saying that it has to be reported very carefully. so the truth should always drown out the lies. the concern is that if a false political claim gets -- gets echoed on social media or across cable news by lots of pundits. people understand it's false but the more they hear it, the more familiar it seems and the less unethical they may think it is to spread. >> so in some ways, you're saying this problem of disinformation is us. we have to look in the mirror. we have to be more vigilant. it does sound like there is an institutional or technological fix to this. that ultimately, it's a behavior -- it has to come from individual behavior. >> yeah. chuck, i see this as a psychological trap that all of us, left, right, center, wherever we are in the political spectrum, can fall into. and one thing that i, you know, would urge us all to do is when we're on social media. think a little bit more carefully before we click that share button. these feelings of -- of

truthiness that it feels true in my gut. that's an intuition. and when we're thinking with our heads instead of our guts, we may rely less on those intuitions and less likely to pass on information that we know is false. >> look. part of this -- the fascination with conspiracy theories is not new. that's human nature. in some ways, we want to believe there is a complicated explanation for what happened. not just some randomness to what happened. whatever that happening is. that is how our brains work so i get that. are we making it too easy to access conspiracy theories? you know, it used to be on the far end of a.m. radio. or it used to be, you know, in, you know, maybe weird magazines that didn't necessarily have high -- high ethics. it's just so easy to find a conspiracy. look. my 15-year-old daughter is obsessed with these crazy phenomenon about ghosts and this or that and these videos on the internet. i'm telling her you know it's not true. she goes, yeah, i know, but it's really cool. >> yeah.

look. the phenomenon of fake news is probably older than -- than news itself. i mean, think of yellow journalism and -- but of course what's new is social media. the other thing about social media. not only is there just so much misinformation on it but it also encourages, by design, people to think with their guts. right? you're scrolling on your phone on your way to work. you see something that's interesting or funny or that aligns with your political views. your gut says share it. your heed says i knad says i kne but you don't listen to your head so much. >> the worst tweet i -- the worst tweets to see are the ones that says, big if true. there's a lot of retweets that go, big if true because most of the time it wasn't true. anyway -- >> i actually have research suggesting -- oh. >> go ahead. finish that statement. go. >> sure. yeah i have some research suggesting even when people know that a falsehood is false, if they're encouraged to imagine how it could have been true if

circumstances were different, they think it's less unethical to spread. so the example would be someone in the trump administration saying, yes, trump's inauguration crowd may not have been bigger than obama's. but it could have been bigger if the weather was nicer. turns out that's a really effective tactic. >> wonderful. daniel efron. you have only made us more nervous about how falsehoods get spread. but it is important information that people need to see. and hopefully, perhaps colleagues and twitter users and facebook users are a bit more responsible before they hit the like button or the retweet button. daniel, thanks for coming on and sharing your research and your expertise. i appreciate it. up ahead, the latest on the breaking news we've been following all day. a deadly shooting at a naval base in pensacola, florida, and what we're now learning about the gunman. memory loss related to aging? prevagen is the number one pharmacist-recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere.

prevagen. healthier brain. better life. 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. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. we di didn't have to call an ambulance.. and i didn't have to contact your family.

because your afib didn't cause a blood clot that led to a stroke. not today. we'd discussed how your stroke risk increases over time, so even though you were feeling fine, we chose xarelto® to help keep you protected. once-daily xarelto® ... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib... not caused by a heart valve problem. in fact, over 96% of people remained stroke-free. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, a spinal injection increases the risk of blood clots, which may cause paralysis - the inability to move. you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and any kidney or liver problems. be sure you're doing... ...all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. ask your doctor if it's time for xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com.

♪'cause no matter how far away for you roam.♪ys.♪ ♪when you pine for the sunshine of a friendly gaze.♪ ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ the united states postal service goes the extra mile to bring your holidays home. just between us, you know what's better than mopping? anything! at the end of a long day, it's the last thing i want to do. well i switched to swiffer wet jet and its awesome. it's an all-in-one so it's ready to go when i am. the cleaning solution actually breaks down dirt and grime. and the pad absorbs it deep inside. so, it prevents streaks and haze better than my old mop. plus, it's safe to use on all my floors, even wood. glad i got that off my chest and the day off my floor.

try wet jet with a moneyback guarantee welcome back. turning now to the breaking news that's been developing thought the day herement the fbi now taking the lead in investigating the deadly shooting today. the big naval base in pensacola, florida. three people were killed when a gunman opened fire this morning. eight more were wounded including the two deputies responsible for neutralizing the shooter. officials identified the gunman, who was killed in the incident, as mohammed saeed alshamrani. he was a member of the saudi air force who was in the united states for training. the pensacola naval air station hosts many outside military for training purposes.

this is a regular thing that the u.s. military's doing. so this is a very common practice by the way. pete williams. he's here with me. and our national security and pentagon reporter courty cuby joins me on the phone. pete, let me start with you. what new have we learned? >> well, he's a second lieutenant or was a second lieutenant in the saudi air force who came here for flight training. there are sort of three groups that come. very junior officers, very senior ones. he was in the middle. beyond that, we don't really know much about him. there are some pretty fundamental questions like how did he get the gun? the sheriff's office says he did the shooting today with a handgun carrying it out in a classroom building at the naval air station. now, this is a training base. so it has a lot of classrooms. but the sheriff's office says that when the agent or when the officers came in, the deputies came in to encounter the shooter. it actually played out over two floors of that classroom building. so they were obviously pursuing him. and as you say, they were not seriously wounded.

one hit in the arm. one hit in the knee. so they're going to be, essentially, okay. the big question is why did he do this? the mere fact that he is he's from saudi arabia doesn't answer the question because it could still be some personal grievance. some interpersonal liverrivalry. or could be an act of terrorism. >> but they don't have any -- there's -- it's not like they have found a note or something on any phone or anything that makes them give them any other idea other than what they have in front of them. >> right. and you remember there are some obvious questions to ask. for example, in the case of the major who attacked the -- >> he was an american citizen. american member of the military. >> who attacked fort hood in texas. he had a history of sort of being a hot head and expressing some pretty scary ideas. that his instructors and other students knew about. so that's one line of inquiry for the fbi is talking to his instructors, fellow students. >> courtney, it's my

understanding that there are some strict rules about -- about weapons on these -- on all of our bases here in the united states. so what would have been procedure? he's a member of the military. he may have had a handgun. would there have been a locker that he was supposed to have put that in? is it -- what were -- what do you know about the procedures specifically there about weapons on that base? >> so pensacola is an open base. so there's -- there's two different categories to think about. number one, is their service weapons. so a member of the military who has a military-issued service weapon, there are very specific rules about those being locked up in depots, weapon depots, and kept when they're on the base, they are under very strict lock and key. and they have to be signed out for specific reasons if they're going to a range. if they're doing training or whatnot. with the exception of people who are there, military police.

the second category, though, i mean -- and -- and -- and remember as an open base, if you are someone who has an i.d. that allows you on to that base, your vehicle is generally not going to be checked. so if he had some sort of weapon that was not service issued that he had and he had general access to the base. so he was coming and going every single day or even perhaps living on the base while he was there training. then, you know, theoretically, he would be able to have a -- a -- a private weapon that nobody would know he had. you're not supposed to. it's against the rules. but if you're going on and off of an open base like that, your car's not going to -- there's just a volume of people coming on and off. the mps cannot check every single vehicle that comes on and off. >> what kind of background information do we have on these visiting military members from other countries' militaries who come to the united states to train? what is that procedure like, courtney? >> so they all -- they do have

to go through background checks because remember they're going to be on a base. you know, they're going to have -- they're -- they won't necessarily have access to classified information or anything like that. it's not that level. but they do go through background checks before they come here. it is a very common practice for the u.s. to train foreign militaries. and they actually -- last time i was in -- a year or so ago, the saudis and the -- the u.s. military who were there were very proud of the fact that they work and train with the saudi military. particularly, the air force because as we all know, the saudi air force has had a history of -- of accidents and whatnot. in some particularly awful and devastating ones in yemen where they've hit markets or -- or areas and killed a lot of civilians. and they say it's poor training and whatnot. so made this very concerted effort to work with them to try to help them on their targets and their proficiency and professionalism. they are very proud of that program. but it's not just the saudis. you know, they train many other air forces. and they do it all over the

continental united states and overseas. >> pete williams, how complicated would this have been had the gunman been alive and in custody since he's not a u.s. citizen? >> the investigation you mean? well, of course, any foreign national in the united states has the -- can work with their embassy. but i -- i don't think -- look -- >> you don't think this would have complicated? >> no. the fbi's still going to do what it's going to do in terms of looking at social media. electronic fingerprints. digital fingerprints. who was he talking to? all that stuff. the only question here, and i just don't know the answer, is there's going to have to be some cooperation from saudi officials because the fbi's going to want to trace this guy all the way back to the cradle. so how much cooperation will he get from the saudis? that remains to be seen. the king called the president today. said saudi arabia's very upset about this. so, presumably, they're going to be cooperative. that's the only question. >> courtney, i'm not trying to connect what happened in honolulu to what happened today but this has been a rough week

for the pentagon on -- on this issue in particular. >> and for the navy. you know, i mean, look. it's -- we don't know the motivations behind either yet. it's -- whether it's just a cruel coincidence they happened within days of one another and that it involved members of the u.s. navy and it seems in both cases. but, you know, this -- there's an overarching much larger problem. chief of operations, he has been very outspoken about this and i suspect this is going to make him even more so. which is if you -- if there are service members, if you see someone who is -- who is having a hard time, who's in trouble. reach out. there's -- there's opportunity for help and whatnot. and so i suspect that's going to be one of the big themes we hear going forward out of the navy. and out of the -- the pentagon and the military after these tragic incidents. >> courtney kube, pete williams. thank you both for this. up next, we now know what the white house is doing next week on impeachment. or more accurately what they're

not doing. but what will the house do next? we're going to get the latest from capitol hill. itol hill. woman 1 oc: this is my body of proof. man 1 vo: proof of less joint pain and clearer skin. man 2 vo: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 2 vo: ...with humira. woman 3 vo: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. man 3 vo: ask your rheumatologist about humira.

woman 4 vo: go to humira.com to see proof in action. 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. ♪ [ "turn around, look at me" ♪ there is someone ♪ walking behind you ♪ turn around ♪ look at me ♪ there is someone ♪ look at me

the amount of student loan debt i have, i'm embarrassed to even say. we just decided we didn't want debt any longer. ♪ i didn't realize how easy investing could be. i'm picking companies that i believe in. ♪ i think sofi money is amazing. ♪ thank you sofi. sofi thank you, we love you. ♪

zblnc welcome back. while the how is has said it's decided not to proceed in the house's impeachment going forward. to begin drafting articles of impeachment, democrats have to figure out how limited they want those articles to be. in other words, do they want to focus on president trump's specific incidents of bad behavior? or with a larger pattern of behavior? so incidents versus overall behavior. leanne caldwell covers congress for us here at nbc news. she joins me now from capitol hill. so, leanne, it really comes down to are we going to see specific articles on specific incidents where he abused power or bribery? say, on -- on ukraine. or is there going to be this

pattern of obstruction? you know, where house -- you know, financial services says he obstructed here or oversight. you know, or is it a combination? >> we don't know yet. this word pattern started popping up a lot. especially, wednesday in this hearing with the constitutional scholars. and ever since then, we've been hearing that more and more again. a pattern of behavior. what the president's been doing over time for the past three years. and a pattern that advocates of that route say will consistently -- will -- will -- he will continue to do that moving forward. and those people are advocating for these articles of impeachment. there's talk about a pattern. so we could be hearing a lot more of that. then there's the other train of thought about let's talk about the specific instance and that would probably be something like the july 25th phone call. the reason we are actually in this impeachment inquiry. so there is these discussions that are going on between pelosi and the chairman of these

committees. but also with -- among members as well. they're having these talks. and it doesn't always necessarily break down along ideological lines with the moderates wanting something more specific. and the more progressives wanting things -- more things included. that seems to be a little bit blurred at this point. only because of the way they're framing it. a pattern of behavior is very intriguing for a lot of people, chuck. >> what is next week going to look like? as they draft this. or how transparent is this process going to be? is -- is -- is -- do we have a good sense of what this will look like next week? >> all we really know is, monday, that is the hearing where the intel councils will come and judiciary councils will come and present the findings. the last chance for the public to hear about the findings of their investigation. beyond that, i mean, we're going to have a markup at some point of these articles of

impeachment. after they're released. and that is where it's going to be extremely transparent because this can go all day, through the night. and who knows? it could last more than one day. but the judiciary committee does have to mark these up, get these out of committee on to the house floor. but i'll also say, chuck, that there is a lot of positioning already underway. i was speaking with congresswoman elisa earlier today. she's a freshman from a conservative district. she's one of the seven who wrote this "washington post" op-ed that really started this impeachment inquiry, calling for an inquiry. and she said just today when she was on the house floor voting, she was starting to be lobbied by her republican colleagues to try to get her to oppose impeachment. and so while, you know, republicans are really hitting these democrats hard on the -- on the campaign front. they're also doing that on the house floor trying to get them to not support this. >> i have -- leanne, i've heard this. they are desperate.

they believe if they can get abigail or alyssa slotkin, even if they were the only democrats to vote with the two that voted against the inquiry, they would see that as political victory and they would walk away. i'd be curious to see. >> national security democrats. >> it is -- it is an obsession of theirs. i have a feeling they're aware of this. the two members. so we shall see. anyway, leanne caldwell. thank you. much appreciated. >> thank you. >> up next, the latest move by senate republicans to do exactly what we were warning about earlier. spread debunked conspiracy theories. piracy theories under control. with less eczema, you can show more skin. so roll up those sleeves. and help heal your skin from within with dupixent. dupixent is the first treatment of its kind that continuously treats moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis, even between flare ups. dupixent is a biologic, and not a cream or steroid. many people taking dupixent saw clear or almost clear skin.

and, had significantly less itch. that's a difference you can feel. don't use if you're allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur, including anaphylaxis, which is severe. tell your doctor about new or worsening eye problems, such as eye pain or vision changes, or a parasitic infection. if you take asthma medicines, don't change or stop them without talking to your doctor. so help heal your skin from within, and talk to your eczema specialist about dupixent. 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

just between us,

you know what's better than mopping? anything! at the end of a long day, it's the last thing i want to do. well i switched to swiffer wet jet and its awesome. it's an all-in-one so it's ready to go when i am. the cleaning solution actually breaks down dirt and grime. and the pad absorbs it deep inside. so, it prevents streaks and haze better than my old mop. plus, it's safe to use on all my floors, even wood. glad i got that off my chest and the day off my floor. try wet jet with a moneyback guarantee this piece is talking yeah?. so what do you see? i see an unbelievable opportunity. i see best-in-class platforms and education. i see award-winning service, and a trade desk full of experts, available to answer your toughest questions. and i see it with zero commissions on online trades. i like what you're seeing. it's beautiful, isn't it? yeah. td ameritrade now offers zero commissions on online trades. ♪

done nothing wrong. i mean, that's pretty clear at this point. the senate, as i mentioned before, the president's clear. if it goes there, he wants a trial. he welcomes it. >> but are there republican senators who are wavering? >> he absolutely wants to bring forward serious witnesses, like the whistle-blower, like adam schiff, like hunter and joe biden. if they're going to do this. if the democrats want this fight, it's something the president is willing to have. >> welcome back. president trump may be counting on the senate to save his presidency from impeachment and today may have been a good reminder of why that's likely. three republican senators, lindsey graham, ron johnson, and finance committee announced they were seeking interviews on reported -- to help hilary clinton's 2016 campaign.

betsy, michael steele, marie are back with me. so michael steel, what's that about? >> they are creating a counterfactual narrative that will be convincing enough to the group of president's supporters to continue supporting him and confuse enough people that he doesn't get convicted and impeached. i mean, they have a very clear strategy. we may not like it. we may not agree with it. we may think it's all factually wrong and terrible. but they have a convincing argument that a lot of people are going to buy. >> and they didn't just ask for this former dnc consultant to talk to them. they also asked for a ukrainian guy to participate in their investigation. i whatsapped with him a little earlier today. he told me he's received a former invitation and he's going to play ball with him. >> where does he live right now? >> he lives in kyiv. he's in kyiv right now. he's one of the people participating in the documentary. and most importantly, he is the

only person who went on the record for the "politico" story in january 2017 that set off the entire narrative that the ukrainians allegedly colluded with the democrats. it all comes back to andriy. of course, they've said this narrative is not true and being pushed by the russian security services but he maintains the allegations he's making despite that. and now we have three less senators staying they take him seriously and they want him to participate in their investigation. >> but i think it goes back to the guest you had earlier. all of a sudden, you create doubt. >> there must be something to this ukraine business. i keep hearing about it. >> that's all you need. you could even bring the show together of the -- the heckler that was against vice president joe biden. he clearly thought that was true, as well, right? the more you repeat it, the more you start perceiving doubt and that's often times all you need. >> all right. there is a political fall here.

lindsey graham is playing with matches here a little bit. i don't think he fully realizes it politically. i mean, he's got a state that is surrounded by swing states. and i'm just saying he seems to be pushing the envelope in ways i dptd thi i didn't think he would push. >> i don't think he's putting himself in -- >> not in danger but he's going -- his opponent is -- he's going to be facing somebody. ask ted cruz what that's like when you face somebody with an enormous amount of money. >> he will do better than most people who run against lindsey graham but lindsey graham will comfortably win re-election. >> i wouldn't use the word comfortably. >> comfortably enough i think. we will see. i think that part of the problem here is that there are underlying facts that this is not totally made-up conspiracy theory. the former vice president's son did get a very lucrative job at a ukrainian company that was not necessarily qualified for at a time his father was the point man for administrations of ukraine.

there were former elected officials who were clearly rooting for secretary clinton to win. >> why is that? >> because they believe now-president trump was a friend and ally of vladimir putin. >> what did he say during the campaign? let russia have crimea. >> right. >> no. the context of this, i just think -- the context. the idea of leading and -- the idea of leading while there were these ukrainian officials who were coming out in favor of hilary clinton. it's not like they just randomly decided i want to be for hilary clinton. the other candidate said hand pieces of our country to another country. i -- i -- so they wrote an op-ed. and they objected diplomatically. this is -- it's also not even -- it's not even remotely the equivalent of what russia did. >> of course not. but there are enough little wisps of fact there for the president ae president's allies to thread this together. >> john kennedy was shot and then all of a there is a -- that was the one agreed upon fact.

>> there's also all sorts of fun uk have with wisps of fact. the idea is comparing a russian-intelligence backed multiple dollar operation to spread this to break into american citizen's computers -- >> weaponize them. >> to compare that for the trump administration and senate republicans, to compare that to a ukrainian writing an op-ed -- >> it's not exactly a widely read -- no defenoffense, but -- >> it was insider. >> to ukraine's minister of the interior writing a post on his fn page in ukraine, to say there's a comparison here. >> what a medal. >> give me a break. >> it's as factual as they all share the same oxygen.

>> exactly, right. >> name three people. >> right. >> that's another reference from the 1980s. >> i'll google it. >> you'll have to google that one. it involves a postman and jeopardy. >> sounds good. >> i'll have to google that one too. now you've really lost me. >> the white house isn't cooperating here. why do we think at the -- at the end of the day, why do we think this president finds out there's not 51 senate votes to agree to the ideal of let's bring up adam schiff, hunter biden and joe biden into this thing, does the president not cooperate with this trial? >> i don't think ultimately the president cooperates with the trial. the talking point, this is a force without hunter biden is what they're going to be stick with. there are not 51 votes for a kangaroo court in the united states. there are 51 votes not to convict the president and remove him. >> but there aren't 51 votes to get rid of the trial either. >> this is the kind of spectacle

that the trump white house really enjoys. it's going to be made for tv. they're hoping to bring in folks they're aligned with, people who can push their counternarrative. this moment is something -- >> i don't know about that. >> i think people will be disappointed by the senate trial. i think people will be disappointed in what the senate is willing to do. >> they didn't get any of it. they didn't come prepared and didn't have anything that was willing to say things that were untrue. >> if you can't create a circus on the house side of things it's 10,000 times harder. >> exactly. thank you very much. up ahead why i'm obsessed way lasting life lesson, courtesy of "arrested development." >> there's always money in the banana stand! before we talk about tax-smart investing, what's new? -well, audrey's expecting... -twins! grandparents! we want to put money aside for them, so...change in plans.

alright, let's see what we can adjust. ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. okay. mom, are you painting again? you could sell these. lemme guess, change in plans? at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. 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. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. sa new buick? for me? to james, from james. that's just what i wanted. is this a new buick? i secret santa-ed myself. oh i shouldn't have but i have been very good this year. i love it...i love it... don't forget you this holiday season, get an s-you-v, from buick. celebrate the holidays with up to 25% below msrp for current eligible non-gm owners and lessees on most of these 20-19 buick models.

welcome back. tonight i'm obsessed with the great works of master artists. the raw emotion of the "the scream," the dreaminess of "starry night" and the stark simplicity of comedian which is a banana affixed to a wall with duct tape. and it can be yours if you're willing to cough up $150,000. the piece is on sale at art

bazal, the modern expo in miami beach. you might think that's kind of pricey and you're right because two versions of it have already sold for $120,000. i'm not sure even lucille bluthe would pay that much. >> it's one banana. what could it cost? $10. >> there is always money in the banana stand. if i can look at it and see drek and someone else can see art. how about these disposable cups in my office, a contemplation of the dispensability of our politics and how fleeting it is. it's all yours for $100,000. how about this sculpture? maybe it's a pile of paper napkins or maybe it's the

critique of the uniformity of our bland existence and our meager efforts to clean up the filth of our conspicuous con sups. $240,000. you know what? make it $250,000. art may be in the eye of the beholder but so is income inequality. some people can pay 6 figures for a piece of fruit stuck to a wall and some are struggling to pay for food. the banana split, if you will. look, i know modern art twitter may come after me on this one, but in all reality, you think about it, if we have this much disposable income for bananas duct taped to the wall, perhaps we do have an income inequality issue, folks. that's all we have for tonight. msnbc will have special coverage of the judiciary committee

meeting on monday. look what's next for impeachment, jerrold nadler and ted cruz. nadler and cruz this sunday. good evening ari. >> good evening, chuck. we have a lot to get to on "the beat." the white house responding moments ago to congress's offer to participate in the impeachment hearings. also tonight, new heat on rudy giuliani. could he be in trouble on the way he's talking to witnesses. and more on revelations in the impeachment report. we've been breaking news night by night assisted by the new evidence, some of you you may not have heard about yet. but we begin now with breaking news. the white house making it official, they will not participate in this next impeachment hearing on monday. donald trump formally refusing to present any kind of evidence or even engage with what will be the first witnesses presented direct evidence