this is possibly the most important news of the hour. my friend and colleague rachel maddow tonight will interview former fbi lawyer lisa page. it is her first live tv interview. it's tonight. don't miss it. you're crazy if you do. we'll show you some of it here tomorrow. my thanks to donnie, rick, chuck, maya. "mtp daily" with chuck todd starts now. welcome to tuesday. it is "meet the press daily" and i'm chuck todd. we're on the eve of an historic vote in the united states house of representatives who will be impeaching the president for just the third time in american

history. what we've learned today is president trump is livid about it. this afternoon he sent a six-page hyperbole-filled screed. our own nbc sources tell us president trump was very involved in the drafting process of what is essentially a six-page twitter rant. we've got much more on this troubling letter in a moment. by the way, he signed it. none of his lawyers would sign it. that might be telling. it comes as lawmakers have been meeting all day to establish the rules governing tomorrow's proceeds in the house. in this hearing, republicans have stuck to their arguments that they've largely been issuing all along which is attacking the process while democratic congressman jamie raskin, pinch-hitting to judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler who had a family

emergency. >> we present you not just with high crimes and misdemeanors but a constitutional crime in progress, up to this very minute. mayor giuliani, the president's private lawyer, fresh from his overseas travel, looking to rehabilitate once again the discredited conspiracy theories at the heart of the president's defense, admitted that he participated directly in the smear campaign to oust ambassador yovanovitch from her job. the president's continuing course of conduct constitutes a clear and present danger to democracy in america. we cannot allow this misconduct to pass. it would be a sellout of our constitution, our foreign policy, our national security, and our democracy. >> now, what congressman raskin was referring to are two newly-published on the record interviews with rudy giuliani,

where he admits efforts to oust the u.s. ambassador to ukraine were because he thought she would frustrate his efforts to get ukraine to launch investigations into the bidens that of course would personally benefit the president, and two, he admitted that he told this to the president who did what? had her removed. rudy giuliani has been the public narrator yet he is not among the list of witnesses that senate minority leader chuck schumer demanded, part of a bitter back and forth between the two leaders. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell made it clear he's not interested in entertaining any democratic witness requests, at least right now. >> if the house plows ahead and this ends up here in the senate, we certainly do not need jurors to start brainstorming witness lists for the prosecution and demanding to lock them in before

we've even heard opening arguments. >> an interesting -- we're going to parse that statement there, but there's one way to listen to that, mitch mcconnell indicating that maybe he'll entertain witness requests during the trial. bottom line, we're heading into unknown territory. the president is raging, that's not a price. any hope that democrats had that the impeachment act itself would be a check on his behavior in 2020, well, that's gone as his lawyer plows ahead with efforts to go off into foreign lands to try and get foreign governments to investigate the president's political rivals and the republicans continue to defend his actions. z glenn kirchner, michael steel, joel payne join me. glenn, let me start with the president's letter today. it seems as if every time republicans have coalesced

around a comfortable defense of the president, all he and rudy giuliani do is make it that much harder to stick by him if you're a skeptical supporter of the president. it felt like all his tweets in the last year in one letter. abuse of power, war on american democracy, election nullification scheme, more due process was afforded to those accused in the salem witch trials. this letter, i guess it was simply -- it's simply an instruction packet for his supporters on social media because there doesn't seem to be any point to this letter as far as the process is concerned. >> i agree with you, chuck, and yet i have seen letters like this many times before as a federal prosecutor. >> is that right? >> oh, i have. whether i was prosecuting rico cases against some of the most notorious gang members in d.c. or standalone murder cases,

these letters would come in not infrequently prior to trial, and they would be filled with allegations that the fbi is framing me, the prosecutor is out to get me, i'm the victim here, don't believe anything they say. we took those letters in stride because we knew exactly what those letters meant. it meant we were dealing with somebody who was truly guilty of the offences with which he was charged and he was not feeling good about his prospects of winning at trial. the defendants who had a really good defense and they knew they had a good shot at beating the charges would just kind of sit back and would be quietly confident about their odds in court. this is like a desperate jailhouse letter from a guilty pretrial defendant. >> well, what's odd about it, michael steel, is that he does it at a time when arguably he

didn't need to be doing this. >> right. >> and by the way, this president, whatever he's accused of, he projects and accuses the other of. i got this piece of projection which is truly rich, you are the ones interfering in america's elections, you are the ones subverting america's democracy, you are the ones obstructing justice, you are the ones bringing pain and suffering. i'm rubber, you're glue, michael steel. >> when i worked on the hill, we had a phrase, member management. it meant the member wanted to do something pretty stupid and you came up with other strategies to divert them from doing the thing they really wanted to do and shouldn't. the president wants a kangaroo court, he wants a show trial, he wants the bidens, he wants a spectacl spectacle, and he's not going to get a spectacle in the senate trial. he's not going to have the circus he wants. he wants to call people he wants

to hear from, allowing him to send this letter, just blistering everyone, that really serves no purpose whatsoever. >> i know you're well-wired into the white house. what's the thinking of the screed beyond just giving social media supporters something to quote? >> one part of the screed that it's important not to overlook, he says that people in the faith community are frustrated with pelosi for saying she's praying for president trump and he basically alleges that she's lying when she makes those claims of religious faith. that very much highlights -- >> such a nasty thing. >> and it also highlights this friction that many religious conservative christians have with people like pelosi who are open and public about their faith but also politically very progressive. and it points to the extent to which white house advisers have sort of given purchase to this notion that on the right there actually is a marriage between faith and politics, that those

things are inextricably linked and that when people aren't part of that linkage, their faith is less legitimate. >> joel, raskin was trying to make a case today that i think was sort of at the very least, maybe impeachment will serve as a check. but now there's a concern it may not check anything. take a listen to what he had to say this morning. >> we can only ask what the 2020 election will be like, or indeed what any future election in america will be like if we just let this misconduct go and authorize and license presidents to coerce, cajole, pressure, and entice foreign powers to enter our election campaigns on behalf of the president. who will be invited in next? >> this is the democrat party's dilemma. i do think the rationale to go through with impeachment even though you know he's not going to get tossed out is to erect a

guardrail and figure, he's not going to cross that line. but then he will, so then what? >> if you're a democrat, you can't allow the president to feel like he can act with impunity. and two, the base is looking at you. if democrats want to make sure their base understands they're going to fight for the things they put them if power for, they have to show they're willing to fight. i think it's a catch-22. i actually don't think most democrats are unhappy about that. i think nancy pelosi likes the fact that she was pressured into this. remember, she was thoughtful about stepping into this impeachment morass to begin with. she didn't rush into it but was careful and kept her powder dry. >> this just in, jared golden, who is from the one congressional district that voted for trump in the state of

maine, the definition of a trump district that means something in 2020, is go to vote yes on abuse of power and no on obstruction, simply saying that in his mind on obstruction it didn't reach the threshold. let me talk about rudy giuliani. senate democrats aren't asking for rudy to be one of the witnesses and frankly i understand why, it's for the same reason i don't know if i want to invite rudy giuliani to do a television interview, which is are you giving a platform for a known misinformation abuser, if you will. and it doesn't matter, sort of, if he has gone past the ability to know truth from fiction, what do you do with a witness like him? >> you know, i guess you

passively receive this ginned-up report that would probably be the product of fallen and disgraced ukrainian politicians and prosecutors and you file it in the circular file in congress. but, you know, i don't think rudy giuliani will let himself be placed under oath, because i really think after the question "state your name," he would have a tough time being truthful and consistent with all the following questions. the other thing, chuck, he stands up and he seems to brag now about the fact that he got ambassador yovanovitch run out of her position. she was nothing but a good, strong, dedicated career public servant. and there were state department employees like ambassador yovanovitch who were involved in corruption and misconduct, that's something that the state department oig should take up. that's something that the criminal division of the department of justice should take up. that is not something that rudy giuliani, president's personal tv lawyer, has any business involving himself in.

>> by the way, we do need to remind people, this idea, donald trump sort of makes up the idea that he finds stuff, he has done this his entire life. the most infamous time he claimed his investigators had found things, which of course were bunk. >> three weeks ago i thought he was born in this country. now i have real doubts. i have people studying it and don't believe what they're finding. >> you have people in hawaii, searching? >> absolutely, and they can't believe what they're finding. >> probably true, they couldn't believe he was born in america, darn it. >> i think we're all wondering why is giuliani sticking his head back up now. i think he's being set up for the fall guy. >> you still think that? >> i think he's very aware of that. republicans on the house committee are comfortable saying, i don't know what's going on with giuliani, the president has a lot of plausible deniability with giuliani, or he

thinks he does. this is about giuliani protecting himself. >> there is probably not another national politician who knows as acutely as trump does just how much political value there is in announcements about investigations. trump knows, he learned that, he learned that, it's part of the reason he got elected. >> he learned that from roy cohn, who manipulated and lied about stuff all the time. >> he became president because comey announced the continuation of the clinton investigation. >> donald trump and innuendo are basically synonymous. >> it's his business model. >> yes. but what happens, michael steel, to rob portman, pat toomey, when they see all the republicans from the house judiciary committee -- excuse me, the house intel committee, who praised ambassador yovanovitch

and then you put up that interview last night by rudy giuliani and say, who's lying? >> this is the reason they want to keep the trial within tightly-bound guardrails. if they talk about the facts that the house developed, they're not overwhelming, in part because administration witnesses didn't testify, but they can make the case that the house fell short and it does not rise to the level of conviction. >> glenn, would you want rudy giuliani to testify or not? >> not in my defense. i would love to cross-examine him if he were an adverse witness, that would be great. but i do not think you're going to see anybody ask him to raise his right hand, swear an oath to tell the truth, and then start answering questions. >> i still got to think that at some point the justice department says, hang on there, we're in the middle of something with him and that's when this stuff starts getting really interesting. glenn kirchner, thank you, sir, for your expertise. betg betsy, joel, and michael, you guys get to stick around.

coming up, what the consequences are if the president is acquitted. impeachment could be a make or break decision for democrats from swing districts. i'll talk to one democrat who is voting for impeachment even if it might cost her her seat. your orders are to deliver a message calling off tomorrow's attack. if you fail we will lose sixteen hundred men. your brother among them. we need to keep moving. come on! there's only one way this war ends. last man standing.

in america, the zip code you're born in can determine your future. but no matter what neighborhood you grow up in, the y creates opportunities for all. for a better us, donate to your local y today. for a better us, wh(fake gagging noises) ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. -well, audrey's expecting... -twins! grandparents! we want to put money aside for them, so...change in plans. alright, let's see what we can adjust. ♪

we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. okay. mom, are you painting again? you could sell these. lemme guess, change in plans? at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan.

as speaker pelosi herself once said, it says the house's obligation to, quote, build an ironclad case to act. that's speaker pelosi. it's the house's obligation to build an ironclad case to act, end quote. if they fail, they fail. it's not the senate's job to leap into the breach and search desperately for ways to get to guilty. >> welcome back. that was senate majority leader mitch mcconnell this morning, the same mitch mcconnell who said publicly just days ago that

he's coordinating with the white house counsel's office on the pending senate impeachment trial. and after rejecting the democrats' request to have four witnesses at the senate trial, he says he does not see himself as an impartial juror. joining me now, another juror, in effect, in that trial, senator sherrod brown of ohio. senator, i know you're a history buff like i am. what's your impression of what the founders -- how the founders thought the senate would view itself when it came to being a juror? >> i'm not easily shocked by mitch mcconnell. almost everything he's done in his -- i mean, almost nothing he's done in his career has really shocked me. this one, i remember watching, my wife and i were -- connie and i were watching tv and saw it. i was incredulous because he knows better than that. he doesn't have respect for the institution, although you would think the majority leader of the u.s. senate would. but there is increasing talk that he should recuse himself

from this trial when we are supposed to sit there and judge the evidence. my biases, we all have them towards president trump, people know what i think of him, i know what my friends think of him. that's really immaterial. i sit there, i'm not a lawyer, chuck, but i sit there and listen to the prosecution, the house managers, listen to the president's defense. i make up my mind based only on the evidence and my questions and what comes out of the trial, not on my preconceptions and preconceived notions. >> all right, but senator -- >> but i understand -- >> you know what i mean, most of us look at this and think -- put it this way. there's been three members of congress who disappeared with their party on impeachment. two felt they had to leave their party in order to survive. that tells you how polarized we are, does it not? >> it does, but for the person that's one of the leaders of the trial to just say i'm not an unbiased juror, all of us should be open -- maybe trump will

bring witnesses. maybe he'll bring mulvaney, maybe he'll bring bolton forward, maybe he'll change minds. i need to be at least open to that. jurors are supposed to listen, not decide ahead of time. i'm amazed how mitch mcconnell has demeaned the representative form of government we have by the way he's acted. it really is a pretty amazing spectacle when the leader of the senate does this. >> if you can't agree on a set of rules that you think would at least create a fair playing field for some presentation of the evidence, i don't know if you can call a trial with no witnesses a trial, but a presentation of the evidence, are democrats better off not seeing this trial happen? does a trial that doesn't really have witnesses, that acquits the president, is that really, considering how he might take

acquittal, is that a good idea for the republic? >> i think it's not a good idea for the republic that the trial moves quickly and looks like a sham. it's not up to the democrats to aud all of a sudden pull it back. if the house passes impeachment articles tomorrow, we have a duty to do this, just like they think they have a duty to come forward. when you see the evidence here, and republicans aren't willing to bring in witnesses? you hear the republicans saying -- they only criticize the process, they're not defending the president's actions per se. then they turn around and say this is all hearsay evidence. but they're not allowing people who were in the room, who heard when saw the president, they're not allowing them to testify. so that's the sham part of this. there's going to be enough people in the public this occurs to that understand this, that

it's going to backfire on them politically. my concern now is that this trial be done right. and mcconnell has no interest in that, nor does trump, nor to the sycophants and the minions and all my colleagues that just think this is all right. >> all right. mitt romney introduces a resolution of censure and it has a chance of 51 votes and your choice is, he's acquitted of impeachment or you can censure him in the senate. is censure better than nothing? >> is romney doing that, that i haven't heard of? >> no. it's been floated. the idea is floated out there. if it happens, and it's the only thing you can do, ultimately i assume the goal here is if he's not convicted is to make it so hard that he won't do this again. but if he's acquitted, he may

decide, are you better off at least getting him a speeding ticket, i guess is my point. >> that's the tragedy that mitch mcconnell is creating and all the people in his party that are going along with him are creating, that forget trump for a minute, if trump gets away with this and all his party sticks with him after he in essence attempted to bribe or bribed a foreign official for his own benefit, what's to stop the next president who has morals no higher than this president and standards no higher than this president, what's the to stop that next president from doing that? that's the tragedy of this. maybe it's a democrat. that's what he's creating. that's what both breaks my heart and makes me angry about this, chuck. >> and it does feel as if you guys are in this no-win situation where you push and he could get acquitted and he doesn't -- any other person would not like the impeachment, would not like this, he sort of owns it and relishes it.

>> for misbehavior. he loves being the center of attention every minute of every hour, every day. fundamentally that's why we're going to beat him next year is so many people in this country including a lot of independents and some republicans will be sick of this spectacle of the president in your living room, on your tv, every hour of every day. let's return to some normalcy. and i'm tired of my kids seeing him as a -- i'm saying people will say this, i'm tired of my 13, 14, 15-year-old kids seeing this president act this way and that's the leader of our country? there's going to be a weariness ten months from now that's going to cause him to lose. >> let me ask you about trade here. i have to say, we're sitting here talking about -- you're talking about this president in ways that he's not a role model for anybody and i get that. it is amazing, though, he'll be the first president you served with i think that you're going to support a trade agreement

with. barack obama, you voted against or didn't support his trade deals with south korea, colombia, panama, tpp. you're supporting nafta negotiated by this administration, first time ever. what is this administration doing on trade that obama's didn't, that made you okay with nafta? >> i've voted -- for 25 years i've never voted for a trade agreement, as you point out, because they're corporate special interest trade agreements, written by and for corporate interests. president trump put out a similar kind of agreement on nafta about a year and a half ago and i worked with speaker pelosi and senator wyden and the labor movement to fight like hell and make sure that workers were at the table and that workers would be represented in this trade agreement. and the president refused, refused, refused, resisted, resisted, resisted. we got this language in because we knew he couldn't get a nafta without it. workers will be better off as a result. and this isn't really any kind

of victory for trump. he's going to say it is. >> i understand that. but what does it tell you that you are more effective with a trade agreement with the opposite party than getting these protections in there for a trade agreement basically put together by your party? >> well, it tells me that trump made a campaign promise and he's broken most of his promises. this one he just didn't think he could break. and he'll go back and lie about how he renegotiated nafta and it's good for workers, but it's good for workers only because of the labor movement and democrats. that's what we'll say. >> have you and rob portman voted the same on a trade agreement before? >> he's voted for all of them. i voted against all of them. i guess that answers your question. >> we'll find out on this one. >> he's for it and i'm for it, for different reasons, we're for it. we will vote the same in all likelihood. >> senator sherrod brown, democrat from ohio, always good to get your perspective, thanks

for coming on, appreciate it. up next, problem solved with double trouble brewing over the democratic debate. the debate itself seems to be happening. seems to be happening. fine, no one leaves the table until your finished. fine, we'll sleep here. ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win.

we don't see who you're against, through or for,rs, whether tomorrow will be light or dark, all we see in you, is a spark we see your spark in each nod, each smile, we see sparks in every aisle. we see you find a hidden gem, and buying diapers at 3am. we see your kindness and humanity.

the strength of each community. we've seen more sparks than we can say. about 20 million just yesterday. the more we look the more we find, the sparks that make america shine. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away

if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. yeah. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. con liberty mutual solo pagas lo que necesitas. only pay for what you need... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ welcome back. tonight on 2020 vision, it appears the debate in los angeles will happen after a labor dispute put the whole

event in jeopardy. all seven candidates who qualified for the debate threatened not to cross the picket line. but the union workers have reached a tentative deal with the university with the help of democratic national committee chairman tom perez, so the show will go on. the organizers were pretty clever on this one, huh? while the dnc may be proceeding with plans for thursday night's debate it's still facing scrutiny over the rules for who qualifies for the debate. all seven who qualified for the debate signed a letter to the dnc asking them to change the debate qualifying rules going forward. cory booker failed to qualify. the dnc says it will not be changing the qualifications for the upcoming debates. for what it's worth, there's only one more that takes place before voting. the good news is polls should be eliminated from this starting in

february. and a reminder, nbc news and msnbc will be hosting a debate on february 19th from las vegas with our friends from "the nevada independent" as well, our local media partner there, all that three days before the nevada caucuses. the beauty that have is hopefully we don't have to use polls. coming up, elisa slotkin, one of the democrats who says she's doing the right thing, if not the easy thing politically, by voting yes on impeachment. >> he's made that decision. >> four more years! cision >> four more years ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home.

♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby, helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message.

idoprevagen is the number oneild apmempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. (kickstart my heart by motley crue)) (truck honks) (wheels screeching) (clapping) (sound of can hitting bag and bowl) (clapping) always there in crunch time.

welcome back. ahead of tomorrow's vote to impeach president trump, we're hearing from more and more moderate and centrist democrats on how they plan to vote. so far swing district democrats are falling in line, if you will, announcing they will vote in a few of at least one of the articles of impeachment. we have one member who is slitting his vote. politically it's a tough call for these 40 or so lawmakers. it's a choice that could

potentially cost them their seats. but the party has stayed largely united and right now it appears speaker pelosi has the votes to impeach the president, certainly by our count, it looks like she's in the 230s minimum here. so far only two of those vulnerable democrats, minnesota's colin peterson and new jersey's jeff van drew, said they won't vote for impeachment. van drew confirmed today he is considering switching parties. one of the democrats' declared yes votes is elissa slotkin from michigan who faced a rowdy town hall in her district, a district that trump won in 2016. >> i hope you believe me that i made this decision out of principle and out of a duty to protect and defend the constitution. i feel that in my bones and i will stick to that regardless of what it does to me politically. >> and congresswoman slotkin joins me now. congresswoman, good for you for that town hall. i know they're harder and harder to do these days because they're not really a cross-section of

your constituency, they're just politically, active, organized people. that seems to be a better way to announce that. let me ask you this. how much should public opinion matter on something like this? >> well, of course it should matter. this is one of the biggest things we'll be voting on as members of congress. it's a big deal for the country. so i think it's been important that we've brought the country into this. they've been able to see through public hearings what's gone on. and it matters, of course it matters. but i think, you know, for me, at the end of the day, i couldn't decide by a poll or, you know, a consultant telling me what to do. i had to do what i thought was right based on the training i had as a cia officer and looking at the body of information. that's what i did. that may not be politically expedient in my district but it's something that i believe is important. >> the reason i asked about public opinion, i go back and

forth myself sometimes. your district is pretty divided, let's be realistic. it would make sense, yours is a swing district, it should be divided. how do you vote on division? if you're there to represent your constituents, your constituents are split. what is in your mind the best way to represent that point of view? >> yeah. well, to be honest with you, we've taken thousands of calls. we've gotten thousands of emails and letters. we actually had to install another phone line in the office because we couldn't keep up with the pace. and they're on both sides. this is across the political spectrum. but, you know, again, based on my life in national security, i have had the experience of having to make a tough call on something that might be unpopular because the security of the country is at stake. that's something i'm comfortable doing. and i think that's part of leadership, that you can't just be a populist and take, you know, a test of the wind and see which way it's blowing and make your decision. on certain things you have to go

back to first principles. that's what i've tried to do. >> there's obviously a risk here that this is the most powerful weapon the house of representatives has in the constitution. you use it, and he's acquitted, and he doesn't see it as a guard rail that was erected, instead he sees it as vindication. how concerned are you that this could backfire to the point of he's unbound. forget the politics of it. that it doesn't do what you're trying to do which is limit his ability to cheat in 2020. >> listen, i think it's clear we have a letter from the president to the to the speaker, he's clearly expressing his displeasure with the process and how it's gone, and that's his right. but i think there just comes a point where everything that's gone on, this very basic idea of reaching out to foreigners and asking them to participate in some way in our political

process, that just can't go unanswered. if you think about where that goes, today it's a republican president reaching out to the ukrainians. tomorrow it can be a democratic president reaching out to china and saying, hey, could you just do a small cyberattack for us? if you think about where it goes, it's just a very, very dangerous place. and i think it's important that even if the senate doesn't convict, even if the president feels like he's been exonerated at the end of this process, that we as leaders have done what we thought is right to protect and defend the country. and i feel that for me really deeply. >> what should the house do going forward if the you guys come across more what you might find to be an impeachable offense? >> you mean on this issue or on other issues? >> going forward. you know, jamie raskin today said there's crimes against the constitution happening in real time, referring to rudy giuliani, but going forward, we don't know -- we know that lev

parnas is a ticking time bomb but we don't know how that explodes. there's a lot of unknown information just on this investigation let alone what else comes down the line. i guess the question is, again, can you impeach him a second time? >> well, let's just get through this process now. >> i understand, but you get my point here. what do you do when you come across more wrongdoing here? >> i mean, listen, there's lots of things that have gone on in the year i've been here that are really problematic. i'm on the homeland security committee. we've been unable to get the acting secretary for homeland security to come up for our annual counterterrorism brief. there are things going on in terms of the relationship between the executive branch and the legislative branch every single day. we can't just look aside and let that stuff slide, especially if

more information comes out. but i do think we can't just take a kitchen sink approach and start throwing everything in one big basket and saying we're going to go after everything. what's important to me about this specific process is it's been clear, strategic, and focused. i think that's how you bring the american public along with you. >> did you at all consider splitting your vote on these two articles? >> you know, when i sat with the materials this past weekend, i just sort of did what i've been trained to do. i had all the reports and the documents. i went back and reread the constitution and the federalist papers that speak to the issues of impeachment. for me, it was pretty clear, that there was an abuse of power, and that there was an obstruction of congress. and the data was there for both. i think for me, there wasn't really that like calculus of should i say yes on one and no on the other. the data was there on both. >> congresswoman elissa slotkin, democrat from michigan, thank you for coming on and sharing

your views. and keep holding town halls no matter how rowdy they get. >> of course. that's my job. >> it's still better for the republican, darn it. up ahead, the message 2020 democrats are starting to send and the first states that matter. ( ♪ ) 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.

you have a brother in the second battalion? they're walking into a trap. your orders are to deliver a message calling off tomorrow morning's attack. if you fail, we will lose sixteen hundred men. if we're not clever about this... no one will get to your brother. i will. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. and i approve this message. climate is the number one priority. i would declare a state of emergency on day one. congress has never passed an important climate bill, ever. this is a problem which continues to get worse. i've spent a decade fighting and beating oil companies,

stopping pipelines, stopping fossil fuel plants, ensuring clean energy across the country. how are we going to pull this country together? we take on the biggest challenge in history, we save the world and we do it together. and everyone has dad's eyebrows! we chose eleanor. it was great-grandma's name. so apparently, we come from a long line of haberdashers, which is a fancy word for... they left everyone, and everything so they could get here. and start this family. every family has a unique story. this holiday season, help your family discover theirs. ♪ spread a little love today

♪ spread a little love my-y way ♪ ♪ spread a little something to remember ♪ philadelphia cream cheese. made with fresh milk and real cream makes your recipes their holiday favourites. the holidays are made with philly. i receivelize travel rewards. their holiday favourites. going new places! going out for a bite! going anytime. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. welcome back. some notable movement in the 2020 democratic primary. amid the impeachment furor here in washington, on the campaign trail we're starting to see top candidates sharpen their attacks

on the president as they stop talking about their own plans. new ads released today targeting early primary states, both biden and klobuchar call out the president by name. >> it's always a fight. it's a battle that is never fully finished. but if donald trump is reelected, he will forever and fundamentally ultalter the character of this nation. if donald trump has four more years, it will fundamentally change washington. >> americans deserve a president who has their back, who isn't afraid to take on powerful forces, who has a record of bringing people together. >> and in a new buttigieg ad, he takes aim at the dysfunctional vision of president trump. >> whenever i visit nevada i hear the frustration with politics being so broken for so long. politicians seem more interested in the part about fighting than the part about us.

>> betsy, michael, and joel are back. joel, we highlighted this because it does seem to be, all of a sudden they're like, oh, we need to remind people of why you need to think about your primary choice, don't forget it's about. and certainly buttigieg, biden and klobuchar certainly believe their candidacies rise and fall on whether or not they can beat trump. >> it is interesting that their candidacies are the ones that have done the best. biden has stabilized, klobuchar has experientialed a boone, and buttigieg has gone the longest. and i think somewhat of the dysfunction in d.c. speaks to a more moderate vision that brings the country together. i still think, what biden's challenge is is that the debates have not been the clarifying moments for him. the debates are usually the place where you can make a move if you're joe biden. they have been his worst performances. and you're coming up on a period when we'll have like six debates

in an eight-week period of time. >> and they'll be smaller debates where if he gets caught up, nobody wants to go against pete buttigieg. >> we've learned that. including donald trump. >> one thing that has disappointed some democratic operatives working for 2020 candidates, they haven't seen their people get the benefits out of debate that historically they would want to. in some cases, senator harris had a big bump. >> but that was a bump. >> it didn't work out so great. many of the candidates are thinking, they don't have a lot to show for it. another thing that's really important, stepping back, pre christmas state of the race, i chatted with an operative about an hour ago about this. and the operative made two points. first one thing, the stabilization of bernie sanders and biden. despite a $7 million fundraising for biden, he's doing fine. bernie sanders got through a

heart attack and he's doing fine. that's a huge deal. >> well, it's interesting about bernie and warren in this moment. that warren is unfortunately for her, she has stabilized back in the low teens. she's stabilized but it is there. bernie has stabilized back to where he began but that's all he's at. i have a feeling, that's his ceiling. that's the problem. one thing warren and bernie haven't done are ads that look like buttigieg's and bidens which is, i'm the one to take trump on. >> bernie started this campaign with as close to 100% name i.d. as anyone in the race. if you are going to like bernie, you already like bernie. there's no room in that sense. he and warren are the hardest argument to make for, this is the person ready to stand on a debate stage with donald trump. this is person able to go into those swing states that hillary lost in 2016 and take those back for democrats. the much harder case to make for them -- >> okay. i agree with you on this except

i could make, if i were bernie's people, i could sit here and say, a lot of you smarty people tell us the bernie people and the trump voter are similar people. why are not i considered actually the best? i'm the one candidate. this is what bernie people say. i'm going to get some of them to say, at least -- don't say that. >> they get upset at that, too. >> what do we call them? bernie siblings? bernie people? >> bernie supporters. >> wait a minute. if it's about winning over trump voters, bernie is the guy. >> do you know what they haven't done yet? warren and sanders? go after each other. i think that's what people are waiting for. they warned not to go after the sanders folks a few weeks back when she had her moment. i think the folks in boston -- i don't know if they regret it but i think they'll start to consider whether or not they need to reconsider the nonaggression pact. >> we had this conversation last week.

every candidate other than bernie and biden got in, assuming either bernie or biden would collapse. and they weren't in position. >> i think warren assumed bernie would go away and he hasn't. >> bernie and warren, whatever supporters they shared are already with wraarren. >> there's a weird cross section for a lot of democratic primary voters. there was a really great date visualization put out yesterday showing, highlighting the fact that for many voters whose first pick is biden, their second pick is bernie sanders. >> and they're older. >> and they vote like crazy and they don't fit into some of the conventional thinking, are you progressive and moderate and which team are you on in the primary? >> i had sanders' people tell me that it was b that was taking their supporters. more than warren. because it was basically, the older guy in the shiny jacket. right? the union guy. >> i think we make too much

supposition. oh, this person is coming from this person, et cetera. i think they all feed off each other because the voters are still deciding. one thing you want to pick up, the vice presidential sweepstakes. >> what sweepstakes? every time i open the envelope, it says stacy abrams. >> an african-american or person of color. there are four people, kamala harris, who willian castro, they're considering who the front-runners are. one of them has to be the vice president. >> what you're saying is elizabeth warren can't pick another woman? >> elizabeth warren, pete buttigieg, they all need a woman or a person of color on their ticket. >> do you think elizabeth warren could pick another woman? >> i think it is unlikely. to his point, there have been conversations between warren's camp and andrew gillum's camp in florida that were the type of communication out would expect for someone being eyed as a vice presidential choice.

>> you have to be careful about geographic balance as well. you would hate to have a double coastal ticket. if your ticket is california and massachusetts. >> this is why i look at stacy abrams. she checks so many, she's, you can be comfortable in rural america, comfortable in urban america. she seals to be a crossover. >> the best thing for kamala harris is getting out of the race because i think she is the number one person to be on all of their vice presidential lists. she can clean up and become new kamala harris. >> i think the trial is an interesting opportunity for kamala harris. something to think about. thank you, guys. we'll be right back. you, guys. we'll be right back. ♪ (loud fan noise) (children playing) ♪ (music building)

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. we don't see who you're against, through or for,rs, whether tomorrow will be light or dark, all we see in you, is a spark

we see your spark in each nod, each smile, we see sparks in every aisle. we see you find a hidden gem, and buying diapers at 3am. we see your kindness and humanity. the strength of each community. we've seen more sparks than we can say. about 20 million just yesterday. the more we look the more we find, the sparks that make america shine. and a drumroll, please. [ hisses ] [ hisses and snarls ]

[ bell chimes ] let's dance! and now the icing on the cake!

that's all for tonight. we will be back tomorrow with more "meet the press" daily. it should be a raucous house floor. good evening, ari. >> good evening. as we come on the air right now, we're getting new evolving details about how congress plans to hold this vote on impeaching president trump tomorrow. we have that for you. meanwhile, the president lashing out with a new letter claiming he is being mistreated. some dubbing it a rambling screech of rage. plus later tonight, my breakdown on the terms for any senate trial and why chuck schum