country. we all want the same things. it's just sometimes that gets lost in the noise. >> the most admired woman in the world assuring the daughter of a former president and all of her fellow americans that the world as we know it will still be there when this is all over. so that end that's our broadcast on a tuesday night. thank you so much for being mere with us. good night from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. mayor pete buttigieg is going to be here in studio tonight. he is of course one of the top contenders for the democratic presidential nomination. he is currently and pretty solidly the front-runner in iowa. which is the first race in the democratic presidential primary. that iowa contest is less than eight weeks away. mayor pete buttigieg is going to be here live on set in just a moment, and he's here on an auspicious day as the house has just released articles of impeachment against president trump. and that of course makes this a historic day in its own right.

but by reading the political tea leaves sort of looking at the restraint and the small c conservative approach democrats took to drawing up these articles i think it's fair to say not just this is a big day because these articles have been released to the public today. i think this is big day and this will go down in history because looking at the way this is going to go, and looking at what democrats are effectively charging the president with here, it now seems to be just overwhelmingly likely that not just is this an effort by the democrats in the house and by the house of representatives more broadly to impeach president trump, it seems i think clear and fair to conclude this far out that president trump will soon become only the third president in u.s. history to be impeached. it's going to happen, and it's going to happen quickly. we had one in the 1800s who was impeached.

there was one in the 1900s who was impeached. and now the 21st century will have its impeachment, too. after lots of speculation about how the house would break down various allegations against president trump and different types of evidence of his different types of misbehavior, ultimately now know as of today they decided to write up just two articles of impeachment. there were three against nixon, four against clinton, two of which failed in the house, two of which passed. but today there were these two articles against president trump. and even with a big font and wide spacing they only take up nine total pages of text. when i say the democrats are taking a small c conservative approach to this impeachment, that's part of what i mean. this just isn't a sprawling set of allegations. this does not encompass everything that democrats have alleged against president trump or even everything that was discussed over the course of these impeachment proceedings.

these two quick articles of impeachment, these two articles on abuse of power and obstruction, amount to a short sharp shock of an indictment against the president. they didn't go wide, they went narrow. even so, though, even with this tightly focused approach from the house of representatives, there's still a couple of surprises in these two short of articles of impeachment. we're going to be talking about that in just a few minutes. but before we get there, can we also just take a moment to appreciate this for a second? because this had to happen today of all days? really? raise your hand if you think that maybe this was not the first choice from the trump white house for how the president should spend the day on which the articles of impeachment against him were unveiled. because you recognize this guy, right? you have at least seen him in the oval office before.

you saw him when he was last there on may -- in may of 2017. and he was back in the oval office again today. when he showed up in may of 2017, at that point federal prosecutors were pursuing criminal charges against trump national security advisor mike flynn. they were pursuing a criminal investigation of him for lying to the fbi about his interactions with the russian government including specifically with that russian government official. when these guys were in the oval office back in may 2017, trump by that point had already repeatedly leaned on the fbi director james comey, that comey should let flynn go, that the fbi should ease up on their investigation into flynn. the fbi by that point was not only pursuing that case against mike flynn, they were also pursuing a counterintelligence and criminal investigation into russia interfering in the 2016 presidential election and that crucial question of whether russia had any help from the american side when they did that. in the context of that ongoing investigation by the fbi, president trump by that point

had repeatedly pressured fbi director james comey to promise him loyalty, and comey would not do that. he demurred from that. he took careful note of all his interactions with the president, but he told the president he wasn't going to be loyal to him, not in the way the president wanted. the president then fired the fbi director james comey. that ultimately would lead to robert mueller being appointed the special counsel and all the rest of it. but it is still amazing that the very day after trump fired fbi director james comey, the day after firing comey that's the day he brought that guy, russian foreign minister sergey lavrov as well as the russian ambassador to the united states into the oval office. i mean, these have been lavrov's two visits to the oval office in the trump presidency. two visits to the oval office, period. the day the articles of impeachment were unveiled

against president trump today and his previous visit, may 2017, the day after trump fired the fbi director. and in that last oval -- if you want to understand how these two sort of -- these two tent poles function here in the trump presidency i mean think about what he learned about that last oval office meeting. remember there was like this cascade of revelations about what happened that day in the oval office the last time the russian foreign minister was there in the oval. first there was the surprise news of that meeting itself. this is one of the many interactions president trump has had with the russian government since he's been president that we the american people had to learn about from the russian government. our own white house, our own government didn't say anything but russian state media and the russian government announced it was going to happen. this was also a meeting where the white house took overt steps to block all u.s. reporters and photographers from covering that meeting. but nevertheless they allowed a russian photographer from russian state-run media to come in alongside lavrov and the russian ambassador. that's how we got these happy,

happy pictures of the president hosting his high-level russian government guests the day after he fired the fbi director. and then within days of that meeting "the washington post" and "the new york times" started to report out some sort of hair on fire details about what had actually happened in the oval office that day. again, that meeting was the day after trump had fired the fbi director, right, to try to shut down the russia investigation. in that meeting in the oval office the next day after that firing we would soon learn -- excuse me -- that what president trump told the russians in the oval office that day was that he had just fired the head of the fbi, he had just fired comey. he said, quote, i faced great pressure because of russia. that is taken off now. so the president told the russians in the oval office that day that firing the fbi director would get rid of the pressure on him about russia.

trump also told the russians that day some very highly classified information he was not supposed to release to them. quote, president trump revealed highly classified information to the russian foreign minister and ambassador in their white house meeting according to current and former u.s. officials who said trump's disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the islamic state. information the president relayed had been provided by a u.s. partner through an intelligence sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the u.s. government. nevertheless, that day he blurted out that super secret information from one of our allies to the russians. we would eventually learn actually just a few months ago that there was a memorandum summarizing that meeting that happened in the oval office back in 2017, trump and the russian foreign minister and the russian ambassador. and the memorandum of what happened in that meeting was only circulated to a very few officials with the highest security clearances in the

government. and according to that memorandum we found out just a few months ago the other thing president trump told the russians in that office, the day after he fired the fbi director which he said relieved great pressure on him having to do with russia, the other thing he told them that day in the oval was that he was, quote, unconcerned about moskow's interference in the 2016 u.s. presidential election. that assertion by president trump that it was okay by him that russia had interfered in the 2016 election on his behalf, that remark by the president in that meeting reportedly so alarmed trump white house officials who heard him say it that it prompted them to, quote, limit access to the memorandum recounting those remarks to an unusually small number of people in an attempt to keep the president's comments from being publicly disclosed. so if you think about these as high points, it's like tent pole moments for the trump presidency.

the last time the russian foreign minister sergey lavrov was in the oval office was the day after trump fired the fbi director, which is the thing that led to robert mueller being appointed, the whole investigation. in that meeting he kicks out the american press, he allows in the russian press, he tells the russians it's okay by him they interfered to help him in his election. he tells them he fired the fbi director to get rid of the pressure on him about the russia investigation. and he gives them code word sensitive so sensitive super classified intelligence that he's definitely not supposed to talk to them about. and -- but wait, there's more. it would take us a couple of years for us to learn about it, but again just a few months ago in september of this year we also learned about yet another consequence of that oval office meeting back in may of 2017. quote, in a previously undisclosed mission in 2017 the u.s. successfully extracted from russia one of its highest-level covert sources within the russian government according to multiple trump administration

officials with direct knowledge. quote, the removal of the russian source was driven in part by concerns that president trump repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the source as a spy. the decision to carry out the extraction occurred soon after a may 2017 meeting in the oval office in which trump discussed highly classified intelligence with the russian foreign minister. quote, the disclosure to the russians by the president prompted intelligence officials to renew earlier discussions about the potential risks of the u.s. source inside the kremlin being exposed. quote, knowledge of the russian covert source's existence was highly restricted in the u.s. government and intelligence agencies. according to one source, there was no equal alternative within the russian government because the source provided both insight and information on vladimir putin. so the last time this guy, the russian foreign minister sergey lavrov, was in the oval office

with trump, trump tells him it's okay you interfered in the election, i fired the fbi director to get rid of the russia investigation. whew. here's some super sensitive intelligence information i'm not supposed to share with you. we know that white house officials locked down the memo recounting what president trump did at that meeting in response. we only found out a couple of years later that also reportedly in response to that oval office fiasco the u.s. government had to go into russia and exfiltrate the highest ranking source u.s. intelligence had inside the kremlin. all in the wake of that may 2017 meeting, the last time lavrov was in the oval office before today. that guy we had to exfiltrate out of russia in the wake of that meeting, "the new york times" would later report that that source who u.s. intelligence had to yank out of moscow and resettle him in the united states in 2017, he was such a highly placed source inside the kremlin he was the reason the cia was able to conclude that the russian election interference effort in

2016 had been ordered by president putin personally. because this guy was high ranking enough in the russian government that he could tell them that. according to cnn's reporting at the time, quote, the spy had access to president putin and could even provide images of documents on the russian leader's desk. incredible source for u.s. intelligence, right? particularly at a time when russia's newly aggressive toward us and toward our allies, they've pulled off this audacious military intelligence operation to mess with our election. for us to have a highly placed kremlin source like that that can get that close to putin and provide that -- i mean, that's priceless. and they had to pull out that source and get him out of russia entirely once they realized the kind of stuff that president trump was willing to say whenever he was behind closed doors with russian government officials. those fears presumably got worse a few weeks after that oval office meeting with the russian foreign minister when president

trump went to hamburg, germany and had a direct meeting with lavrov's because, had his direct meeting with vladimir putin. that was the meeting where president trump confiscated the interpreter's notes and forbade the interpreter from talking to anybody about what she'd heard in that meeting. so this is just like -- i know this is a historic day. but this is like reverse where's waldo. it's a remarkable thing for this day in history. on this day of all days this guy is back again in the oval office with president trump? this was closed press today. no reporters were allowed in to witness their conversation. it was just this one photograph released from the event. this meeting of course happens just one day after the justice department's inspector general concludes that the investigation into russian interference in the election and the trump campaign's involvement in it, that was a properly predicated investigation. that wasn't carried out because of any sort of improper bias or political intentions on the part of the fbi. that conclusion from the inspector general yesterday of

course flies in the face of president trump's continued assertions that the russia investigation targeted him and his campaign unfairly. the lavrov meeting comes after the justice department concludes that that investigation wasn't unfair, it was brought under -- it was brought properly with proper predication. lavrov's in the oval office on the day we get the impeachment articles against president trump. and while the president's impeachment scandal is still and i think will forever be shorthanded as a ukraine scandal, it is as much about russia and the russian government and the desires of the russian government as it is about anything else. i mean, this is sort of the nut. this is the meat of article i, abuse of power. quote, using the powers of his high office, president trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, ukraine, in the 2020 u.s. presidential election.

he did so through a scheme or source of conduct that included soliciting the government of ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his re-election, harm the election prospects of a political opponent and influence the 2020 u.s. presidential election to his advantage. president trump also sought to pressure the government of ukraine to take these steps by conditioning official u.s. government acts of significant value to ukraine on its public announcement of those investigations. president trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit. in so doing president trump used the powers of the presidency in a manner that compromised the national security of the united states and undermined the integrity of the u.s. democratic process. he thus ignored and injured the interests of the nation. president trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct through the following means. first president trump acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the u.s. government, he corruptly solicited the government of ukraine to publicly announce

investigations into a political opponent, former vice president joseph r. biden, jr. and into a discredited theory promoted by russia alleging that ukraine rather than russia interfered in the u.s. presidential election. with the same corrupt motives president trump acting both directly and through his agents, conditioned two official acts on the public announcements he had requested. number one, the release of $391 million of u.s. taxpayer funds that congress had appropriated for the purpose of providing military security assistance to ukraine to oppose russian aggression in which president trump had ordered suspended. also, two, a head of state meeting at which the white house -- excuse me. a head of state meeting at the white house in which the president of ukraine sought to demonstrate continued support for the government of ukraine in the face of russian aggression. that's article i.

that's what president trump is being impeached for. given that, given the way the president is being impeached for having done all those things to ukraine in and way that undermined our alliance with them and specifically their fight against russian aggression, which is, you know, led to a five yearlong war in ukraine, i mean given the fact he's being impeached for undermining ukraine in its war against russia, this is heck of a day to choose to have the russian foreign minister sitting on your lap in the oval office. i mean -- okay, not on his lap. at his right hand? in the first impeachment article against president trump, the abuse of power that he's accused of trying, it's to, you know, undermine joe biden's chances of beating him in the 2020 election, but he's also accused of effectively exonerating russia for having tried to help him win the 2016 election. right? as the impeachment articles note it is a, quote, discredited theory promoted by russia that

the real interference in the 2016 election wasn't russia at all, it was ukraine instead. u.s. intelligence agencies have reportedly concluded and briefed the u.s. senate on their conclusions that the russian government, russian security services have been promoting that lie about ukraine as a disinformation effort that is designed to benefit the kremlin. so i know you know how all of those individual dots, right? but it's amazing to see them connect on a day like this. it's an amazing thing to have the president as of today officially being impeached for him trying to help the kremlin in that way, while he is simultaneously meeting the guy from the kremlin in the oval office. i mean, from the white house's perspective this is not great timing for having a meeting with a senior russian government official, right? while he's being impeached for helping russia. why would we think it's the white house that made this decision and not the russian government dictating these terms? it was only yesterday that the

white house finally confirmed this meeting would take place. for days the russian government and russian state run media have been saying that lavrov was coming to washington, he was going to be meeting with trump. and the white house wouldn't say anything and wouldn't confirm anything, and finally yesterday they confirmed it. the rollout of the meeting was also super awkward and insulting to the united states. on terms that are favorable to the kremlin and not to the u.s. the white house put out their official readout of this meeting today. quote, today president donald j. trump met with foreign minister sergey lavrov of russia. the readout says, coat, president trump warned against any russian attempts to interfere in united states elections. oh, really? do you believe that president trump in his meeting with the russian foreign minister today sternly warned him against any russian attempts to interfere in u.s. elections? you think president trump actually did that, actually issued that warning to russia? well, the foreign minister mr. lavrov was asked about that by

reporters after his meeting with president trump, and regardless of whatever was in that white house readout lavrov immediately shut that down. >> mr. lavrov, edward long from "the new york times." the white house just put out a statement about your meeting with president trump saying that the president did warn about -- warn you not to interfere in u.s. elections and also urged you to try and settle your conflict over the situation with ukraine. i was just wondering if you did discuss these two items and if so can you tell us about the discussion? >> translator: well, you know, we haven't even actually discussed elections. regarding ukraine i briefed both secretary of state and president trump about yesterday's summit in paris. >> oh, elections? did trump say he warned me that russia shouldn't interfere in the elections? that is adorable he told you he said that.

no, he did not say anything of the kind. what was the quote? "well, you know, we haven't even actually discussed elections." we didn't even talk about that topic. that's cute, though, that's what he told you we talked about. now, as for ukraine, he says i briefed both secretary of state pompeo and president trump about yesterday's summit in paris. well, in fact yesterday there was a summit in paris. it was the first high-level sitdown in three years between ukraine and russia to try to resolve the war that started when russia invaded ukraine, took a piece of that country for itself and then started occupying the eastern part of ukraine. here's how the "washington post" nutted up that summit. quote, the negotiations pitting a comedian turned president with no international diplomacy experience against a calculating former kgb agent who's been in power for decades come at a crucial moment in ukraine's grinding conflict in the east civilians and soldiers are still dying along the front lines but

this is a lonely moment for ukrainian president zelensky. once ironclad u.s. support for ukraine is shrinking under president trump. trump's suspicions of ukraine and his role in the holdup of military aid this past summer have cast doubts on u.s. support for ukraine in its conflict with russia. in ukraine many supportsers even zelensky supportsers were nervous about this meeting with putin at a moment when republicans in washington have seized on the false conspiracy theory that ukraine, not russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election. "the new york times" nuts it up even more starkly. quote, as zelensky seeks an end to the conflict with russian-backed separatists who control a large part of the eastern part of his country, he enters negotiations without a counterweight that ukraine had in its favor until recently. that counterweight used to be clear backing from the united states. so from our perspective here in america the day president trump is being impeached, today was

kind of a terrible day, a super awkward day for the russian foreign minister to turn up for the second time in the oval office. not only given what happened the last time he was in the oval office, but also to remind everybody of president trump's involvement with russia and unresolved questions about that and how he has behaved toward that government and how his behavior toward that government has freaked out even officials in his administration and led ultimately to impeachment articles that were just brought against him today, right? i mean, from the american perspective you can't imagine that the trump white house wanted this meeting today of all days. with a senior russian official showing off that he can get into the oval office to meet with president trump. it's not even a two heads of state meeting, right? it's like a russian cabinet official effectively being able to get into the oval office and meet with the u.s. president. so from our perspective not great, not great timing, not ideal, super awkward. but maybe it wasn't the white

house that decided this meeting would happen today. from the russian government's perspective today's timing was perfect. because russia is continuing to wage a war against ukraine. and we used to be ukraine's greatest and most important ally. and russia has had a remarkable windfall over this past few months, past couple of years. they've succeeded in getting the u.s. to interrupt our assistance to ukraine and to make it contingent on stuff. they've turned the republican establishment and conservative media against what used to be our staunch ally ukraine and instead in favor of russia. they have so called into question u.s. support for ukraine in their war against russia that the day after ukraine and russia have their big critical summit talks about that war and we're not there at that summit to support ukraine, the day after those talks it's russia that sends its foreign minister for his oval office meeting and his photo with the president.

where our used to be ally, the president of that country still can't get to washington, still can't get an invite. the associated press's main story about this today has a lead that lays it out as clear as can be. it's the lead from the a.p. today. quote, the oval office meeting with president donald trump on tuesday was the second for russia's foreign minister. the president of ukraine is still waiting for his first. and so the day that impeachment articles are unveiled against president trump, i mean this is going to go down in history as a wild one. right? to have the russian government squatting in the oval office on this of all days, i mean, how are they looking at that in the kremlin? somewhere between hilarious and a victory lap? but it also supports a little noticed and i think fascinating decision by the judiciary committee in writing these articles of impeachment. as i mentioned these articles of impeachment are a short sharp shock. they went narrow instead of broad. it's a total of nine pages in big print double spaced. but there is a surprise here. and today's shenanigans in the

oval office i think goes some way toward justifying the decision by the house of representatives to include this surprise in the articles of impeachment, and that's next. stay with us. ♪ we switched to tide purclean,

♪ because it's made with plants.♪ ♪ we switched to tide purclean,♪ ♪ it gets stains out of his pants.♪ ♪ tide purclean, they don't put phosphates in. ♪ ♪ no dyes or chlorine ♪ it's gentle on my skin. ♪tide purclean, it has nothing to hide. ♪ ♪ it's made with plants and ♪ has the cleaning ♪ strength of tide. the first plant-based detergent with the cleaning power of tide.

some things are too important to do yourself. ♪ get customized security with 24/7 monitoring from xfinity home. awarded the best professionally installed system by cnet. simple. easy. awesome. call, click or visit a store today. the house of representatives has released the two articles of impeachment they're going to vote on against president trump in judiciary committee proceedings that will start

tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. eastern. those proceedings will probably go late into the evening tomorrow night. and then those proceedings will continue the following morning thursday morning starting at 9:00 a.m. and we expect that the ultimate outcome of those proceedings in the judiciary committee will be that these articles of impeachment are voted out of the committee and they are conveyed to the full house for a vote in the full house which will maybe happen next week. and that will be the formal impeachment of president trump. but now that we've got these articles, now that we know they're voting on, we know there are just these two articles, abuse of power and obstruction. nixon faced three articles of impeachment. clinton faced four. with president trump there will be two. and they're not long. nine pages in total. but even though these are short and concise and narrowly targeted articles of impeachment there's a little-noticed and i think very interesting decision by the judiciary committee that they took in writing up these articles in which they make clear that even though this is a narrowly targeted thing part of

what they are impeaching him for is that these actions that he took in the ukraine scandal are part of a broader pattern. literally that's the word they use at the end of both of these articles. at the end of the first article of impeachment, the abuse of power article, here's how that article ends. quote, these actions were consistent with president trump's previous invitations of foreign interference in u.s. elections. in all of this, president trump abused the powers of the presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit. he has betrayed the nation by abusing his high office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections. where forpresident trump by such conduct has demonstrated he will remain a threat to national security and the constitution if allowed to remain in office and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of

law, president trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the united states. but sort of the start of ending of that article, these actions were consistent with president trump's previous invitations of foreign interference in u.s. elections, that is echoed towards the end of the second article of impeachment. the second article of impeachment, same thing. quote, these actions were consistent with president trump's previous efforts to undermine u.s. government investigations into foreign interference in u.s. elections. so no, they did not do a separate article of impeachment against president trump about president trump welcoming russia's interference in the 2016 elections and him, you know, trying to take maximum advantage of their interference in our election at his behalf. and no, they didn't do a separate article of impeachment based on volume 2 of the mueller

report and all of the ways mueller found president trump tried to impede and obstruct the investigation into russia's interference and the russia-related investigation into him and members of his campaign and members of his administration. there aren't specific articles of impeachment that are about that scandal in 2016. but what they are nailing him on and what they are about to impeach him on is his behavior toward ukraine. and they are explicitly noting -- i didn't expect this but they are explicitly noting that his behavior toward ukraine fits the pattern of what he did with russia for the 2016 election too. and when democrats talk about the speed with which they're moving forward in these impeachment proceedings, that's what they said today, that they need to move quickly now in advance of the 2020 election to try to deter him from inviting and trying to further extort foreign powers into interfering in the 2020 election on his behalf as well. politico.com reporting tonight

that when the articles of impeachment are voted out of the judiciary committee, which will likely be thursday morning this week, the house reportedly tends to file a lengthy report expounding on this point and specifically on the evidence turned up in the mueller investigation and how the president's behavior is a coherent pattern between both the scandal of his treatment of ukraine and the scandal of his involvement with russia. so that's all going to happen really soon like in the next two days. who knows? maybe the russian foreign minister sergey lavrov will still be in town. maybe he should stay around for that one too. might be another big day in washington. maybe it's time for oval office meeting number three. stay with us. we've got mayor pete buttigieg here live with us on set. we'll be right back. frequent heartburn waking him up. now that dream is a reality. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? good morning, mr. sun.

good morning, blair. [ chuckles ] whoo. i'm gonna grow big and strong. yes, you are. i'm gonna get this place all clean. i'll give you a hand. and i'm gonna put lisa on crutches! wait, what? said she's gonna need crutches. she fell pretty hard. you might want to clean that up, girl. excuse us. when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you built with customizable coverage. -and i'm gonna -- -eh, eh, eh. -donny, no. -oh. skip to the good part with alka-seltzer plus. now with 25% more concentrated power. nothing works faster for powerful cold relief. oh, what a relief it is! so fast! ♪ ♪

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. ♪ ♪ ♪ the calming scent of lavender by downy infusions calm. laundry isn't done until it's done with downy. i receivelize travel rewards. going new places! going out for a bite! going anytime. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com.

the first contest in the democratic presidential primary will be iowa. it's less than eight weeks from now. this is the real clear politics polling average from the state of iowa taken from a number of different iowa pols. see the purple line there that ends up at the top on the far

right? that purple line is the polling line that representats the prospects of south bend, indiana mayor pete buttigieg. as you can see, since mid october mr. buttigieg has been rising steadily into what now looks like a pretty stable lead in iowa. he's up nearly 6 points ahead of his nearest competitor who at this point is vermont senator bernie sanders. as you can imagine, that rise in the iowa polls has meant mayor buttigieg is also facing new levels of scrutiny particularly from his fellow candidates. last week massachusetts senator elizabeth warren called on mayor buttigieg to open his private fundraisers to reporters so the press could hear what happens and report on what happens at his fundraisers. yesterday the buttigieg campaign responded by saying they will allow members of the press to start attending fundraisers from here on out. mr. buttigieg has also faced a number of questions about his time working in the private

sector for the consulting firm mckinsey. tonight he has released a full list of his clients with mckinsey. they include blue cross blue shield of michigan, the u.s. defense department, and u.s. postal service. joining us now for the interview is pete buttigieg. the outgoing mayor for south bend, indiana, and a leading candidate in the democratic primary for president. mr. mayor, it's great to see you. thank you for being here. >> thanks for having me back. >> last time i talked to you you said you were very much enjoying the campaign but you were under no illusions. you said if you walked out of here and walked down the street there would be a lot of people who wouldn't know who you are. how's that changed? >> it's a little different now. yeah. but that's a good problem to have. >> let me ask you about that polling lead in iowa. you spent a lot of time and a lot of money in iowa. obviously iowa is first and it is incredibly hotly contested. are you comfortable with your position there and what do you think we should expect over the next eight weeks? >> i think getting comfortable with your position is a big mistake anytime in a competitive election, and

especially with weeks to go between now and the caucuses. so what we're going to continue to see is us sharing our message. and what i'm focusing on most of all is what america will need the day after donald trump leaves office. you know, part of this of course is to demonstrate that we will be the best nominee to take on and defeat donald trump. but by definition we're all competing to be the president for what comes next. and i'm focused on big solutions to big problems. but not measuring bigness by how many people we alienate but by how many people we can include. that seems to be working very well in these early states as we campaign. but again, i'm under no illus n illusio illusions. there's a lot of work to go. there's a lot of ups and downs that can happen. and we'll be keeping our head down and continuing to push. >> when you say not measuring it by the number of people you can alienate, by that do you mean your fellow competitors are trying to alienate people? >> i think there's a perception sometimes that the boldness of an idea rests only in how controversial it is. sometimes maybe that's true.

definitely some of the democratic reform ideas i've come out for that i think are the most bold might also be the most controversial. but part of what i'm trying to get across in my approach on health care, for example, on college and others is -- certainly on climate is that we can undertake big solutions, things that will make for the most meaningful change we've seen in a half century on health care, for example, in history. on climate. without focusing on just how many trillions of dollars it'll cost or how it falls on some ideological spectrum, and that i think is our best shot. not just in order to win, in order to beat donald trump and end this trump era, but in order to make sure we can govern in a way that will leave our country more united and not more divided. >> let me ask you about the health care debate. i thought a lot about this heading into the last actual debate that msnbc and nbc were involved in moderating. just thinking about the thrust of those questions and the amount of time to spend on that and the real nature of the

divisions between you and your fellow candidates on that. i am troubled by what i see as -- what feels to me as sort of an observer of the process, feels to me like a focus on the fight between democratic candidates there that is out of proportion to the real differences in goals among the candidates. it seems to me all of you want universal coverage and reduction in costs. >> absolutely. and so for the democratic primary to be about sort of making a bogeyman out of some of the candidates' approaches would be and how scary that would be and how unelectable, you've really led the charge about medicare for all being a politically disastrous proposal. nor is it that different from what you proposed in the past. >> again, my concern is not just the politics of it. it's governing. it's making sure we solve a big problem in a way that's likely to induce more people to feel

like they want to be part of where we're headed. i do think it's a concern. for example, when i talk to union members who are really frustrated by the proposal, that they should be happy with being kicked off plans that they negotiated for. that being said, i agree with you from a bigger picture perspective. there's a lot more we have in common than divides us, and there's a lot of focus on the disagreement about how coverage should work. obviously i think my approach is better and i'll go out there and make the case for it. but we also need to be talking about costs, prescription drugs, mental health and addiction and how to get at the same visibility and the same resources that go into physical medical issues. a whole range of issues, health equity, racial disparities in health outcomes, rural health, so many things that deserve to be looked at in addition to this area where we've got this tug of war going on, which is how should coverage work in the future. >> are you at all concerned by the way in which your criticisms of medicare for all seem to directly dovetail with the

private insurance industry and the other health care quloik and special interest groups that are dumping tons of money into the democratic primary specifically to try to make taboo some of the more left-leaning proposals from your competitors? >> you know, the day i released or the day after i released my health care plan the health industry lobby attacked it. they wasted no time in denouncing my proposal. i think because they don't want the competition from the public alternative that i want to create. so rather than trying to triangulate what other people are going to say or who's going to attack my plan from what angle or whose party it rhymes with i'm just going to come out for the policy i think makes sense. by the way, for those of us who believe that medicare for all is an attractive destination, i think this is the most responsible way to move there without dictating a timeline or assuming that we in washington would know better than individuals choosing their plan what they ought to have. i just think it's the right thing to do. >> i want to ask about some of the new information your

campaign has just released, some of the changes you've just made in terms of your campaign. we're going to take a quick break. we'll be right back. mayor pete buttigieg is our guest. stay with us. a first-of-its-kind, personalized education center. see, you just >>oh, this is easy. yeah, and that's >>oh, just what i need. courses on options trading, webcasts, tutorials. yeah. their award-winning content is tailored to fit your investing goals and interests. and it learns with you, so as you become smarter, so do its recommendations. >>so it's like my streaming service. well exactly. well except now, you're binge learning. >>oh, i like that. thank you, i just came up with that. >>you're funny. learn fast with the td ameritrade education center. call 866-295-0917 or visit tdameritrade.com/learn. get started today, and for a limited time, get up to $800 when you open and fund an account. that's 866-295-0917,

or tdameritrade.com/learn. ♪ 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. ithere's my career...'s more to me than hiv. my cause... and creating my dream home. i'm a work in progress. so much goes into who i am. hiv medicine is one part of it. prescription dovato is for adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment and who aren't resistant to either of the medicines dolutegravir or lamivudine. dovato has 2 medicines in 1 pill to help you reach and then stay undetectable. so your hiv can be controlled with fewer medicines while taking dovato. you can take dovato anytime of day with food or without. don't take dovato if you're allergic to any of its ingredients or if you take dofetilide. if you have hepatitis b, it can change during treatment with dovato and become harder to treat. your hepatitis b may get worse or become life-threatening if you stop taking dovato. so do not stop dovato without talking to your doctor. serious side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, liver problems, and liver failure. life-threatening side effects include lactic acid buildup

and severe liver problems. if you have a rash and other symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis b or c. don't use dovato if you plan to become pregnant or during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy since one of its ingredients may harm your unborn baby. your doctor should do a pregnancy test before starting dovato. use effective birth control while taking dovato. the most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, nausea, trouble sleeping, and tiredness. so much goes into who i am and hope to be. ask your doctor if starting hiv treatment with dovato is right for you. back with us is pete buttigieg, the mayor of south bend, indiana. 2020 presidential hopeful. mr. mayor, thanks for being with us. >> good to be here. >> you have been criticized the last few months about not allowing the press into your fundraisers and you and your campaign had sort of resisted that pressure and said there were reasons why it was

appropriate for the press not to be allowed into those kinds of events. but you've now changed your mind and decided from here on out the press will be allowed to cover those things. why the change? >> i think it makes a lot of sense. we're talking about transparency in this campaign. we've had a president who's moved in the exact wrong direction in transparency. i think it took a little getting used to because traditionally campaigns haven't generally done this. i don't think more than one other xhan is doing it now. but i think it makes sense. >> but you did change your mind about it. >> i did. i was never hostile to the idea, but it took some getting used to and i reached the conclusion it was the right thing to do. >> in terms of the other announcement from our campaign tonight, you had worked for mckinsey after college for about three years, just about. 2 1/2, 3 years. and you talked about that private sector experience as sort of something that voters should appreciate about you in terms of where you're coming from as a candidate and where your leadership experience comes from. it was not until this week that

mckinsey said you were effectively released from the non-disclosure agreement that you signed when you left that firm. and you've now disclosed who your clients were when you worked there, including the defense department, including blue cross blue shield of michigan, including a grocery chain in canada. let me ask you about the sort of journey you went through with your campaign, facing criticism on those fronts, and then ultimately getting mckinsey to let you talk about these things. >> well, i'm very glad that we've been able to release the client list because until mckinsey said that they would allow me to -- void that agreement, it put me in this position where i felt like i had to choose between two things i care about. one thing i care about is transparency and making sure folks know everything they need to know about me, who i am, where i come from, my story. the other thing is keeping my word. and when i say i'm going to do something. especially when i sign my name to a legal document. then i think it's important to keep that word. even though as you've seen

there's nothing particularly sizzling about the list of clients that i served. so i'm glad i was not left in that untenable position that mckinsey understood that when someone who used to work for your company is being considered for the presidency you should probably go back to your clients and just ask them to release you and i'm glad they did. >> in terms of mckinsey's reputation, obviously they're a rich and foufl and influential firm. it's always been a very prestigious job to work at mckinsey but there's a lot of criticism that the firm has come under because of its work on everything from the trump administration's immigration policies, they've worked for the governments or state-affiliated institutions for china and saudi arabia and russia. how should people understand your values as they map onto the values of that firm? particularly because you've

highlighted your time there as something that's important people should understand about you and who you are in the world. >> first of all the criticism is well deserved. they have taken a number of steps. i can think of at least four times in the decade or so since i've left that i've opened up the newspaper and seen them doing something that was upsetting. i remember the message when i joined the firm when the recruiting was going on was you know, join this firm, you'll learn about how business works, you'll see all kinds of different things going on with foundations, non-profits, governments and business. and there's no better place in the world to learn how that works and be part of it than here. and in my experience, that's what i got to do, but i think it's also clearly the case that several times there people at that company have made decisions that are embarrassing to the company and embarrassing to anybody who ever worked there. >> in terms of the blue cross blue shield having been your client, can you tell us anything about the work you did for them and whether that's affected your views of what to do on health reform?

>> i was assigned to a team that was doing analysis on the overhead costs that they had. nothing to do with claims or patients but kind of as an organization, buildings, rent, utilities, travel, that kind of thing. i certainly saw how big and complicated an insurance company could be. that was my very first study, so honestly most of the time i was just figuring out how to do my job and perfecting my powerpoint skills. but it at least gave me a sense of what that world is like. and it's one of the reasons why i believe that with a public alternative we can deliver something that will outcompete all the private plans out there. i'm just not willing to assume that on behalf of individuals before they have the choice to put it to the test and decide whether that public alternative i want to create really is better than what those insurance companies out there can do. >> when you did that sort of cost and overhead assessment for blue cross blue shield of michigan, a couple of years

after that they laid off like a thousand people. was your work part of what led to those layoffs? >> i doubt it. i don't know what happened in the time after i left. that was in 2007. when they decided to shrink in 2009. now what i do know is there are some voices in the democratic primary right now who are calling for a policy that would eliminate the job of every single american working at every single insurance company in the country. >> mayor pete buttigieg just gave his farewell address as mayor of south bend after eight years there. i know your last day is january 1st. a lot of change, a lot all at once. thanks for being here tonight to talk to us about it. really appreciate it. >> good to be here. >> we'll be right back. stay with us. stay with us

♪ did you know even the cleanest looking cars can smell musty? that's because odors trapped in your car's soft surfaces get released, and are then circulated by your ac system. to stop the cycle of odors try febreze car vent clips. febreze stops the circulation of musty air by trapping and eliminating lingering odor molecules for up to 30 days of fresh, clean air. plus, they come in a range of scents including extra light.

stop the cycle of odors in your car with febreze car vent clips. brand power. helping you buy better. i wanted more from my copd medicine that's why i've got the power of 1, 2, 3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved once-daily 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy ♪ the power of 1,2,3 ♪ trelegy ♪ 1,2,3 ♪ trelegy man: with trelegy and the power of 1, 2, 3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works three ways to open airways, keep them open and reduce inflammation, for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy

and the power of 1, 2, 3. ♪ trelegy, 1,2,3 man: save at trelegy.com. ♪ trelegy, 1,2,3 looking around here i see tablets, laptops, printers, smartphones. they're all connected to the internet. they're all connected. can your network handle all those devices? sometimes. comcast business runs on the nation's largest gig-speed network. so you can get the bandwidth you need to power all of your devices at peak performance. if all of my devices could have that kind of speed, i would be dancing! get started with secure 35-megabit internet and one voice line for just $64.90 per month. call today. comcast business. beyond fast.

that's going to do it for us for tonight. tomorrow night it's going to be a little weird. we're expecting at 7:00 eastern the judiciary committee to be starting markup essentially of the articles of impeachment against the president. that'll be tomorrow night into the wee hours and then they'll pick up again thursday morning. it's going to be a hurly-burly next few days. now it's time for "the last word" with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening, rachel. and you know it's december because in december they start markups at 7:00 p.m. because they're watching the calendar tick down to the christmas recess. and whether it's legislation, or it turns out in this case impeachment, they start processes at 7:00 p.m. and in the normal section of the calendar they just start in the next day at 10:00 a.m. but they're getting a head start on what will become their work on thursday.