second guessing doctors, nurses and first responders... now "big insurance" is lobbying congress. asking for restrictions on air medical services. eliminating patients' access to life-saving care and destroying jobs all in exchange for bigger profits for insurance companies. tell congress, put patients first, not big insurance. good evening. i'm richard lui. full coverage on impeachment just ahead. but we'll start with breaking news this hour. nbc news now reporting the trump administration intends to draw back more than 4,000 troops from afghanistan by the 2020 election. the u.s. has between 12,000 and 13,000 troops in afghanistan now, and the announcement comes just days after diplomatic talks with the taliban resumed. joining me from the white house north lawn, nbc news correspondent hans nichols.

also with us tom nichols, "usa today" columnist. hans, put this into context for us and the exclusive reporting that we have. >> so my colleague courtney kube broke this story that the white house intends to announce as early as next week this drawdown of troops. now, this is significant for a whole bunch of reasons. remember, it was about two and a half months ago that you and i were talking about that time that president trump invited the taliban to camp david and then canceled it abruptly and said all talks with the taliban were off. but at that point the intention of the president was very clear, that he wanted to bring down troops. at the time we thought they were 14,000 and there are actually 12,000. bring that down to 8,000 which they'll do through natural course of events going there. this wouldn't be whole units being drawn out of afghanistan.

it gets you down to about 8,000. now, what that does to peace talks with the taliban, it's not quite certain. you mentioned the peace talks started again, and they have. the white house quietly did that after the president made that unannounced vivid to afghanistan over the thanksgiving holiday. i think one thing to look at is when the peace talks actually get back on track because they're in a temporary pause right now after there was a big attack at the bagram air base on saturday. there are a lot of cross-currents, but you need to look at the president's rhetoric and his intentions. president donald trump has wanted to get out of afghanistan from day one, and he's been challenged by his generals on this. there's this big "washington post" multipart reporting out that has these afghanistan papers on how a lot of senior officials always suspected that the war was essentially unwinnable. richard? >> unwinnable. so cross-currents. over to you, tom nicholas.

do you negotiate from a position of strength, meaning more troops potentially versus fewer troops? >> i'm not sure it makes much of a difference to the taliban about whether we have more or fewer in any given time. the commander there has said that he can manage the drawdown, and that may not be the issue at hand. it seems like the timing of this is the president trying to get ahead of a new cycle. whether this happens, when it happens, that's a different story because even if this does happen, it will happen in phases, so from the point of view of negotiations, it's less important than the political point that that was made by announcing it in a dramatic fashion. >> negotiations with the taliban, as you know so well, the futile power structure that exists, it's not concentrated. >> no.

and that's the other problem. when you're negotiating with a set of groups like this, who can speak on their behalf? who can make the arrangement stick? exactly what are you getting in terms of future guarantees? that's a separate question from how many troops we have there at any given time. we looked have even more troops there and that would still be a problem. >> hans nichols with the news this hour. thank you, tom nichols. thank you both. following a historic vote from the house judiciary committee, we look ahead to a big one on wednesday. that is when the full house votes on whether to impeach an american president for only the third time in the nation's history. but first, some new developments. nbc news confirms one moderate democrat, new jersey congressman jeff van drew expected to switch parties after a personal meeting with president trump. democrats can afford to have 17

defections on the impeachment vote expected on wednesday, but no more than that. a sign of the intense effort by the white house and house republicans to peel off democrats who might be on the fence on impeachment. now, earlier today i spoke with california congressman harley rowd da and asked him what he thought of van drew's possible defection. >> i hope it's not true. in fact, i hope every politician would not decide how they are going to vote on impeachment based on polling. we took an oath to the constitution of the united states of america, and to me that should be the defining document and defining purpose on how we decide to vote. it's politicize clear how we should vote. we should vote to impeach the president of the united states, president donald j. trump. >> and then what happened over the past week. leading up to the key judiciary committee vote.

>> the president abused his power and is a continuing threat not only to democracy, but to our national security. >> i mean, come on. this is a predetermined -- you guys have been wanting to impeach this president since he got elected. >> the entire argument for impeachment in this case is based on a charge that is not a crime. >> there are no crimes here? that is the defense my colleagues across the aisle are putting forward. the president abused his office. >> this impeachment is going to fail. the democrats will pay a heavy political price for it. >> when a robber points a gun at you to take your money, they usually don't walk up and say i'm robbing you. >> it's a little hard to believe that burisma hired hunter biden to resolve their international disputes when he could not resolve his own dispute with hertz rental car over leaving cocaine and a crack pipe in the

car. >> the pot calling the kettle black is not something that we should do. i don't know -- [ laughter ] i don't know what members, if any, have had problems with substance abuse, been busted in dui, i don't know. but if i did, i wouldn't raise it. >> the question now is an article one of the resolution. >> mr. chairman, there are 23 ayes and 17 "nos." >> the article is agreed to. article 2, impeaching president donald trump for obstructing congress. >> mr. chairman, there are 23 ayes and 17 "nos." >> the article is agreed to. the resolution is amended. >> dingell, is house senior whip representative. thank you so much for being with us on this saturday. >> it's good to be with you.

>> what do you make of this reporting on representative van drew? >> you know, it doesn't surprise me. i think he comes from a very difficult strict. he often finds himself voting or agreeing with many of the policies of the republican party. i'm still going to work with him like i do all my republican colleagues. he voted against moving forward with the process that we have been investigating and nobody expected him to vote one way or the other. this is not a partisan vote. this is a vote of conscience. >> this is a predetermined process, this is a predetermined vote. that's your response to that? >> for me it wasn't. last summer when i had -- tom steyer bought 40 ads against me because i wouldn't come out against it. i was worried and am worried

even as i sit here tonight of how divided this country is. but i haven't announced what i'm going to do, but everyone knows i've been greatly disturbed by what the actions have been, that we did take money that had been who didn't want to do congress, which was needed for our national security, and came subject to someone's personal political demands. that's not okay. and it clearly has been an obstruction of congress in many fronts. i'm going to re-read the intelligence committee report and the judiciary committee's report and then announce my formal decision. but until itches worried about our national security and protecting our democracy, hesitated on impeachment until we had clear things that endangered our national security because i am worried about how divided our country is. but this is not a political vote. i don't put my finger in the air and say what are people thinking? i have to do what i took my oath of office to do, which is to protect our country. >> so representative dingell,

you're saying you have not decided yet which way you will vote? >> well, i'm leaning, but i want to read it one more time because i am worried. no matter where we go, what happens next week, it's going to continue to divide this country. and i tell you what. i've had people screaming at me, very few people telling me ugtsd to impeach him. not so much last summer. but i've had some come up to me and threaten me and you can't -- but do you know how many people have been home for two days, have just come up and thanked me and said i'm worried about our country, what do we do to pull us together? that's what i'm focused on. how do "w" we pull together? i will work with republicans on all the issues that we're working on now that matter to them from lowering prescription drugs. we've gotten a trade deal, which shows we can work together. that's what our job is and that's what we got to do more of. >> as the history of your family name has been, representative,

will you look at the great deliberative culture of the state of michigan, what would you say, then, to representatives who say i know how i'm voting before reading the report? >> i think different people come to decisions differently. i'm someone that really spends -- i'm just -- i'm someone that dots every "i" and dots every "t." everybody -- it's a moral decision. i don't believe this is a political decision for each of us that has to cast that vote. each of us has come to that very quickly or very -- i'm just -- every time. >> would you believe that more than 17 votes could be lost? van drew is the first one. do you think it would be more than 17? >> i don't know because we're not whipping it because it is such a personal, individual vote. i would be surprised because i've been talking to a lot of my

colleagues. but, you know, i've been talking my republican colleagues too. they're struggling as much as we are. there's a lot of pressure being put on the republican side, but in the end, i think we all have to love our country and do -- and protect our constitution and our national security. i don't think we're going to have 17 people vote the other way. >> very quickly, if you read the headlines today, the trump team is leaning on vulnerable democrats. they're whipping, it appears, why not on your side whip the votes? >> because it's not a political issue. this is about our country. i'm an american and i am going to vote the way that i do because i'm an american. and my job is to protect this country, our national security, and our democracy. and that will be what my vote is on, not based on what anybody says to me and the district. i care and i respect it, but it's what i morally believe to protect our country from this point. >> from the grate state of

michigan, congresswoman debbie dingell. >> thank you. >> let's turn to our panel, daniel lipman, jackie alemany, former republican congressman from florida and msnbc political contributor david jolly, and former director of paid media for hillary for america, joel payne. dancer what do you make of the reflections that just came from the senior whip, not going to whip votes, clearly appears that the white house or the trump team is trying to figure out the numbers here. >> yeah. i think this makes congresswoman dingell's job easier since she's not having to pester her colleagues to vote one way or another. but i don't think nancy pelosi would be bringing impeachment to the floor next week if she didn't think that it would pass because it would be very embarrassing if they brought that impeachment motion on the floor and then more than 17 democrats defect. and so i think congresswoman dingell and many other democrats feel like they're going to do

this regardless of the political consequences. you've already seen republicans raise a lot of money from the trump campaign about impeachment. >> you know, when we look at representative van drew, when i was pressing representative dingell, she respected his process, every member's process, jackie. and the question is, how many roudas have there been that are waiting for the report in terms of a summary and a readout of the articles and exactly what happened during the deliberations? how many might there be, and how many debbie dingells might there be on the left? >> that's a question that we'll find out on thursday, obviously. i think what van drew and dingell are both really explicitly contrasting is this existential crisis. is it country, constitution, or party and politics? what do they prioritize. in the case of van drew, it

appears he saw a poll that saw him losing in his district if he voted against impeachment, and the pressure trump put on him worked. but what you saw during the house judiciary markup that stood out to me at least was these calls to the conscious. lucy mcbath who represents georgia is the only vulnerable democrat on the judiciary committee who said that she did not come to congress to impeachment the president. she came to congress to represent the legacy of her son, who was killed in gun violence. but at the end of the day, this is the right thing to do for her, and she doesn't care if she loses that seat. so i think it remains to be seen again just how many moderate democrats deflect, but that's why nancy pelosi was wrukt reluctant all along because she is concerned about protecting her front liners. >> joel, predetermined or not? the question might be is there going to be a surprise between

now and the end of what might be happening in the senate trial. back to nixon we heard from the supreme court during the deliberations of the judiciary committee during those two months, and that turned the tide in the end. will there be a surprise. >> yeah. the only surprise now is whether republicans can find their scruples because that's the only thing that's going to change anything. we know that nancy pelosi would not have done this unless she had enough votes. that's probably a wise assumption that the speaker knows whether or not she's whipping the vote. she knows what her members are thinking. i think in the senate you already heard mitch mcconnell, lindsey graham, other influential republicans talk about how they already predetermined what should happen even though they are supposed to impartial. if republicans have a change of heart and decide to approach this with the type of sobriety we would all expect they would,

there's no surprises. he's going to be impeached in the senate and will escape on a party line vote. rather, he will be impeached in the house and escape on a party line vote in the senate. >> david jolly, you mentioned in the past potentially -- you're not the only person that thought of this idea and discussed it, which is if the articles are approved, should the leader, leader pelosi, hold them for a while? if she were to do it, why would that make sense? >> speaker pelosi has done a masterful job. democrats have a tricky playing field they have had to navigate. but there's a real question for the speaker and house democrats as custodians of what will likely be approved articles of impeachment in the house whether to refer them to a senate as joel mentioned where the majority leader says he is fully coordinating with the white house to ensure the president's

acquittal. so what is the point? we have to ask ourselves of referring the articles to the senate where the fix is already in. at least impeach him in the house, record that for history, accept that as a certain accountability on the president, and then perhaps by withholding the referral to the senate, schumer and mcconnell can strike a deal where there are certain concessions for fairness of the proceeding, or perhaps you wait until the next spring or summer and see if there's more impeachable conduct by the president of the united states. we know that congressional action is not a deterrent for the president. what happens if he engages in additional impeachable behavior and he's already been acquitted by a senate under control of senate majority leader mitch mcconnell? it's not an easy decision for nancy pelosi, but i think the inflection is upon us, richard, very quickly, because if they pass this and refer it to the

senate, then we're going to watch a rigged trial in the senate. and i'm not sure that for reasons of prudence that that's the best course forward. it may be worth house democrats considering holding the articles back and is not referring them to the senate immediately. >> jackie, is that a possibility? >> you know, i actually am not quite sure if house democrats are actually weighing that at the moment. seems like we're going full steam ahead to have this vote on thursday. that is the direction that most people have indicated. you also see people like max rose, one of the front liners who represents staten island. i don't think that's going to happen. but where congressman jolly is right, this is a potential liability for democrats. if these articles are voted upon and it makes it to a senate trial, this trial is going to go into the democratic primary. you're going to have some of the leading contenders for the democratic primary as well sitting on the bench, sitting in

the senate six days a week listening to these trials. instead of out there campaigning. it's also why you see president trump pushing to have a thee i can't tell drawn-out trial. democrats do face potential problems when it comes to mapping out the parameters of this trial come january. >> quickly, david jolly, censure possible? >> no. i think that's off the table. you saw this debated as a compromise during the clinton impeachment. the difference here is democrats in '98 were willing to have the conversation with republicans. what if we delivered votes for censure to say that president clinton's behavior was wrong? republicans under president trump will never acknowledge the wrongdoing of the president and will never offer a censure compromise. this is exactly what the framers envisioned. this was the presidency they

feared when they wrote the impeachment article. impeachment is the proper response by house democrats in this situation. >> always great to get your perspective. former representative david jolly, appreciate your time with us tonight. the rest of the panel stays with us. see you soon. coming up, education, not impeachment. it was the topic of the day for 2020 presidential candidates at msnbc's public education forum. r insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

and you'll experience a whole new range of emotions like... of a travel site the relaxing feeling of knowing you're getting the best price. and the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone. i can read minds too. really? book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee.

wthat's why xfinity hasu made taking your internetself. and tv with you a breeze. really? yup. you can transfer your service online in about a minute. you can do that? yeah. and with two-hour service appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. so while moving may still come with its share of headaches... no kidding. we're doing all we can to make moving simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started. save hundreds of thousands of lives. but after the emergency, time and again, insurance companies deny coverage,

second guessing doctors, nurses and first responders... now "big insurance" is lobbying congress. asking for restrictions on air medical services. eliminating patients' access to life-saving care and destroying jobs all in exchange for bigger profits for insurance companies. tell congress, put patients first, not big insurance. welcome back. while lawmakers in washington debate impeachment, the 2020 democratic candidates for president are out across the country trying to keep the focus on issues closer to home for voters. education being one of the topics. seven candidates attended the msnbc public education forum in pittsburgh today discussing the challenges that teachers, parents, and students face. they laid out their proposals for how to improve america's schools. >> i've met with many parents

and grandparents who have put their children in public charter schools. and i have no doubt about the sincerity of their efforts to educate their children. but i believe that it is our responsibility, as a nation, and will be my responsibility as president of the united states, to make certain that every public school is an excellent public school. >> under me, would -- what an education secretary would do is to help transmit that innovation across the country where kids living in poverty are actually overcoming circumstances because of phenomenal teaching and phenomenal school leadership. the rest of the country needs to see those examples because we're desperate for them all over. >> college affordability is very important. and so is college completion. but the way it's being talked about right now, you'd think it's the only thing that matters after 12th grade. and there is not nearly enough conversation going on about how

to support apprenticeships, internships, and cte so that you can prosper whether you went to college or not. >> there is no question that we have got to keep track of every kid in this country to make sure that he or she is reading, doing math well. but there are better ways to doing it than standardized testing, in my view. >> as we look at the anniversary of sandy hook, which i know you pointed out earlier, the thought of that teacher, that school aide in the closet with the little boy with her arms around them where they're both shot dead. that shouldn't be happening in our schools. >> universal free pre-k is an absolute requirement for our educational system. we -- look. this is a question of resources but it's not only a question of resources. absolutely, teachers are being underpaid. but they're also being undersupported. >> i had teachers who first and foremost worked on my confidence.

told me i was smart. told me i could do what i needed to do. you got to give 'em confidence. that's what you all do. you guys and women are not only teachers. you're coaches. you're coaching these kids. >> an overview of what was said today at msnbc's education forum up next for you, attorney general bill barr versus inspector general michael horowitz battling it out over what is true in the russia investigation. ♪ i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications.

and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. [fa♪mers bell] (burke) a "rock and wreck." seen it. covered it. at farmers insurance, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

so chantix can help you quit slow turkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions.

decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix.

the fight over impeachment dominated the headlines this week. but another scuffle within the department of justice also made some news. the report by doj inspector general michael horowitz on the probe of the 2016 trump campaign. much expected. much watched. it found that despite the fbi mishandling parts of the investigation, the launch of the probe was justified and political bias did not play a role. the findings were quickly criticized by attorney general bill barr before horowitz had the chance to talk publicly about the findings before congress. and then when horowitz did testify, days later, he stuck by his findings. he created a public disconnect, though, between the two at the same time. take a listen.

>> i think our -- our nation was turned on its head for three years. i think based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by an irresponsible press. >> so your report states that you didn't find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation played a role? >> that's correct. >> do you still stand by your statement that -- that -- that the campaign was spied upon? >> oh, it's clearly spied upon. i mean, that's what electronic surveillance is. >> your investigation found no evidence that the fbi placed any confidential source within the trump campaign or tasked any confidential source to report on the trump campaign, that's correct, right? >> that's correct. >> and i think when you step back here and say, what was this all based on? it -- it's not sufficient. >> we found the crossfire hurricane was open for an authorized investigative purpose and with sufficient factual predication.

>> john durham, the federal prosecutor barr tapped to lead a different, a separate, review of the russia probe. that is still ongoing right now. the report is forthcoming. it also said or jon durham also said in a statement that he disagreed with the ig's report. joining us now to discuss former deputy assistant attorney general and u.s. attorney harry litman. and columnist tom nichols. harry, let's talk with you first. who's right here? >> look. there is a disagreement and there is a way to resolve these disagreements. it's called the inspector general. that's the reason we have an inspector general to make an apolitical call on the facts. the attorney general suggested maybe he knows other facts. but that doesn't make sense. whether it was predicated or not has to do with what was in front of the fbi at the time. he gave the information that did -- did the attorney general to horowitz. horowitz didn't change his mind. that really, really should've

been the end of it. incredibly unusual and aberrant for the attorney general then to come out and contradict that statement. what's the point of having an inspector general if that's what's going to happen? >> and there's the process of process in that. you wrote in an op-ed here, harry, barr allegedly wanted to avoid public confusion. but he caused more. that was your "washington post" op-ed. and let's go over to tom on this. because if you're -- you're an everyday american, like myself, and you look at this. you're saying, well, which way is right? i'm not sure. everybody is contesting each other's opinion. and report. >> the attorney general -- the attorney general's a cabinet officer. he works directly for the president. he heads the department of justice. i think most people are going to take barr's view on this because most people out there, understandably, don't really understand what an ig investigation is. i mean, we abbreviate it, you know, because we know what an inspector general is.

but the average american, i think, again understandably, has no idea how those are conducted. as harry pointed out, they're supposed to be the last word. it's supposed to be the independent voice that looks at a problem and determines if there were some kind of irregularities. and -- and usually, when there's an inspector general report in any department, sometimes you'll get that cabinet officer saying they were too hard on my guys. you know, to defend the institution. that sometimes happens where they want to defend their department and its conduct. this is a case of saying an independent, outside voice wasn't hard enough on my own department to find what i wanted to find because i believe this whole thing was wrong from the get go and i don't care what the inspector general says. and we're going to keep doing this until we get the answer i want. >> as part of that, the fisa abuses that came out and the attorney general saying look at that. see? there is a problem here, harry.

and when you look at the level those abuses did happen, the counter to it is that it's -- was happening at a lower level. how do you assess what actually happened in the reporting of the ig came out on? >> it was pretty blistering at that level, richard. and i don't disagree with it. i have seen reports like that. and the -- and christopher ray, the head of the fbi, was quick to accept it and try to put reforms in place. but it just has nothing to do with the headlines of the report, which is, they validly initiated the investigation and there was no political bias. they're just two separate sets of conclusions. so, yeah, they should clean their own house. but to try to fan the flames, the embers, really, to keep a lie, this notion of some political bias or deep-state operation. really is -- is wrong at this point, as tom says, when do you stop? you keep going till you get it right? that's not normally how it works. especially, one more quick point, durham, you know, made a statement in the middle of a

criminal investigation. that's also extremely unusual and -- and against the normal policies of the department. >> again, what you write about for those watching if you want to get more detail, go to your op-ed, harry, there in "the new york times." tom moilks -- "the washington post," excuse me. tom, as we look at this attorney general and i'll bring up this example that just came out this week. judge rejecting department of justice's effort to delay a house lawsuit against barr. this has really been the playbook of the department of justice. don't give the stuff over to the house if they ask for it. and so the question has to be how effective has this attorney general been in impeding the progress and the power of a different branch of government? the house and its oversight. >> i think it might be unfair to say that it's been the effective strategy the department of justice. it's been the effective strategy of william barr. and it's been very effective. one of the things i think that

has averted a lot of terrible outcomes over the past three years is that the bush -- excuse me, the trump white house just isn't very competent. they're just not very good at what they do. unfortunately, barr is competent. he is good at what he does. and what he's doing here is obstructing all of this in order to protect the president. and, you know, that's -- you have to give him credit. he's actually good at it, which is enough to -- to make me somewhat nostalgic for jeff sessions at this point. >> 15 seconds. harry litman. there's a difference between rank and file. >> yeah. there -- there is. but my -- 15 seconds, i'll take three. agree 100%. >> agree 100%. well-said. good writer. harry litman. tom nichols. appreciate your headlines this hour. coming up, senate democrats and republicans talk about the trial ahead. [sneezing]

♪ you don't want to cancel your plans. [sneezing] cancel your cold. the 1-pill power of advil multi-symptom cold & flu knocks out your worst symptoms. cancel your cold, not your plans. advil multi-symptom cold & flu. you ever wish you weren't a motaur? sure. sometimes i wish i had legs like you.

yeah, like a regular person. no. still half bike/half man, just the opposite. oh, so the legs on the bottom and motorcycle on the top? yeah. yeah, i could see that. for those who were born to ride, there's progressive. when you take align, you have the support of a probiotic and the gastroenterologists who developed it. align naturally helps to soothe your occasional digestive upsets, 24/7. so, where you go, the pro goes. go with align, the pros in digestive health. 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.

so there's a lot to look at for the coming week, which is when the full house is expected to vote on articles of impeachment. most likely, they will send them to the full senate for a trial. and this week, some senate jurors gave us a glimpse into what those proceedings could look like. >> everything i do during this, i'm coordinating with white house counsel. there will be no difference between the president's position and our position as to how to handle this. there is no chance the president's going to be removed from office. my hope is that there won't be a

single republican who votes for either of these articles of impeachment. >> what i think is so unfortunate is here you have the majority of the -- majority leader in the senate saying i'm going to take instructions from donald trump's lawyers. you know, instead of behaving like a leader ought to behave. >> if you wonder what's going to happen in washington, impeachment will be over probably by mid-january. personally, i think president trump will come out of this stronger. >> we cannot in any way give the president a pass for doing things that violate our values. and now, we have to decide in an objective fashion, indeed, was this an impeachable offense? and we will hear evidence of that and we need to not have somebody's back. we need to do the bidding of what's best interest of the american people. >> this is a kangaroo court in the house. but it's going to go to the senate. it's going to go nowhere. and i think the american people know this is a waste of time and -- and this is democrats putting on a circus.

>> and a part of that, to call or not to call senate republicans' struggle with the issue of whether to call hunter biden or any witnesses in an impeachment trial. as a struggling actor, i need all the breaks that i can get. at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ at chevy, we're all about bringing families together. this time of year, that's really important. so we're making it easier than ever to become part of our family. that's why our chevy employee discount is now available to everyone. the chevy price you pay is what we pay.

not a cent more. family is important to us. and we want you to be part of ours. so happy holidays. and welcome to the family. all: the chevy family! get the chevy employee discount for everyone today. my lady! those darn seatbelts got me all crumpled up. that's ok! hey, guys! hi mrs. patterson... wrinkles send the wrong message. sorry. help prevent them before they start with new downy wrinkleguard. that's better. so you won't get caught with wrinkles again. and you'll experience a whole new range of emotions like... of a travel site the relaxing feeling of knowing you're getting the best price. and the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone. i can read minds too. really? book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. i felt gross.

it was kind of a shock after i started cosentyx. four years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. ask your dermatologist about cosentyx.

steven could only imaginem 24hr to trenjoying a spicy taco.burn, now, his world explodes with flavor. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day all-night protection. can you imagine 24-hours without heartburn?

now as we head toward likely senate impeachment trial, what's not clear is whether the president's witness wish list will be fulfilled. that list, in partial, includes joe biden, his son hunter, the whistle-blower and house intelligence committee chair adam schiff. what we do know is majority leader mitch mcconnell is saying he will coordinate the proceedings with the white house counsel. the president's close ally and chairman of the senate judiciary committee senator lindsey graham is calling for a fast trial. that's something the president says he's open to, as well. >> do you prefer a short process in the senate? or a more extended process? >> well, i've heard lindsey graham, who's terrific and i heard his statement and i like that. and i could also -- i can do -- i'll do whatever i want. look. there is -- we did nothing wrong. so i'll do long or short. i wouldn't mind the long process because i'd like to see the whistle-blower. >> political consultant joins

shermichael singleton joins us. daniel litman, jackie, and joel pane still with us. joel, as we look at what mitch mcconnell's saying, lindsey graham, they're saying fast and coordination, as well. speed, fine. react to that, joel. but then there is also the reaction of mitch mcconnell clearing going on to sean hannity and speaking to the president, in effect. >> they have no idea what the hell they're doing. i bet you one thing the president is tired of and it's having republicans testify against him because in adam schiff's committee, that's all it was, was career republicans or career diplomatic officials, members of our national security apparatus that he appointed to these key positions who are all validating everything that was in that whistle-blower complaint. so i'm sure he would like to mix up the trial a little bit in the senate and add in joe biden or hunter biden or others. >> and the issue is, as we listen to mitch mcconnell, the majority leader here,

shermichael, is that all the senators become jurors and in that interview on sean hannity, he also did intimate that he had hoped all of the other senators, republicans in the senate, would vote with him. or be in lockstep with the president but they're jurors. >> right. i mean, i don't know if you can guarantee that. i actually think you may see at least three to four republican senators vote unfavorably for the president. i think if you talk to many gop strategists, they would likely agree with those numbers. with that said, i think it would be a disaster to call witnesses. because remember, if republicans call witnesses, democrats get to also call witnesses. and i don't think that the president wants john bolton, for example, there. i don't think he wants his chief of staff, mick mulvaney, there. so you have to think about this on the negative and i don't think the president's thinking about that. he's only thinking about the charade, if you will, thinking about this from the perspective of i guess a media reality show. that's just not how this process works.

and i don't think mitch mcconnell wants to delay the process i don't think mitch mcconnell wants to delay the process by going that route. you do potentially hurt someone, you are vulnerable, your republican senators who are up for re-election next year >> jackie, how do you see the tone of the senate trial compares to what we saw this past week, we were watching words never said or heard in a hearing that was televised nationally. >> i think we are seeing it procedurally. again during this senate trial, it is going to be six days a week, senators are going to have to sit in silence every single day and theatrics of the president really wants the see. the way mcconnell has set this up when his members is supposed to take an oath to the department of justice, he's out there is trying to whip his members and making sure people

are in line with the president. it gives democrats ammunition of what house republicans are doing to say this trial is rigged. why are republicans going into a trial without hearing any of the witnesses already saying which way they're going to vote. >> you know, daniel, as you are going into the white house and the president is watching this, there has been reports both ways he's worried or not, we all reflected on her comments and watching the president was reacting to what debbie dingell was saying on msnbc and not fox news. where is the president concerned right now? >> he's very concerned of his legacy. he does not want that asterisk to be attached to his presidency where he's the third person or

fourth person who's impeached or resi resigned. this is a person who cares about his image. he can't help but watch any other channels but fox. you saw him attacking congressman dingell. it makes it looks less partisan. he wants it to be as partisan as possible to achieve that goal of what mcconnell wants which is no republicans voting to convict him. should the democrats be at this moment - this is about a constitutional obligation and role that you must take on that's not political but if the white house is whipping, should the democrats also do that as they look at the number we put

up on screen now. >> as a matter of strategy, i think they should. i do agree with representative dingell, that is matter of moral and ethical responsibility. i think you do have to set a standard standard. if you don't set a standard now then what? what's the guideline and what's the line for any future president to do whatever he or she decides to do regardless of the rules of our country. that may come at a political price. that's something democrats are just going to have to accept that reality if that becomes the case. i do think the american people, members of congress to uphold of their oaths and dos of their best interests of the country over politics. that has to always take precedent. >> i want to play jonah mattis of what he said. i want to get reaction from you. let's listen to that first. >> if we start unifying by

understanding each other's point of view instead of calling people names or enemy of the state or terrorist or anything else. i would be very alarmed and i am less concerned right now with foreign enemies than i am of what we are doing ourselves. >> joel payne, the biggest threat to america ourselves. >> yeah, another threat is people like jonah mattgeneral m rex tillerson who are not talking about their experiences at the trump's white house and not call truth to power. with all respect to the general, i understand that's something he takes seriously as a uniformed member of our armed services. he held the responsibility to the republic to report on what he saw and to share what he saw. i think that's a cop out.

general mattis had been taking a pass and propping up the trump administration and allowing a lot of the things we are debating today to happen and go forward. >> i wish jonah mattis will use his voice and speak up. >> we are talking about debbie dingell, she responds to the president and this is what she said. i always said i would work with president trump when he wants to help working men and women. but i will also work to hold this administration accountable. >> thank you all on this saturday. that wraps up this hour for me. i am richard lui, you can follow me on twitter and instagram. our coverage continues right after this. d instagram. our coverage continues right after this ush. cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers.

you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab. there's no excuse for waiting. get screened. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers.

why fingerstick when you can scan? with the freestyle libre 14 day system just scan the sensor with your reader, iphone or android and manage your diabetes. with the freestyle libre 14 day system, a continuous glucose monitor, you can check your glucose levels any time, without fingersticks. ask your doctor to write a prescription for the freestyle libre 14 day system. you can do it without fingersticks. learn more at freestylelibre.us you can do it without fingersticks. 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. (dad) on(daughter)r on a hobirdie!...? (dad) that's what i'm talkin' about. and a score of two under par is...? (daughter) big birdie! (dad) no, it's not that, it's uh... (rickie) turkey vulture! (dad) rickie fowler, i'm sorry, what...? (rickie) turkey vulture. (dad) oh! thats a turkey-oh!

all right, lets go. i'll follow you. go, go, go- go! (burke) otherwise known as sand trap scavengers. seen it, covered it. september twenty-ninth, twenty-seventeen. at farmers insurance, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

tonight democrats vote to remove our cheating president. >> the president was caught red handed. >> as donald trump prepares for his trial and meets with his bag man at the white house. >> plus, the supreme court's stunning decision to take up the fight over trump's tax. connie schultz and senator sherry brown on how trumpism is playing