working for months to figure out a strategy to sort of counter program what is happening on this side with impeachment as democrats are moving toward impeaching him today. >> live in d.c. for us, thank you very much. you can sign up for the news letter at signup@"axios".com. >> i'm yasmin vossoughian along side ayman mohyeldin, morning starts right now. i donald john trump do solemnly swear. >> i would recommend that they start an investigation into the bidens. >> that i will faithfully execute the office of president of the united states. >> china should start an information into the bidens. >> and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend. >> i think you might want to listen. there's nothing wrong with listening. >> the constitution of the united states. >> it's not an interference. they have information. i think i'd take it. >> johnson, clinton and now

trump. today for the third time in history, the house of representatives will impeach the president of the united states. the democrats have laid out their case. the president abused his power and obstructed congress by trying to strong arm a foreign nation into boosting his political prospects and then covering it up. the president's defense if there is one, involves a lot of yelling, a lot of tweeting and a lot of republicans appearing to turn a blind eye to the constitutional principles they had held sacrosanct for generations. we are in washington for today's historic vote. the house will gavel in at 9:00 eastern time, and we have a big show this morning with a lot of guests leading up to the start of the session including "new york times" columnist and pulitzer prize winning officer tom friedman, former white house counsel under the president obama, bob bower, former u.s.

senator claire mccaskill, presidential historian michael beschloss, plus key members of the democratic leadership, chairman of the house intelligence committee, adam schiff. house majority whip, jim clyburn, chairman of the house democratic caucus and member of the judiciary committee hakeem jeffries along with freshman congresswoman elissa slotkin who is one of the democrats who flipped a trump district and who will now vote in favor of impeaching the president. to start things off along with joe, willie and me, we have -- we have david ignatius, columnist for "the washington post," washington anchor for the bbc world news america katty y kay, political reporter for "the washington post" and msnbc political commentator robert costa. >> and it's important as we start this historic morning to talk about what we were talking about before we came on the air, and that, of course, is very historic day, that of course is

the irishman. you saw "the irishman" and loved it. saw it twice, right? >> i think it's recommended to watch it in two sittings, so i sat down for an hour and a half, had a long dinner, came back to it, finish it. pesci is amazing. i grew up outside of philadelphia. to see pesci as a mob guy, it's so understated the performance. there's power in the understatement. >> by the way, i'm going to channel chris matthews here. you saw rizzo, you know what that's all about. you know what that's about all. the mob loved him. but you saw it too. >> i saw it. it's superb. real mob bosses don't tweet. they barely talk. >> they just look at you. >> you love de niro's performance. >> de niro's performance had fewer words and more intensity. >> i watched it all in one sitting. i thought it was fantastic. it's three and a half hours. i would have watched it again a

second time. i think you can have both, de niro as best actor and joe pesci as best supporting actor. >> did you see it at masterpiece or what? >> i saw knives out. that was great. >> if you start talking about "star wars" i'm going to keel over. >> but pesci, though, pesci's performance was incredible, and it was understated. it was fantastic. >> okay. so now -- >> great big glasses, little tiny face. >> are we going to give any credit to pacino? >> he was fantastic. >> okay. but it is house resolution 755 from the 116th congress impeaching donald john trump, president of the united states for high crimes and misdemeanors, abuse of power and obstruction of congress. the "new york times," "the washington post" and the a.p. all report that democrats have the votes meaning pi tby the en

the day trump will make history as only the third u.s. president to be impeached coming one day short of the 21st anniversary of the house vote to impeach bill clinton. the house is scheduled to gavel in until just a few hours at 9:00 to adopt the rules, which call for six hours of debate split evenly between parties before members vote on the two articles of impeachment. speaker nancy pelosi is urging members to join her on the floor this morning when the house convenes. the president claims he will not be watching the proceedings. >> not true. fact check, not true. >> he is scheduled to hold a campaign rally in michigan this evening. at the same time we expect the house will actually be voting on the articles of impeachment, and he wrote quite a doozy of a letter, willie. >> it was actually -- we'll get to that in a moment. it was actually very long, real donald trump tweet that just happened to be on presidential stationary. >> to nancy pelosi.

>> but you know, people have been saying there's no drama here. there actually was a lot of drama unfolding, which i want to talk to bob about in a second, but there was a lot of drama unfolding yesterday in looking at one democrat in a trump district after another democrat in a trump district deciding that they were going to do something that was actually politically hazardous to their future, and that is go ahead and vote to impeach donald j. trump, and we've seen one after another after another decide they had no other choice but to do that. >> we saw congresswoman slotquislotkin, she announced she would be voting yes in impeachment. she took some heat in that town hall. mikie sherrill in new jersey did the same. these are people who did not come into congress talking about impeachment. these are not people who sthave been banging their fists and saying we've got to impeach the

blanker or what some other members have said. they're people who have served the country and they have decided they will vote yes, which means now the president of the united states will be impeached. the fact that it's inevitable makes it no less historic. this is as mika laid out, 1868, 1998, and now 2019 when united states presidents have been impeached, and i think it will be quite a scene tonight in battle creek, michigan, with the president of the united states standing up at one of his rallies. he may have just been impeached or in the process of being impeached while he's railing against the impeachment process on stage. >> you know, i remember back in '99 bill clinton holding sort of this rally in the rose garden with democrats, and you can dress it up any way you want to. to quote -- >> oh, that was wrong. >> mccain's vice president, palin, you can put lipstick on a pig. at the end of the day you're still an impeached president,

and bob costa, i know you've talked to a lot of people at the white house. he may be whistling past the graf ya graveyard, but man, this really stings donald j. trump. >> based on my reporting, that letter was drafted by him in coordination with some of his confidants. that was a letter from president trump. you called it a tweet on paper. his associates described it to me as a trump rally on paper, a letter that essentially lays out his entire 2020 campaign, grievance politics, running against the establishment, running against the democratic party. yet as much as he and his republican allies want to cast this entire inquiry as a partisan process, speaker pelosi is keeping her conference together, member after member because of the way she continues to frame this as a solemn duty-filled decision, and that's what's keeping people like congress w congresswoman slotkin and others

in line. >> you want to read the letter? >> the president's last stand before impeachment came in the form of this angry six-page letter. i had a hard time reading it. it was all over the place. it was to speaker pelosi if you can imagine, described by most as a rambling diatribe of rehashed tweets on presidential letterhead filled with lies, bad grammar, and personal attacks. the president falsely claimed the impeachment is unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid. he says the house speaker has, quote, cheapened the importance of the very ugly word impeachment and that, kwoelt, more due process was afforded to those accused in the salem witch trials. yesterday pelosi said she did not read the full letter. >> we can stop there. katty fact check. is that true? we're going to throw you to the bottom of the ocean with rocks tied to -- >> the salem witch trials.

they were strung up. i never thought i would have the sentence donald trump and salem witches in the same breath, but he clearly feels this enormous sense of grievance and the sense of drama and this is all about me. the tone of that letter is so discordant with pelosi herself and the tone that she has had during this. for me the most perhaps offensive thing about the letter is where he said you lied about praying for me, that he is impugning her faith. >> that's just ridiculous, you lied about praying? >> you say you pray for me, but you're lying that you pray for me. >> her reaction is actually very fitting if, you know, you could take a look at that letter. she said what -- she didn't readread the whole thing but what she heard about it was ridiculous and really sick. as for how the letter came to be, nbc news has learned that president trump came up with the idea last week and had it

drafted by white house aides including, wait for it, stephen miller. we're told the white house counsel's office was not involved in drafting but did offer some edits, some of which were accepted. >> somebody actually edited that letter david ignatius? >> it didn't have a heavy hand -- it's not editing like i would do. >> no, it didn't. it may be the most unpresidential presidential document ever written. >> right. i thought the thing that told you what's going on for donald trump is when he called impeachment a very ugly word, and he's wounded. >> yeah, he is. personally. >> he gets it. he gets it. he knows that he's about to be impeached, and six pages of flow, i think the one thing that people have to think about today is how many people around the country would be as angry, you know, as full of venom and

indignation at what's being done to donald trump as he is himself because that's really what we're going to be living through these coming months. how big is the number that agree with this rant from the president. it's not a defense. it's really just a rant, but it was a document that told you that for donald trump this hurts. >> and -- i'm sorry. >> one thing i keep thinking about as a reporter, you probably remember this in 2015, then candidate trump gaich ve m list of his finances, and at the top of that list billions of dollars was his name, the value of his name, and i recognized then that he puts such an emphasis on his brand, and he is a marketer. he is someone who licensed out his name and his brand to be on buildings, to be part of businesses and products, and now that brand in history will be associated, and he can't stand it, his associates and friends tell me. he will be impeached if the vote

unfolds as we expect today. he will be an impeached president, and this is a person whose entire business was based on the name and what that name is. >> it's disgrace. >> there's some irony here because the party is thinking we can use that asterisk, the fact that he has been impeached to get all of those people who you've mentioned are furious as he is today, to make sure they turn out in the polls. they do see this as a fund-raisi fund-raising. already they've seen the numbers come up. for him personally in terms of his historic legacy, it may ironically help him in november get reelected. >> we know donald trump projects a lot, and that letter is him trying to convince you that he's full of bravado and everything else that he projects all the time. what he's covering for is exactly what these guys are describing, the fact that he knows a guy so worried about the impression of him that he joins a terrible club in american history that includes only andrew johnson and bill clinton as impeached presidents. i was driving in here last night from new york and you pass the

washington monument and the lincoln memorial, and there's the jefferson memorial. history is everywhere you look in this town. you can't turn around without seeing some piece of history, and when history looks back at donald trump among many other things, it will lead with the fact that he was an impeached president. imagine waking up as donald trump and realizing that this morning. >> and also, you talked about driving around washington and seeing the history. i always remembered commuting in from connecticut and going down the west side highway every morning and right before i got off on 57th, seven -- i think about seven very tall, beautiful condos facing the hudson. every one of them trump, trump, trump, trump all -- one by one people have been so humiliated to be in a building with his name on it, they've demanded that the names get taken down. in chicago the same thing, remember that trump tower when

they were having the chicago -- sort of that faux chicago cancellation protest rally, the same thing. they've had to tear his name off because his name is now so toxic. >> in chicago on the upper west side, i was in hershey, pennsylvania, last week, they're all wearing trump. >> yeah. >> in pennsylvania. >> so in some areas it crops up. >> his behavior, though, including this letter and the rally tonight are exactly why some might argue nancy pelosi wanted to keep this focused and quick because he's going to churn up that sort of victim hood and that anger as much as he can, and if you had -- because there are many other things they could have worked with here. they could have many more articles. >> right. >> but they're working with two, and it seems to be fast and focused, and there's been some concern about perhaps is it too fast. is it too simple. have they not covered enough? >> there are crimes on the table. >> there are crimes. >> that they decided -- >> and there are crimes off the

table one would argue. >> not to put in there, but you know, bob when you're talking about donald trump and his brand and how much it meant to him before, you can talk to your colleague farenthold at the post, you can talk to so many others who have seen, his earnings have gone down. high end customers have left the trump properties. an impeachment just adds -- it's one more black mark attached to that name, and yes, his base is going to be with him, but they've always been with him. they would be with him if he shot somebody on 5th avenue. the resistance will always be against him. it's those independents, of course, that matter and those independents seem to have slowly been breaking towards impeachment and removal, but that's really where the battle's going to be over the next year. i mean, there's going to be massive turnout operations for the bases, but it's where those

independents go, how they respond to impeachment that's going to matter so much in the end. >> and you say that over the next year that's going to be the likely scenario. at the same time, when you talk to people who have known president trump for the longest they wonder does this pattern of behavior last beyond 2020. does he become if he's defeated in 2020, a president in exile. they see this political warfare that he's fwing to mount with the letter, goes into 2020 as something that is going to dominate his life but the republican party next year and perhaps in years to come, that he can't give up the fight and this is just the beginning. >> because with trump it's a fairly good rule of thumb with donald trump is in the end it's all about him. there's this intense narcissism about him, which is why it also becomes so personal. if you've built a whole business empire based on your name and your identity and your persona, then to have that trashed, which i think is why this letter to pelosi is also so personal.

he sees this as -- you know, that she's spiteful, that she's lying. it's about his battle with her as a person. it's nothing to do with his behavior or the country, and it's why the central phrase in this impeachment do us a favor, though, the us is trump. it's not the country. it's trump. >> mika talked about the speed of this. adam schiff, who will be our guest this morning was on this show sitting with us on september 17th, that's three months and one day ago talking about a mysterious whistle-blower complaint in the intelligence community. he didn't know what was in it yet, said he didn't have it yet, and here we are three months and one day after that moment and the house is ready to vote to impeach the president. >> i don't want to get in trouble here. >> uh-oh. >> i am drawing no comparisons whatsoever between bab lpablo er and donald trump. but speaking of great shows,

it's unbelievable. he tried to get into congress. they didn't let him in even though he got in legally because he was a drug trafficker, and it just drove him crazy, and he spent the rest of his life trying to get even with the establishment. there's a very touching moment where one of the hostages who was the daughter of a former president says to him, you could have done so much. you could have helped the poor who you wanted to help. you could have built their houses. you could have fed them food, but you let the establishment get in your head and drive you crazy. now that's pablo. now let's talk about donald. donald's entire life, and i'm not the first person who's said this, can be explained by the fact that he's an outer boroughs guy that always wanted to be respected, always wanted to be beloved in manhattan. they never would let him in the doors. they would never let him in their country clubs, so he had

to build his own. they would never accept him, and nancy pelosi more than anyone is in that club that he alwaysme wanted to be in as a democrat, through 2005, through 2006, through 2008 when he was giving money eight times to hillary clinton, when he was giving money to eliot spitzer, when he was giving money to anthony weiner, when he was giving money to any democrat who would take his money. they would never let him in the club. you see the intensity, the ferociousness of that anger and that rejection, and now nancy pelosi hands him the ultimate rejection, even as president you will never ever be seen the way you want to be seen because you can't conduct yourself as a commander in chief should. >> joe, that tone of the wounded

applicant, they wanted to take this away from me from the very beginning, they never gave me a chance. it is the outer borough guy. the one thing i remember from narcos which i agree is a great movie is how hard it is to get people who kidnap your politics out and what courage it takes. that show but so much of what we see around the world is people fighting year after year when something bad happens to their politics to put it back together. i think, again, what we're going to live through is the democrats i hope educating the country about why this is important, why this is about the constitution. it's not so much about donald trump, it's about the constitution. >> it's beyond outer borough politics as well. there are so many echoes of history in this moment. you think back to richard nixon, august 1974, that famous farewell address when he's talking to the white house staff, and he says others may

hate you, but you can't be consumed by hate, and once you get consumed by hate, when it's against the establishment or your perceived enemies, that's when that hate becomes the dominant factor in your life and especially your political life, and we're seeing president trump with this letter showcasing to the world his own detestment for those who see as a line against him. that is the driving, that is the piston of this presidency. >> going to that nixon speech, which i'm sure david remembers, there was also another line in that speech that lines up donald trump and the regret that he'll never be accepted where nixon said they'll never write a book about my mother, talking of course about a book they wrote about rose kennedy. and i think that's the strength in this message of resentment because people outside elite corridors feel it. they feel it coming from the

media, us, and i know that because when i was a republican member of congress, i felt it from the media. you feel it from hollywood. you feel it from popular culture. you feel it from everywhere, so donald trump, the lifelong democrat who gave tons of money to hillary clinton and charlie wrangle, he knows that, he sees that, he feels that, he feeds on that, and that is his power. >> well, still ahead on "morning joe" on this very momentous day, rudy inc., david ignatius explores the twisted relationship between rudy giuliani's overseas business dealings and his role as president trump's personal attorney. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ limu emu & doug

and now for their service to the community, we present limu emu & doug with this key to the city. [ applause ] it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. and now we need to get back to work. [ applause and band playing ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ aveeno® with prebiotic striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome.

so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home.

woman: friction points, those obstacles that limit a company's growth. i try to find companies that turn these challenges into opportunities. but by going out in the field, and meeting management, suppliers, competitors. in the end, it's these unique companies with creative business models that will generate value for our investors. that's why i go beyond the numbers. that will generate value for our investors. the holidays are here and we want to keep you connected to those you love, with the new iphone 11. hurry into t-mobile today, to get up to four iphone 11's on us. only at t-mobile.

is a very great crime fighter. he was probably the greatest crime fighter over the last 50 years. ♪ ♪ ♪ rudy ♪ rudy ♪ winey, drinky, teethy ♪ rudy >> tv. >> wow. love it. >> all right, well, rudy giuliani after saying in interviews that ousted u.s. ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch was an obstacle to getting the country to announce investigations desired by president trump took to twitter

yesterday, oh, boy, claiming, quote, yovanovitch needed to be removed for many reasons, most critical she was denying visas to ukrainians who wanted to come to us and explain dem corruption in ukraine. >> we're confused. you read something from the new yorker i think it was where actually he said it was because -- >> we had to get her out of the way to clear a path for the investigations. i'm paraphrasing there. that's what he said in an interview on the record with "the new yorker". >> rudy should probably know when you make the admission, you can tweet all you want, the admission still sits there like a -- well, whatever you want to say it still sits there like a steaming piece of confession. >> yes. >> and also, by the way, he went on fox the same night "the new yorker" piece came out and said something completely different as if he hadn't been quoted in the new yorker saying the thing he said. i also loved in that tweet he's very concerned about the visa process, we had to get her out of the way.

>> and then he screams outwardly that she's corrupt, and there's no follow-up, saying explain how because many who know ambassador yovanovitch feel she is not corrupt and did her job with great dignity and patpatriotism. >> by the way, nobody has ever suggested she ever did anything corrupt, let alone untoward, and what is just -- there's sometimes, david, we need to just stop and think about the fact that here we are in washington, d.c. in an extraordinary country that has had an extraordinary history because there are norms that our past leaders of both parties have gone by, our secretary of states our secretaries of defense have gone by. here we are days after rudy

giuliani closely associated with the president of the united states calls an honorable woman, an honorable ambassador corrupt, and the secretary of state, mike pompeo, doesn't say -- >> he says zip. >> he said nothing. >> -- say a word in defense of her. that's not just bad for her. that's bad for the entire state department, bad for the entire foreign service committee. it is a disgrace. >> ambassador yovanovitch has been a real hero to her colleagues. to call her corrupt is just such a gross misreading of what was happening in ukraine. i spent the last six weeks looking carefully at what i call rudy inc., the way in which giuliani combined his being the president's personal lawyer, his political adviser, but also had these business interests in ukraine, was representing two

ukrainian americans, fruman and p parnav are their napgsmes, one reason that ambassador yovanovitch was fired was that she was standing in the way of these deals, and she knew that, and people around her knew that. >> you mean rudy's deals? >> the deals that rudy's clients wanted to make. they wanted to have huge national gas deals in ukraine and ambassador yovanovitch kept counseling the head of the -- >> so you're saying it wasn't about visas. it was about money. >> the idea that this was about her being obstructive of the consulate and not granting visas is preposterous. >> it's about money, rudy's ideals, the swamp as they say. >> with rudy, money and politics are bound together like that, and in so many of his representations abroad are foreign policy interests

intersect with his clients, his clients business. he bris tled when i raised this with him, these are not the normal conflict of interest rules that apply to people. one thing i'd say about rudy giuliani, he's somebody that anybody would agree, that cartoon clip shows it in this way, did great things once in his life, after 9/11 he was the figure who really rallied new yorkers. >> by the way, his first term as mayor of new york some people want to say that dinkins began that process, but new york said he changed more radically than any city i've ever seen in my life. it was nothing short of extraordinary. >> it makes him in some ways a tragic figure. he was a person of distinction and achievement, and look at where he is now. and that's what i found poignant, mika, in writing about him. >> is it fair to say based on what you've just reported about rudy's business deals that the

president will be impeached today in part because he was protecting rudy and trying to help rudy get a business deal? in other words, he may not have intended that, but that was rudy's motive, and he brought the president along with him. >> rudy got donald trump in the ukraine. donald trump didn't care about ukraine. he couldn't stand the place. >> he didn't even know about ukraine. >> get away he didn't like it, he didn't want to hear about it, and giuliani had gotten deeply involved through these clients, and month by month he keeps pulling trump further and further, so i think that is fair to say. >> isn't it fascinating that donald trump gets so angry when somebody works on his campaign and makes a few dollars here and a few dollars there off of his campaign or off of his name, bob. it drives him crazy. it always has, and yet hear he is being impeached today in large part because rudy sold him a bill of goods while rudy was trying to get even richer off of inside deals in ukraine, and

people all around the president, people in the white house didn't want the president to listen to rudy, but he bought it hook, line, and sinker because rudy said, you know what? i can get at the one thing that exasperates him the most, that irritates him the most. the 2016 election, i'll sell him a bill of goods that this was about ukraine and not russia. he'll blow the entire country apart, and i can go in in the chaos and make millions of dollars off of these inside deals. so donald j. trump is getting impeached today in large part because he bought rudy's nonsense hook, line, and sinker. >> the president's wrath for those who he believes -- feels are using him is immediate, but there are different rules for those who are in the true inner circle. he trusts so few people that those who are actually in the circle have a lot of bandwidth in which they operate. you think about keith shiller,

when the president decides to fire then fbi director james comey. he doesn't go through the chain of command, he asks his long time personal aide to go to the fbi and deliver the letter. during the campaign, he wasn't working through the campaign apparatus whether it was lewandowski or steve bannon or kellyanne conway, he was often working through michael cohen or froent friends on the outside to get things done. you see this with rudy giuliani the acceptance of so many different aspects of behavior, questionable behavior from mr. giuliani because the president believes he's an advocate, he's a loyalist. >> it's a real indication of how the white house works. there is not somebody at some point saying hold on a second, why is the man who is ostensibly your personal lawyer getting involved in state department affairs and advocating for the dismissal of one of our top ambassadors. why doesn't that raise a red flag saying hang on, this is going to cause you trouble. this is not the normal

procedure. something's going on here that is to do with giuliani and his interests not to do with the country's interests. >> they throw out these jabs she was denying visas, she was corrupt. >> she was fighting corruption. >> she was fighting corruption. she was standing up for the united states of america, and testimony in the impeachment inquiry given by george kent explains the visa denials. viva denials for people like this prosecutor shokin who was seen as corrupt and that he was planning a trip to the u.s. to spread conspiracy theories. i mean, this is the type of thing that you do. and you know, they're not denying visas for people that president trump wants to investigate in ukraine or whatever else. they're trying to literally build her up as corrupt, which what she was doing is protecting american interests. >> the country deserves, and reporters are trying to figure this out. the country deserves to hear from people who have been subpoenaed by the house. secretary of state pompeo, all these people at the office of

management and budget, what did they know? because if the rationale was a true belief in ambassador yovanovitch and this perceived corruption, then state it on the record, not through a tweet. but for now we have this -- >> or through a tv interview. >> what about john bolton. her we are, we're going through impeachment, john bolton teasing people that he has a lot of information about this, but he's going to save it for a multimillion dollars book deal? >> yeah, it's all -- he's waiting for a book. obviously democrats in the senate after the president's impeached would like to hear from john bolton, but mitch mcconnell has promised to keep this narrow and tight and brief because he knows he has the votes and wants to end it. but of course john bolton is at the center of all of this, and based on the testimony from other witnesses in front of the house intelligence committee, john bolton's name pops up again and again and again as someone, by the way, who was very concerned about what the president was doing. said you all better go lawyer up. this meeting is over. this is a bad drug deal, et cetera. he is a center piece of the story and we want to hear from

him before his boom comes out. we want to talk about the politics at play as u.s. senators prepare to become jurors in donald trump's impeachment trial. among those casting a vote, republican senator susan collins of maine who just officially announced her re-election campaign. what's at stake for her ahead on "morning joe"? ♪oh there's no place like home for the holidays.♪

♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. so why treat your mouth any differently? listerine® completes the job by preventing plaque, early gum disease, and killing up to 99.9% of germs. try listerine®. need stocking stuffers? try listerine® ready! tabs™. wwithout it, i cannot write myl tremors wouldname.xtreme.rs? i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month. prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them.

for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop. join us in fighting for what's right. male anchor: ...an update on the cat who captured our hearts. female anchor: how often should you clean your fridge? stay tuned to find out. male anchor: beats the odds at the box office to become a rare non-franchise hit. you can give help and hope to those in need.

at this time i will administer the oath to all senators in the chamber in conformance with article i, section iii clause 6 of the constitution in the senate impeachment rules. will all senators now stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear in all things apper taning to the impeachment of william jefferson clinton president of the united states now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the constitution and laws so help you god. the clerk will call the names and record the responses. >> that was then chief justice william rehnquist administering

the oath that turned senators into jurors during the clinton impeachment trial. it is the same oath that senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is expected to take when the trump impeachment reaches the senate, but mcconnell said flat out yesterday it is an oath he has no intention of honoring. >> this is a political process. there's not anything judicial about it. impeachment is a political decision. the house made a partisan political decision to impeach. i would anticipate we will have a largely partisan outcome in the senate. i'm not impartial about this at all. >> joining us now politics and journalism professor at morgan state university, politics editor at the root and an msnbc political contributor, jason johnson. so what's he doing? isn't it his job? it's not about -- >> if you want to know, i mean, why americans hate politics. >> yeah. >> all you have to do is see

what mitch mcconnell said and lindsey graham said in '99, see what they're saying now, pick out your favorite democrat that's still here, see what they were saying in '99, and now we talked about what they're doing now. i mean, you have people actually leading the democratic impeachment against donald trump, shocked and stunned and deeply saddened. and guess what they called impeachment in '99. >> it was a coup. >> a coup. >> amazing. >> so it's just -- you know, and i'll be honest with you, i don't understand these people because i remember getting shredded in my district, an extraordinarily conservative district. they wanted me to say i was going to vote to impeach bill clinton four times, i said, you know, kind of like a juror even though they don't call us jurors as much in the house, i said but just i'm a lawyer. let me look at all the evidence, but he's guilty.

i said let me look at all the evidence, and i get pounded. but there were a lot of people like me, conservatives and liberals that said you know what? we're going to look at all the evidence before we decide. now, for the majority leader of the united states senate and for the chairman of the judiciary committee to say we're not going to be impartial. we're not going to look at any evidence. we're going to treat this with absolute contempt. it just cheapens the institution so much. >> it disturbs me immensely, ask not just from the political science standpoint. mitch got it half right. it is a political process. it's not supposed to be partisan, right? they hated factions, they hated parties when they wrote the constitution. you're supposed to believe that i'm acting on behalf of the united states, what the united states citizens would want to see. now in a perfect world, to be perfectly honest with you, joe, you wouldn't just get rid of all

the members of the senate who already said how they feel, you would also get resideid of the democrats running for president. the problem is we have a system that operates under the assumption we're dealing with noble statesman, and we're not, we're dealing with a bunch of partisan hacks at this point. >> i guess to your point, this happened during the clinton impeachment, and you can point back to the clinton impeachment and to bill clinton for a lot of why we are here today on every level including trump being president. but this process is to assess whether or not the president has done something wrong just like it was back when bill clinton was maechimpeached, and he did,i remember so many democrats and so many members of the administrations doing the same things saying he didn't or dit didn't matter. it's not your opinion as to whether or not it matters. did he do something wrong? did he commit a crime?

did he put the united states at risk? those are the questions at hand, and democrats and republicans should be able to answer them base on the facts. >> some people do stand up. was it 31 republicans, joe, back in '98 who broke party ranks and actually voted with the democrats against impeaching -- now maybe they were looking at their own districts. maybe there was some politics at play there, but maybe they were also thinking, right, i'm going to take an independent stand. i don't think you're going to have 31 republicans this time around saying, actually, i'm looking at the evidence this time around. we're not in an age anymore where anyone, we've got one or two who may break ranks because of what they see. >> bob, as you know, my district, one of the more conservative districts on the planet. >> panhandle of the florida. >> and my safe vote would have been voting for impeachment four times, voted for two articles,

voted against two articles. i was primaried for voting against two articles. this is the thing i always found that i don't understand about members of congress today. i just held a lot of town hall meetings. and they said why did you vote against -- and i said, listen, here's the tedeal. perjury is one thing. the other ones were too general, i said and you all have to stop believing that there will never be another republican who's going to be president of the united states because that president will be held by the same standard that we hold this president, and guess what, i won the primary with 80% because they understood the argument. which nobody will do. >> elissa slotkin said, don't forget that there will be a democrat who could be held or a republican who could be held from the other side on this. >> when i'm at the capitol, talking to lawmakers and pulling them aside. it's evident that this is now

the party of president trump, and republicans accept that. and when you step back and talk to them, it's not just on impeachment. this week they also approved a $1.4 trilli $1.4 trillion spending deal, a party that once had fiscal standoffs with president obama now is quitely greasing the skids to send a bill to president trump's desk, 1.4 trillion on spending. a free trade party is now succumbing to his protectionist position on trade and approving and moving to approve the usmca, a revised version of nafta that's been approved by top labor fwru labor groups and eliminates protections for pharmaceutical companies and on impeachment after crowing for years about the conduct of different presidents, they're accepting -- >> and how character matters. that's what we heard during clinton. character matters, when character was king. character character character, personal responsibility. it's all they talked about. nobody talks about it in the republican party these days. willie, just tin amash tweeted

this yesterday following up on bob's point. conservatives will someday face a horrible truth that the republican party fought so hard to justify and excuse an amoral self-serving president and what he gave them in return was bigger government, an erosion of the principles and values they once claimed to cherish, to which i responded they got bigger government, the biggest most bloated federal budget ever, the biggest federal debt ever, the biggest tariff taxes ever, the biggest socialist foreign subsidy scheme ever, and exploding deficits for as far as the eye can see. they also got a useful idiot for russia. >> that's what we conservatives used to call people that aided and abetted russia. useful in the media or on capitol hill, useful idiots. >> you talked about about the hypocrisy during impeachment, how about the hypocrisy right now of people who are deficit hawks, alleged deficit hawks. >> there are none anymore sfwr rallying behind president trump.

people who have railed against tariffs including lindsey graham over the course of his career. we have tariffs now, people who have railed against farm subsidies. a massive farm bailout is happening in this country that nobody talks about right now. all the conservative principles that you've lived and talked about your entire life, are being swept away in service of a man, not a movement or ideology but of a man, trump. we talk about character, that train left the station a long time ago in 2016 during the campaign when everyone looked the other way and excused the fact that donald trump slept with a porn star, had an affair while he was wife was home with her newborn child. you better hold yourself to that standard all the time and not look the other way just because it's donald trump. >> and the crime he committed that cohen is now in jail for. if you want to talk about impeachment, i still don't know there was an actual crime committed that somebody's in jail for for running that operation for donald trump. i still don't know why that's not an article of impeachment.

it's really -- it's quite remarkable that the republicans have just, again, completely capitulated to a guy who has done violence to just about every conservative value measurable, other than judges, so conservatism, the conservatism of edmund burke, of russell kirk, william f. buckley and ronald reagan, it's all been reduced down to abortion. >> exactly. but here's the thing, joe. that presumes that you ever thought that these things were based on principle, right? there are some republicans who were doing this on principle, but if you look at the vast majority of the support out in the world, right, in north carolina, in georgia, in texas, in ohio, in illinois, if you asked those people why are you supporting donald trump, it's not because of any of these real values. it's because of what he represents. he is backlash. he is we had this guy in office for eight years who made us feel bad. yeah, we got rich under barack

obama, but we want somebody on our side. donald trump makes people feel, they have someone in office who's going to smack down the people they don't like. it is a fwguttural feeling. it's never been about policy. >> in addition to, that it's transactional, overhauling the tax code, overhauling the federal judiciary. they're getting what they want on policy in addition to those grievances. >> i don't think people are being driven by policy, not in the real world. mitch mcconnell is getting what he wants, he's getting those judges, and those jumdges are going to make sure these kinds of economic and judicial things can occur the way trump wants. none of this is about policy. >> katty, it's a little, it's multilayered. >> yeah. >> because bob's talking about the tax cuts. i can tell you the businessmen and businesswomen i talk to, they're all about the tax cuts,

especially if they run big corporations because that was a ton of money for them. you have people in north carolina, people in northwest florida, you know, responding to not just barack obama but responding to the resentment that i talked about, people looking down at them for 50 years, since the 1960s feeling like the entire culture was slanted against them, and it's a pretty toxic combination, and then you have some evangelicals and others who were supporting solely because of federal judges, and you combine all of that and right now that gives you 40, 42, 43, 45%, and $100 million from very rich people who like their taxes. >> and all of those people may say, you know what? we don't love the tweets. we don't necessarily love the guy and his personality, but we like what he is doing for me,

for us, for my community, whether it's the evangelicals getting their judges, or whether it's the people getting the stock market that is booming and they love that. or whether it's the people who felt it was better in my parents' generation and he's offering me nostalgia. >> and mika, that's the brilliance of their campaign line, basically saying he's not a nice guy, but we don't need a nice guy in washington right now. >> he's delivering. >> "the washington post" robert costa, thank you. >> thank you, bob. >> and coming up, congresswoman elissa slotkin says she's been told over and over again that a vote for impeachment could mark the end of her political career. she's doing it anyway. the michigan democrat joins us ahead, but first the chairman of the house intelligence committee congressman adam schiff is our guest in three minutes. and now as we go to break, a "seinfeld" mind meld with the president's letter to nancy pelosi. >> you view democracy as your

enemy. >> exclamation point. >> it is a terrible thing you are doing, but you will have to live with it, not i. >> double exclamation point. >> you have cheapened the portion of the very ugly word impeachment. >> it's got exclamation points all over it. l over it. [ suspenseful music ]

you have a brother in the second battalion? yes sir. they're walking into a trap. 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. so why treat your mouth any differently? listerine® completes the job by preventing plaque, early gum disease, and killing up to 99.9% of germs. try listerine®. need stocking stuffers? try listerine® ready! tabs™.

the president's aggressive and unprecedented resistance to congressional subpoenas for witnesses and documents is blatantly and dangerously unconstitutional. 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 sell out of our constitution, our foreign policy, our national security, and our democracy. >> democratic congressman jamie raskin presenting the findings of the house democrats before

the rules committee yesterday, which voted to set the guidelines for today's historic vote. in just a few hours, the house of representatives will convene to begin the final process of impeaching president donald trump. welcome back to "morning joe," it is wednesday, december 18th, still with joe, willie and me here in washington, we have washington anchor for bbc, world news america katty kay. author and nbc news presidential historian, michael beschloss joins the table, and we have with us the chairman of the house intelligence committee democratic congressman adam schiff of california. he is our guest this morning on "morning joe." good to have you. >> good morning. >> so as we move forward, we're looking at the president holding a rally in michigan at the very time the vote is set to potentially impeach him, the third president in american history to be impeached. is there a strategy to focus this and make it timely in part

because of the president's very dramatic reaction to the facts being put out before him? >> you know, i'd say the timing is driven more by the fact that the plot continues, that, you know, we've had a lot of discussion should we wait, try to bring in more witnesses. it's taken us eight months to go from subpoena to a first court decision in don mcgahn, and given that the president has made clear he's not going to stop seeking foreign intervention in our election. he's out on the white house lawn saying that if we're being honest, there's a simple answer. i want ukraine to do this investigation. his lawyer even this week was in ukraine seeking to dig up the same kind of dirt, so the timing is really driven by the urgency, and that is -- >> a national security issue. >> yes. a national security issue, an issue of our election integrity, if the president is seeking still to essentially cheat in the next election, that is not a remedy for his misconduct. the remedy is impeachment, and

newscast w that's why we've moved forward. we've done so methodically. >> chairman i want to give you a chance to respond to what the president said about you in his letter to nancy pelosi yesterday. first i want to ask you about one of the criticisms we've heard from republicans, heard again from ranking member collins in that rules committee hearing, which is that this process had a set calendar, that you've rushed to the end of it, that you wanted to get out of town by the end of this week and get the vote in. republicans believe there ought to be a more fulsome process with more witnesses and evidence and time to get documents to come in. what do you say to the criticism that this process has gone so quickly. >> mr. collins would have more credibility if he was saying provide congress the documents, respond to the subpoenas. they're lawful, you need to answer. he'd have more credibility if he said let's bring in bolton. let's bring in mulvaney, let's bring in pompeo, let's bring in others that have firsthand relevant information. of course he's not saying that and neither is mitch mcconnell. they don't want to hear these witnesses. they do want to complain about

process but at the same time they don't really want to see the evidence. the fact is the evidence is really already uncontested and overwhelming. if we have yet additional witnesses who further corroborate what we already know, yes, it makes the case that much stronger but the case is already overwhelming, and so i think those process subjections fall flat when they're not really interested in having those witnesses come in or receiving those documents. >> the president did write that rambling six-page letter to speaker pelosi. in it he writes, quote, congressman adam schiff cheated and lied all the way up to the present day, even going so far as to fraudulently make up out of thin air my conversation with president zelensky of ukraine and read this fantasy language to congress as though it were said to me. the president continued his shameless lies and deceptions dating all the way back to the russia hoax is one of the main reasons we are here today. how do you respond? >> that's probably the nicest thing he's had to say about me in quite some time.

this president does nothing but project onto others his own lack of morality. this is someone who mocks others constantly but can't stand to be mocked himself. the call record speaks for itself, and it's damning. he doesn't want to defend it. he can't defend it. he doesn't want to explain why he held up $400 million of military aid to coerce an ally at war with russia into doing his election dirty work. he'd rather attack me. when bob mueller was the investigator he attacked bob mueller. when colonel vindman is testifying, he attacks kol ncol vindman. anyone willing to stand up to him he's going to go after. i just view it as a part of my job and i'm going to keep my focus on holding this president accountable. >> we're going to turn the corner and get to the -- what's happening today in a minute, i just wanted to follow up. this weekend you went on chris wallace, and chris wallace questioned you about the i.g. report whether you should have known more in september about

the fisa warrants and why they were improper and why, for instance, devin nunes wrote a memo that was more in line with what the i.g.'s findings ultimately were than what you were saying back then. >> well, the reality is two years ago we didn't know what we know today. two years ago when mr. nunes was saying this investigation was improperly begun, they were spying on the trump campaign, this was all driven by political bias. of course all of that was wrong. he also speculated there were problems with the fisa applications. that ended up being correct but not for the reasons that he said. it ended up being correct because we would learn two years later an fbi low level lawyer falsified information that went into the fisa. that they withheld information. >> did devin nunes know that two yearsing ago. the crown has been placed on devin nunes's head as the arbiter of truth, which is pretty funny when you look at

what he did, holding a press conference. i mean, it sort of shows the sorry state of trumpism that this guy's their hero. devin nunes, you're saying devin nunes did not say in the memo two years ago what the i.g. said as far as the facts? >> that's right. the vast majority of what the i.g. revealed about flaws in the fisa application were not known to either me or mr. nunes two years ago. they were the product of 170 interviews and 2 million documents we didn't have. we were really in the same position as the fisa court, and that is we did not know about all the flaws and problems in the fbi's production of the fisa applications. >> can we talk really briefly about just an absolute stinging rebuke toward the fbi yesterday in a decision that was made on how they need to overhaul the process. talk about that and also talk about how this process in the

end, at least i think, should make all americans feel a little more comfortable about the fisa court and how there have been abuses and how yesterday it seems that some of those abuses are going to be reformed now. >> well, i think the fisa court was exactly right in the stern opinion it issued yesterday, and what the fisa court basically said is this is an ex party process. that is the suspect is not represented before the fisa court, only the government there. and therefore the court is completely reliant on the government telling the truth. the government being forthcoming, the government saying this is the strength of what we have to offer but these are also the weaknesses we want you to know it all. and when the government doesn't do that, and they didn't do that here, then the court feels that it was not only taken advantage of, but that the law was subverted in a way that causes the court to question when other applications are made. so i think the court is right to

come down hard on the bureau. at the same time, this is a vital process. we need to be able to have a method of going to court with classified information when we suspect someone is an agent of a foreign power. so that process has to continue, but clearly the safeguards i think that the inspector general recommended need to be implemented and perhaps others as well. >> so congressman, "the washington post" reports that vice president mike pence has refused to declassify testimony about what he said in a september phone call with the president of ukraine in what you call directly relevant to the impeachment debate. according to "the post" in a letter to pence yesterday, congressman you wrote that classified witness testimony gathered during the impeachment inquiry raises profound questions about your knowledge of the president's scheme to solicit ukraine's interference in the 2020 u.s. presidential

election. is this concerning the testimony from pence's russia adviser, jennifer williams, that was provided as a supplemental written submission to the intel committee last month. what can you tell us, and is the vice president covering something up? >> what i can tell you is this, when jennifer williams testified in her deposition, she represented what she knew at the time. when she came back to the open hearing, she informed us during the open hearing that she had additional information to share of a classified nature that would shed more light on her recollection of events, and this pertained to that phone call between vice president pence and president zelensky. now, you'll remember ambassador sondland said that he told the vice president about the withholding of this aid, the conditionality of this aid and the president's desire to have these investigations, and the vice president said nothing basically absorbed the knowledge, didn't contest it. didn't say what are you talking

about, didn't raise alarm but merely stood and listened to what he was conveying. the vice president has denied that conversation, essentially said it didn't take place. i don't know what you're talking about. this submission sheds light on who's tell the truth. and i think the american people should see it. i think there's no reason it should be classified. it's not appropriate to classify information because it might be embarrassing or incriminating and so we're going to push to get that declassified and it's telling that the vice presidents has been thus far resisting. >> michael beschloss, by the end of the day, donald trump will be one -- likely be one of three presidents in the 240-year history of our republic to be impeached. give us some historical perspective about how extraordinary this moment is and how there are similarities with what happened with bill clinton

and andrew johnson and how there are differences. >> the founders were always worried this would become a vote of no confidence, that every time members of congress didn't like a president that they would vote to impeach him because they didn't like his policies, and this is nothing like that. but you have to look at some of the ways this is different. you know, congressman schiff was talking this morning, chairman schiff about the fact that this is to some extent about the 2020 election. this is the first time a president will have been impeached who is running for re-election, also one in which national security is at the center of those things that people are worried about. >> and it's interesting, you talk about national security, which the founders were worried abo about. do you believe that the impeachment of bill clinton in '99, i know this is a heavy question to lay on you right now, cheapened impeachment and that the impeachment of donald

trump lines up -- and i say that as somebody who voted twice to impeach bill clinton, but that the impeachment of donald trump actually lines up more clearly with the fears of the founders, if you read the federalist papers and the founding documents more than committing perjury, if it was committing perjury about sexual harassment. >> and the question of what is a high crime. >> right. sure. the other thing is absolutely the founders, i mean it's uncanny what they wrote and spoke about, the fact that they were so worried about interference in an american election early on. george washington, for instance, fired his secretary of state because he thought edmond randolph was his name, he thought he was too close to france. >> chairman schiff, we were talking earlier about john bolton and what a central fig he has been in all of this. we heard it from witness after witness before your committee in

those open intel hearings. his name kept coming up, the bad drug deal as he described it, telling his staff to lawyer up as they walked out of those meetings at the white house. can you speak to how hard you all tried to get john bolton to testify and what kind of response you got, and do you think there's any chance we might hear from him during the senate trial? >> well, we certainly made an effort, a strong effort to get him to testify. we started with his deputy, kupperm kupperman, and subpoenaed kupperman. kupperman basically sued us saying i'm not going to come unless the court says i have to come, and when we contemplated subpoenaing john bolton. he has the same lawyer, the lawyer told us if you subpoena john bolton he's going to sue you also. now, as i mentioned, it's taken eight months to go from subpoena to a first court decision in the case of mcgahn. we were not about to wait eight months to get a decision of a court compelling mr. bolton to testify, and that would be the lower court. they would then appeal to court

of appeals and the supreme court, and the important thing to recognize here is even if we could get to the supreme court in a reasonable period of time, which we can't, and the supreme court ruled as they would, there is no such thing as absolute immunity. that doesn't mean that bolton would come in and answer the questions. he would come in and very likely on the president's behalf claim executive pri executive privilege and refuse to answer important questions and we'd have to go back to court. so the only practical way to get him to come in and testify in short order is i think in a senate trial for the senators to insist, and they have the power to do that. the question is will they and it certainly appears that as mitch mcconnell said, he is not going to be the least bit impartial. he doesn't want to hear from witnesses, and his position is an extraordinary unprecedented one, which is we will not allow any evidence that was not already introduced in the house. that was not true in clinton where they did depositions of

witnesses that had not been deposed in the house or in the trial of president johnson where there was also introduction of new evidence. it's basically a position in line with the white house that they don't want to see it or hear it because they're afraid of what john bolton would have to say. >> plcmr. chairman, it's been a whirlwind three months, it's certainly made for dramatic media coverage. you've been maligned and mocked and ridiculed by the president and republicans, but then you go back and do the work with your colleagues behind the scenes. just wondering what your mind-set is going into today. how are you feeling about it? >> you know, i certainly don't relish this situation, either personally or professionally. i'm grateful only that i'm in a position to make a difference. i think when the country and our democracy are at risk, i tend to look much more forward than i do back ward. yes, this is an historic event.

there have been few in history, but going forward, what we do today and what the senate does will determine whether a corrupt president in the future can be removed from office. it will determine whether a president that refuses all oversight, says i'm simply not going to answer any subpoena can be allowed to stone wall the congress. if we permit that, it means the balance of power has forever changed, and i try to remind me republican colleagues of this. there will be a democratic president, joe, as you were saying. there will be a democratic president someday. are you prepared to say to that democratic president you don't have to answer our subpoenas. you don't have to produce witnesses or documents. we didn't insist that of donald trump. we can't insist that now of you. is that really the road they want to travel? because it will mean that corruption, malfeasance, negligence in the oval office will become the rule rather than the exception. >> are you chairman, also looking beyond america's shores at the moment to the exthat this

impeachment is about the merits of the case, ask if president trump does not go through this process of impeachment, what is the message then to other countries that might be looking at interfering in future elections whether it's russia or china or india or iran. you know with your intelligence hat on that this is happening right now and is going to happen in the future again. are you hoping to some extent that by going through this process you're stayiaying we ta this seriously? >> i am, and you know, there are any number of vignettes within the whole ukraine trail that really are telling to me. one of them is a conversation that ambassador volker had with andriy yermak, the top adviser to have zelensky where volker was saying what he should say, which is you shouldn't investigate the prior president poroshenko just to politically in a politically motivated way.

you shouldn't do a political investigation, prosecution of your past president, and you know what yermak's response was, oh, you mean like you want us to do of the bidens and the clintons? threw it right back in his face, and this is really what is at stake here, which is we have been for, you know, for decades, even centuries promoting the rule of law. we have stood for something. america has meant something, and now we have given the rest of the world reason to believe that we don't stand behind the rule of law anymore, that we're no different than any other thugocracy, that to quote the president when asked why he can't criticize vladimir putin, are we really so different. that's what's at stake. i think about that a great deal. i do think that whatever the senate does there is merit in what we do today to tell the rest of the world that we are a functioning democracy. we do hold our president accountable even at this point

if it is only in one house and not in the other. >> so michael, forgive me for bringing up my experience again, but i remember my floor's speech on impeachment when everybody was saying it was a coup, i said -- it was around christmas, i said, you know what? america is not grinding to a halt because what we're doing in washington tonight, you know, people are going out and christmas shopping, families are in front of tvs. they're, you know -- i think i even said at 30 rock people around the christmas tree. this is part of a constitutional process. >> absolutely. >> this is something -- this is not a coup. this is something the founders envisioned, and i know it drooifdrives mika crazy when i say this, but i'm going to say this again. we will be feign. can y -- fine. can you explain to those watching how this was anticipated by our founders, how

this is part of a constitutional process, and how we endured after '99 and how we will endure after 2019. >> it's part of the strength of this society and we're seeing it exactly today. you're absolutely right, joe. and it is in the touconstitutio. the founders didn't give americans a lot of tools to discipline a president. it's one of the reasons why andrew jackson was censured because they were looking for ways to express unhappiness with the way that a president was behaifg. this is part of the constitutional process. i think as this unfolds today, we'll see that. >> michael beschloss, thank you very much. chairman of the house intelligence committee congressman adam schiff, thank you as well. >> thank you mr. chairman. still ahead on "morning joe." >> the president did something different than what president nixon did and president clinton did and president johnson many, many, many years ago did, and he gave the word to his

administration to not produce any documents, to not respond to any subpoenas and to not appear. that is the president contravening the house's role and responsibility for the impeachment process. so i will be voting yes on obstruction of congress. >> congresswoman elissa slotkin of michigan joins us next on "morning joe." we're live in washington. we'll be right back. in washingn we'll be right back. ♪oh there's no place like home for the holidays.♪

♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. so why treat your mouth any differently? listerine® completes the job by preventing plaque, early gum disease, and killing up to 99.9% of germs. try listerine®. need stocking stuffers? try listerine® ready! tabs™. janie, come here. check this out. let me see. she looks... kind of like me. yeah. that's because it's your grandma when she was your age. oh wow. that's...that's amazing.

oh and she was on the debate team. yeah, that's probably why you're the debate queen. - mmhmm. - i'll take that. look at that smile. i have the same dimples as her. yeah. the same placements and everything. unbelievable. the same placements and everything. most people think as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready. male anchor: ...an update on the cat who captured our hearts. female anchor: how often should you clean your fridge? stay tuned to find out. male anchor: beats the odds at the box office to become a rare non-franchise hit. you can give help and hope to those in need.

some things are too important to do yourself. ♪ get customized security with 24/7 monitoring from xfinity home. awarded the best professionally installed system by cnet. simple. easy. awesome. call, click or visit a store today.

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 because this is bigger than politics. >> congresswoman elissa slotkin of michigan joins us now. she's a member of the armed services and homeland security

committees, and you saw her there congresswoman, talking to your constituents, some of them not too happy about the vote you're going to take today. are you good with that? many would argue you are representing them and perhaps this would be flying in the face of representing your district. >> yeah, i mean, listen i knew it was going to be controversial when we came out and started, you knows realizing that this was the way i was going to go. we did that town hall on purpose and announced it to my constituents first rather than doing it on national media so that they heard from me. but as i told them, i mean, i just think there are times in leadership when you have to make a call, when you know something is the right thing even if it's not the popular thing, and i'm a former cia officer. that is what we're trained to do. i had to do that many, many times in my prior life. while i don't like, you know, when people are upset and being protested, i don't know who does, there is a moment in life when the times kind of come to

you and you have to do what you think is right. >> david ignatius. >> congresswoman, that little clip from your district seems like one of the profiles in courage in this story. i want to ask you, what are you going to say to people in your district who are not yet convinced that donald trump should be impeached after today's vote. how to you teach them and educate them that your view is right? >> well, listen, i think we've seen that people tend to be pretty polarized about this. i do think there's a group in the middle that is still kind of trying to figure out what is right and what is wrong here and kind of what makes sense. to be honest with you, my hope is even if they don't agree, i do everything i can to be transparent and available and explain why i made my decision and that my hope is that they want leaders with integrity, so even if they don't agree, they understand that i made this decision from my gut and because i feel like i'm upholding my

duty to defend and protect the constitution. that's my hope. >> representative, so i'm curious, are you planning town halls specifically to talk about impeachment? you know, are there enough people in your community saying, look, we need you to break this down for us piece by piece, or is it really something that just comes up when you're talking about health care, the economy and other issues that are important to your constituents? >> so, you know, we do town halls pretty regularly. to be honest since i came out in mid-september supporting an inquiry, we've done five town halls ask that's probably more than our average ask that's because we're getting tons of calls, we're getting tons of e-mails and messages, and some of it is about impeachment. some of it was also about health care. usmca, lets not forget, we're voting on a really big trade deal that has a major impact on my state. nafta had a huge impact on my sta state. we're getting a lot of calls. we're trying to be responsive. if we're getting that much

engagement, that means we should be out in public. this last one i did on monday i did specifically because i knew i was going to be coming out on something controversial, i wanted people to see i'm not afraid to stand in front of a tough room. i criticized my opponent two years ago when he wouldn't stand in front of his constituents and talk about health care, and his health care vote. how can i sort of sit in the bunker even when something's hard when i've criticized others for doing the same thing. >> congresswoman, it's willie geist, good to see you this morning. you obviously did not come into congress with impeachment on your mind. there were other members who did, about five minutes after they were sworn in they talked about about impeachment. you deliberated this carefully. i'm curious if you can give not only us but the people in krr district or state a window into your thought process and how you considered the evidence. what tipped it for you? was there a piece of testimony, a piece of evidence that led you to your position to vote yes

today on impeachment? >> impeachment is pretty much the last thing i wanted to be working on in my first year in congress or pretty much ever in congress, and for many, many months i actually didn't believe that impeachment was the right way to go. i thought that the 2020 election was the best way for the voters to meter out how they feel about this president, and then the facts changed, and for me what was pivotal was this very, very basic idea that the president of the united states, the most powerful person in the world, reached out to a foreigner and asked for an investigation for personal political gain, and i want to be clear. unlike some of my peers, i know because i was on the national security council staff under bush and under obama that this goes on, right? we ask the president of the united states uses the power of the office to get things out of other countries, but the difference here is that it wasn't for the national security interests of the united states. it was for his personal interest, and that to me was so fundamentally different, and to invite foreigners in as a cia

officer, like we spend our lives trying to blunt foreign influence in our political process, and he was inviting them. so that was for me a very big moment, and then to be honest, my process of deciding was ex t exactly what i was trained to do as a cia officer. i sat at my great grandfather's desk at my farm, laid out every report, the rebuttal report, the founding documents, the constitution, the federalist papers. i went back to the nixon papers and to the clinton papers, the johnson papers just to have some historical context, and i looked at the full body of information, and that body of information supported that very first admission that the president and rudy giuliani made on camera, that they had reached out to a foreigner to ask for help in our political process. so for me, in the end, i just did what i was trained to do, and i feel strongly about it. >> congresswoman, you have said

that this -- your political career is smaller than the issue of impeachment, but how heavy does it weigh on you that you're in a district that trump won by seven points. you flipped the seat, and there are others like you. there is a chance that your colleagues also voting in difficult districts. you may end up losing the house because of this vote, and that will impact what democrats can do over the next two years, potentially over the next six years if trump wins a second term as well. that must have entered your thinking. it would be understandable if it did enter your thinking that you've got to weigh this one decision against what else democrats can do if they're holding onto the house of representatives. >> yeah, i mean, i think it's a real issue, but i just -- again, i just think there comes a time in a historical context that you just have to put down a marker when something is not okay, and with something that's such a big deal, that would set such a precedent. if it's okay for this president to reach out to the ukrainians,

then why not a democratic president asking china for a quick cyber attack in the next election. it just becomes normal, and i can't accept that. and while i obviously understand the political risk, you know, i've had countless people tell me this is going to be the end of my career, i hope that's not the case, but there just are some moments where you can't look at a poll and you can't make a decision on political expediency. if i don't have my job in 2020 no one dies, right? i believe in the voters. i saw that in my other than election. the voters want people with integrity representing them, even if they don't always agree, and i believe particularly in michigan where i'm from that the voters understand that and they're going to vote their conscience in 2020. >> so the president will be in your state tonight with a rally, and some would argue that in this act that he is being impeached for people did die, so i just wonder given your service

to this country and the cia for the obama administration, for the bush administration, you're at your farm, you're looking at these documents. can you then move from looking to considering to knowing what's the one line, what's at stake today? >> i mean, i think what's at stake today is our rules and norms as a nation as set up by our founding fathers. do we believe in rules and norms, or do we believe that everything is relative. for me i'm a believer in our rules and norms. i have enormous faith in our system, and i think, you know, politics are just going to have to play second fiddle to protecting those rules and norms. >> all right, and let me just say i loved hearing you say trust the voters. take it to the voters. i found time and time again even after running a popular republican speaker out of town, found time and time again, if

you take it to the voters, if you don't underestimate your voters, if you trust your voters with the facts and you stay in front of them, everything works out. always does. >> congresswoman elissa slotkin, thank you so much for being on the show this morning. >> thanks for having me. >> and coming up, the rules for today's impeachment vote will allow separate votes on each article meaning we could see some democrats voting for one article and possibly not the other. we'll talk to the chairman of the house democratic caucus, ake ake akeem jeffries. "morning joe" is back in a minute. "morning joe" is back ina minute ♪ (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. but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? 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.

through the at&t network, edge-to-edge intelligence gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. from using feedback to innovate... to introducing products faster... to managing website inventory... and network bandwidth. giving you a nice big edge over your competition. that's the power of edge-to-edge intelligence. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby, helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him.

i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. aveeno® with prebiotic striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ looking around here i see tablets, laptops, printers, smartphones. they're all connected to the internet. they're all connected. can your network handle all those devices? sometimes. comcast business runs on the nation's largest gig-speed network.

so you can get the bandwidth you need to power all of your devices at peak performance. if all of my devices could have that kind of speed, i would be dancing! get started with secure 35-megabit internet and one voice line for just $64.90 per month. call today. comcast business. beyond fast. howard john wester the facts. we're here today because the president abused his power. we're here today because he solicited foreign interference in the 2020 election. he had welcomed foreign interference as it relates to russia. he solicited foreign interference on the white house

lawn with china, and he did it with ukraine. he's a serial solicitor. >> and congressman hakeem jeffries of new york joins us now. he is the chairman of the house democratic caucus and a member of the judiciary and budget committees. thank you so much for being on this morning. let's start with your take on what's at stake in today's vote. >> well, everything is at stake in terms of the democratic republic that we have that we hold and that we cherish. the founding fathers when they created our republic were very concerned about three principal things, a, abuse of power by a president elevating his or her own personal gain, b, betrayal of our constitution, and c, the corruption of our free and fair elections. what the president has done in this particular instance is implicate all three primary concerns of the framers of the

constitution as it relates to presidential overreach. that's whey ity it's important the house to act today. >> chairman, it's willie geist. good to see you this morning, we're just over an hour away from you gaveling in the full house. a lot of people will be tuning in this morning, watching msnbc and watch the full proceedings. a bit of a viewer's guide about how this might work if you could. then we'll talk about some rules first, vote on the rules, and then a long debate begins with potentially a vote later in the evening. >> that's correct. six hours of debate that will be equally divided between the democrats and the republicans. we expect during that debate as democrats we're going to keep the focus on the facts, that the president in this particular instance pressured a foreign government to target an american citizen for political gain and simultaneously withheld without justification $391 million in military aid from a vulnerable ally as part of a scheme to solicit foreign interference in

the 2020 election. and in the process undermine our national security. we're going to lay out the facts, and we're going to elevate the values that are at stake as it relates to liberty and the integrity of our democracy and free and fair elections. >> jason johnson. >> congressman jeffries, so this is a historic day. i'm pretty sure you and most people in congress never thought they would have this experience. but for regular people out there now, they're thinking okay, if the president gets impeached, what does this do to him? so can you explain to the public if the president gets impeached on both articles today, how does that affect his ability to do his job or how you all view him doing his job going forward? that's what a lot of people want to understand. >> it's an important question and we've maintained from the very beginning as democrats that our center of gravity and our primary commitment remains getting things done on behalf of the american people, whether that relates to driving down the high cost of life civic prescription drugs, infrastructure, criminal justice reform, free and fair trade but

doing it in a way that benefits the american worker, we want to continue to do the business of the people. i think we've shown over the last few weeks that we're going to continue to try to find common ground with president trump, but at the same time we have a constitutional responsibility to protect our democracy. you know, the founders created a system where the house of representatives is a separate and co-equal branch of government. we don't work for this president or any president, of course, we work for the american people. and we have a responsibility under the constitution to serve as a check and balance on an out of control executive branch. donald trump has demonstrated himself to be out of control. the evidence of wrongdoing is hiding in plain sight and so we have that responsibility to proceed while at the same time working to try to get the business of the people done, which we have done. we are doing, and that is what we'll continue to do moving forward. >> katty kay. >> congressman, so far only one of your members has said that they're going to vote against the articles of impeachment, jeff van drew from new jersey.

there are about i think as of this morning about ten who have not yet declared. nancy pelosi has said, the speaker has said she's not whipping this vote, but is there pressure on members to fall in line with democrats so that you can have a unified caucus coming out of this? >> not at all. as you've indicated, speaker pelosi has made clear that this a solemn, a sober, a serious moment, and that the vote that will be taken is one that we will not put any pressure on any member to vote in a manner inconsistent with what they believe they should do in upholding their oath of office. she's maintained that position. the house democratic caucus leadership has maintained that position and members are arriving at their conclusions based on the facts, the application of the law, the constitution, and the truth as it has been presented to the american people. >> all right, congressman hakeem

jeffries, thank you very much for being on the show this morning. >> thank you. and still ahead on "morning joe." >> mr. president, do you take any responsibility for the fact that you're about to be impeached? >> no, i don't take any, zero to put it mildly. >> and his six-page diatribe to nancy pelosi described why. "morning joe" is back in a moment. ♪ any comments doug?

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. ♪ ♪ everybody needs somebod♪... ♪ find everything you need for the kids this holiday, with low prices and free shipping on millions of items at amazon.

aveeno® with prebiotic striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ man 1 vo: proof of less joint pain woman 1 oc: this is my body of proof. and clearer skin. man 2 vo: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 2 vo: ...with humira. woman 3 vo: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure.

tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. man 3 vo: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 4 vo: go to humira.com to see proof in action. ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. some things are too important to do yourself. ♪ get customized security with 24/7 monitoring from xfinity home. awarded the best professionally installed system by cnet. simple. easy. awesome. call, click or visit a store today.

welcome back to "morning joe." 50 past the hour. nbc news is is reporting that the top u.s. diplomat for ukraine bill taylor who testified at the house impeachment inquiry will be leaving his post at the end of the this year. taylor was previously the ambassador to ukraine under president george w. bush. and had returned to the country once ambassador marie yo von vich was removed. taylor voiced concern over the

president of withholding aid to ukraine saying in a text to gordon sondland, the u.s. ambassador to the european union, i think it's crazy to withhold security and it's really what this battle is all agent. we were withholding aid to our allie allies. and he came back full of conviction. he knew he was taking a risk going before congress. that's the moment that this whole process began to go into overdrive. when he spoke to the truth to the country in a very powerful way. he will be missed in ukraine. i can't think of a a member of

our diplomatic services who made more friends in the the last few months than bill taylor. >> bill taylor was coaxed out of retiernlt by the trump administration. now being called a deep traitor. he was hand picked by mike pompeo. i would say he's near the top of the list wo will leave this impeachment process with his dignity intact. privately in the text messages and publicly before the house committee. >> rudy giuliani negotiate will be allowed to remain out on bail while facing charges of violating campaign finance laws. a district judge ruled he could rem remain on house arrest despite prosecutors arguing that he concealed assets from the justice department including $1 million he received from a russian oligarch with ties -- >> you're making that up, right?

>> with paul manafort. >> come on. you could never put this in a spy novel that this guy got a million dollars bail money. am i right here? with connections to paul manafort. >> this is right out of a spy novel. >> it's quite a story. >> so it's actually a ukrainian oligarch. >> an attorney told nbc news on monday that the money wired from russia was alone given to his wife. however, prosecutors argue d tht the funds were sent by an attorney for a ukrainian oligarch with ties to russian organized crime and currently contesting extradition to the u.s. after being accused of bribing indian officials.

>> hold on a second. i want to get this straight. >> so the wire came from russia. and from a ukrainian oligarch. is that correct? >> correct. with ties to paul mab fort. manafort. >> does this happen in british politics? >> they didn't pay it into his account. they think they are being really chefr. so they pay his wife's account. >> masterful. >> there's more. >> another giuliani associate has pleaded not guilty to charges of funneling money from foreign entities to u.s. kabds in a scheme to buy political influence.

>> which circles back to rudy. so starting in 2018, they hire rudy giuliani for a substantial amount. in that period, these two ukrainian-american characters are trying to make, i think, multimillion dollar deals for energy in one of the most corrupt energy markets in the world. and they go from person to person and one of the big blocks is standing in their way is our ambassador. who has been working with ukrainian natural gas company on corrupt deals just like that. that's about the moment that the ambassador has got to go when the campaign starts. it takes a year to get rid of her, but again, my business we're told follow the money. and if you follow the money in this story, you quickly get to

one of the reasons why she was gone. the house will convene in about an hour to begin the final phase of donald trump's impeachment. he tweeted just moments ago. can you believe i will be impeached today by the radical left? do nothing democrats, he ends with say a prayer. >> here's the good news. nancy pelosi already has. we're back in a moment. yeah, and he wanted someone to help out with chores. so, we got jean-pierre. but one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with renters insurance. ♪ yeah, geico did make it easy to switch and save. ♪ oh no. there's a wall there now. that's too bad. visit geico.com and see how easy saving on renters insurance can be.

♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. can you tell me the story again? every family has their own unique story. give your family the chance to discover theirs this holiday season, with ancestry. >> i will execute the office of the president of the united states.

>> china just started an investigation into the bidens. >> and will protect ask defend. >> i think you might want to listen. >> the constitution of the united states. >> it's not an interference. they have information. i think i'd take it. >> you don't need to mix the tapes. it's right there. it would be as if nixon went on the front lawn of the white house and just confessed everything to a bank of cameras and microphones as donald trump did. >> and then said, get over it. today for the third time in the history of the united states the house of representatives will impeach the president. the democrats have laid out their case. the president abused his power and obstructed congress by trying to strong arm a foreign nation into boosting his political prospects and then covering it up. the president's defense, if there is one, involves a lot of yelling, a the lot of tweeting, even right now, and a lot of

republicans turning a blind eye to the constitutional principles they had held for generations. welcome back to "morning joe," pst december 18th. joining us here in washington we have "new york times" columnist and author tom freedman. former white house counsel under president obama bob bower joins us. former u.s. senator and now msnbc political analyst claire mccaskill and chief legal correspondent and host of "the beat" ari melber. a a great group to have with us this hour. >> tom, you could see just how personally the president of the united states is is taking this yesterday. even by his own standards with that letter to nancy pelosi talking about the salem witch

trials and being in business that nancy pelosi would say a prayer for him. >> i think he understands that the end of the day that impeachment is going to be a mark on his tore head he can't undo. and i think that's dawning on him. at the same time, joe, people point out this is is a political process. and ultimately, one thing we know about republicans, when they have power, they cram it right down your throat. ultimately, this is about power. and so my own reaction to all this is i think democrats are doing the right thing for the country. but at the end of the day, if you don't register to vote for a democrat or caucus for a democrat or run as a democrat, if you don't elect a democratic house and senate and president next time around, they are going to cram it down your throat ten times more because donald trump will be reelected and there will be nothing holding him back. so ultimately, this is about power.

and if democrats don't get it, they are going to cram it down your throat. >> claire, senator mccaskill, do democrats get that? we had a congresswoman on last hour and seems to be extraordinarily strong in her position. but do democrats get this? and are these moderate democrats putting the power in the house up for grabs? >> i think it's too early to tell how this will all play out in terms of public opinion of those voters who may have voted for donald trump, but then turned around and voted for a democrat to go to the house of representatives. and make no mistake, trump doesn't think he did anything wrong here. but he's directly responsible for the fact that there's a democratic majority in the house of representatives.

it is his behavior that helped lelkt all of those democrats in swing districts with moderate suburban voters. so that's the power they will use today. and they will impeach this president. then how this plays out in the senate will be teased in terms of the election in 2020 and whether or not those members survive and whether or not the senate picks up seats next year. >> so this is obviously an historic day and an extraordinary day if you think of years. 1998 and 2019, three times the president of the united states will have been impeached. go the end of the day when the vote is is expected to take place. president trump could be standing on a stage inside an arena in battle creek, michigan, when he gets the news he's been impeached or may have just received the news when he goes o out opt stage. as someone who spent his life around the law, who what are you thinking a about this day?

>> the president's approach is certainly unusual. that letter he sent out he said he was protesting the impeachment and declared it to be invalid. that's the first time in history the president declared that the constitutional process does not reach him. and as we know, it's not clear he will engage with the senate anymore than he did with the house. so it's an extraordinary day. the position this administration, this president has taken is extraordinary. it's something we have not seen before. >> have democrats presented a strong case to this point? >> i will only point out, this didn't come up in the comments on the floor, the democratic case was based on largely on testimony from officials of the trump administration. and that's also what make this is an unusual case. that record has been built not as it was against the bill clinton by a controversial, independent counsel, but by members of the trump administration's own officials. >> tom, in your latest op-ed, you argue it's the only thing to

do if our country's democracy is to survive. if we say what trump did is not an impeachable offense, we're telling ourselves and every future president that in direct contradiction of what the founders wrote in the constitution, it's okay to enlist a foreign power to salt the election your way. can you imagine how much money candidates would raise from saudi arabia or china to tilt a future election their way? that would be a prescription for prominent political chaos, as no future president's authority would be respected if they were ele elected on the basis of foreign interference. if congress were to do what the republicans demand, forego impeaching this president for enlisting a foreign power to get hymn elected after he refused to hand over any of the documents that congress had requested and blocked a all of the aids who

knew what happened from testifying, we would be saying that a president is is henceforth above the law. we would be saying we no longer have three co-equal branches of government. we would be saying that we no longer have a separation of powers. we would be saying that our president is now a king. that seems pretty grave. will we will okay? >> the welcome of imagination is shocking. it may be china next time deciding they don't want to deal with donald trump. and so they are going to interfere in the election. or you brought up the saudis, or uae or iran. now did the republicans think the iranians want more republicans elected in the white house? of course, they don't.

republicans are hard liners against iranians. that's what is so short sided in this defense of donald trump being a champion of foreign interference. he admitted it to george time and again. >> it's clear it's become a a cult of personality. and it's shock ing ing to me. it's shocking to me that for $174,000 and free parking, people will debase themselves this way over and over and over. i just wonder, do you not have kids. know what my wife would be saying. what happened to you? people go home at night to an offshore island that you and i don't know about where none of this matters? the willingness to prostitute themselves in this way is so shocking to me. it remains shocking to this moment. you mentioned russia and iran --

think about the next election. i guarantee you one thing. china and russia are voting trump for two very obvious reasons. one, he keeps our country in complete turmoil. we're not having a a national debate about investing in government and research in the next artificial intelligence, we're not having a debate today about how badly our kids did in the last exams and english and math. we're always talking about trump. that's number one. and as long as donald trump he can never organize a global coalition gns them. no one in asia will follow him. and no one had had in europe will follow them. and with facebook out there, basically opening the way for this guy to use social media to target voters. . because all these people will be voting trump.

democrats have to keep it sim e simple. why won't you let the witnesses speak? >> is this where the rubber meets the road in terms of our system of checks and balances? is there a possibility there's a loop hope here? >> it's a great question that you have been alluding to. today's vote will set up the process for that. the standing rules for the trial.

you can see that play out and folks decide that. we are witnessing something that's never happened if the house goes forward as expected. we have never seen an elected president impeached in their first term. it took more time to get to that point. this is the type that's bad for donald trump. let's remember watching rick gates get a a new jail sentence yesterday, who was number two in the trump campaign. this is a president who scored another very negative mark in his history book. he's had more presidential advisers indicted and incarcerated earlier in his presidency than anyone in all of american his i ri. i don't think we can look at today's vote in isolation. it runs alongside independent processes that continue to send

donald trump's closest and most senior aids, longest serving advisers to jail. roger stone, paulman fo manafor michael cohen, and an open investigation in new york into his lur and his ukraine fixer rudy giuliani. we're watching this history unfold with a lot of evidence in public. joe said something at the top of the hour that there are cases like watergate. they just have better sound quality. what the presidented a mutt ed and what the congress has gotten on the record is is a damning case. i don't sit here this morning to say what the congress should do, what the snot will do. we don't have the votes. this is an overwhelming case that runs alongside proven and convicted criminal conduct at the highest level of donald trump's network. >> i would add to the list michael flynn, who will be sentenced a few weeks from now. claire, let's look past today. we expect the house to vote to

impeach the president of the united states and look into the senate. the body you served until not too long ago. mitch mcconnell has come out and said it again. i'm not an impartial juror. lindsey graham said i won't read the transcript because the process is a sham. that's the chair of the judiciary committee not considering the evidence. what about this process that we have basically a foretold conclusion. we knew we were probably going to impeach in the house and that the senate was going to vote not to con convict, to acquit the president of the united states. >> i think there's an opportunity here for chuck schumer and the democrats to win over some folks in the country by how they handle this. a majority of republicans recently polled said they thought that the senate should be allowed to call more witnesses. to get more witnesses in front

of the senate that have factual evidence on this very grave matter that faces our country. so if chuck schumer uses the power he has to make the republicans vote on calling these key witnesses, and by the way, the biggest hypocrisy, when you look at lindsey graham managing the clinton impeachment saying we need more witnesses and keep an open mind. the biggest hypocrisy is the president saying this is the not a process that's been fair to him when he's the very person blocking the witnesses from coming forward. you can't have it both ways. you cant say how unfair, by the way, i want to make sure the people we know what happens never see the light of day. and people are smart enough to figure that out. >> they may be, but what's the mechanism to check that? because if not, then the president is right. >> there will be votes that occur in this process in the

senate. chuck can force a vote on whether or not witnesses should be called. those are the toughest votes for tom tillis and susan collins and joni ernst and the senators in colorado and arizona. those are tough votes because they know when they vote to not allow witnesses to be called, they are going against not only the majority of america, but the majority of their own party. >> you ask what the checks are are. there's no check on dponald trump. not true. we heard that in 2017 and 2018. voters came out and delivered an historic statement to donald trump. the largest landslide by vote total in the history of congressional midterms. largest ever in the history of our republic. they are going to have a say again in 11 months. that is the check.

and if the republicans run rough shot over the process, if they are seen obstructing justice politically in their own way, they will be held accountable at the polls. as will the democrats if they overreach. >> so bob n your recent "new york times" op-ed "trump is the fou founder's worst nightmare", the very point we're talking about here. you write as the self-proclaimed embodiment of the popular will, the demagogues were in deliberations as necessarily a democracy not necessarily a powerful interests against the people, but only he represents. they think norms and interests are fraund lent. president trump made full use of the playbook. he's refused all cooperation with the house. he lies repeatedly about the

facts, holds public rallies to spread these falsehoods and attack the credibility and even the patriotism of witnesses. his motive is is purely assaultive. this is the crux of the trump defense. and not an argument built on fact asks supportive of theory of the case. that's the worry. are we going to be okay? because we have a system of checks and balances, but there's this get over it defense based on anger that does seem to prevail on many steps along the way. >>. >> it's the president who decides to rest on a form of continuous vilification coupled with lies and basically takes a position that only he represents

the will of the public. >> they are going submit to his requirement. they are not going to be operating an independent capacity judging with the house in articles of impeachment. this all standing with him so that is a tremendous concern. ab the roll that he thought the president should play in guiding the senate majority. >> making their own play bock. and talk about what's happened to this country. how we get here over the past 20 years. i think it was the late '90s,

where you talked about how more was bringing us together than tearing us apart. then nempb happened. over the past 20 years not just in america but across the gloe.l tribalism has replaced fact and reason. we have seen that play out in impeachment. it happens on both sides. and this strange, toxic form of government called liberal democracy, whether it's donald trump's governing in america or hunn ga agary has seen this. a lot of people look at brexit and say the same thing. what's happened over the past 20 years? where are we right now? and where to we -- how do we

move out of this phase? >> after that cold war, a lot of people asked the cold war was a a system. when is a system that replaces the cold war system. they haven't worked out that way. it could be a clash of civil yaigs. wrote a book saying it olympic the coming anarchy. and the book i wrote said it's going to be attention. attention between that and the world, identity, faith, religion plays. that's the olive tree. things that anchor us. intersecting with the new globalization system tying us together. the story of politics will be the tension between the two. i do think that theory is still standing. vladimir putin will grab crimea because his olive tree urges are driving him there.

but he won't go to kiev. so is there's a tension. >> look at china. they play that out. >> so i believe that framework is still alive. but why is it sharpening now. as we become more globalized, a lot of americans woke up and went to the grocery store and there was a woman at the cash register and she wasn't wearing a baseball cap. then they went to the men's room and there was a a woman this. and they had never seen someone who presented as a woman. and then they went to work and their boss just rolled a robot up to their desk. it seemed to be studying their job. and it all happened at the same time. my sense of home, my sense of social norms and work all got completely disrupted. along came a a group of leaders around the world that i have the

answer. i can stop the wind. that's why trump was using a wall. it was more than immigration. it was about a change in the face of change. it all happened so fast. a lot of people got on board. >> there's such a a disconnect between our politics and the politics of crisis and the politics of paranoia and the reality. you talk about 20 years, it's been a mess. but poverty, record lows worldwide, disease, we have made great progress, especially in africa whether you want to talk about aids in africa or ma lairuate. teenage pregnancy is down and abortions, i think at their lowest rate they have been in this country's history.

crime and again the great irony of the wall is under barack obama, we were at a 50-year low for illegal boardrder crossings. it spiked up under donald trump, but again, there's such a disconnect between our politics and our reality. >> but none of that wins you a vote. that doesn't sound good on the stump. everything is going great. aren't we doing well? you have to drive the wedges in. and tom is right and i think it's understated in terms of donald trump's appeal in 2015 and 2016 which was this cultural resentment, but also feeling like, whoa, let's pump the brakes. you're calling me a bigot because of those things i saw in the bathroom. i'm not ready for those things. . what donald trump said i'm not either. i'm here to stop it or at least slow it down. that was the appeal to a lot of people and when we talk about

evangelicals, how can you abide all that you have seen? because he's pumping the brakes. he's putting federal judges in. we didn't elect a saint, we elected a president. somebody to help us. >> you also want to give per many mission for a lot of people to say, a lot of stuff that was repressed. and i think we can't underestimate that. when the president does that, the impact that has. >> especially on tv. shocking things on tv that would have gotten you fired a a few years ago. >> joining us now is house majority whip of south carolina. thank you for joining us on the show today. >> it's always great to see you. does donald trump deserve to be impeach impeached? >> thank you so much for having

me. i listened to the testimonies. i have read a lot of the documents. and i do believe as one said i guess it was if these charges are not impeachable, nothing is. and that's what i believe. i think this president has conducted himself in such a way that we are left with no alternative but to proceed with a vote today to impeach. >> what do you say to trump supporters who will argue, the democrats and the media have been after donald trump from the very beginning. it started with the mueller investigation. and with fbi, it continued now with the ukrainian investigation

through the impeachment inquiry. now they finally have done what they wanted to do from day one. this is what to you say to that charge? >> it's absolutely not true. the fact of the matter is we had a campaign, we saw during the campaign what all the candidates were about. it came down to two people. donald trump and hillary clinton. they acquitted themselves the way they should have and people began to fall on some opinions about them. and i think it framed his presidency we just saw that what's in office, he would rise to the office. instead he got into office and tried to pull the presidency down to him. and that to me is what this is all about.

this is is a nation of laws, not of men. he has attempted to make this a a nation of a mask. he's taken over the republican party and now he's attempted to take over the nation. that's why we're here to make sure that we preserve the integrity of this great republic and defend the constitution that we all swore to uphold. >> and meanwhile, the president is tweeting and retweeting like crazy this morning. he wrote a letter to nancy pelosi. i don't know if you had the time to see that letter. the reaction to the vote today. what do you make of that? what does that say about where we stand with this presidency? >> i have seen the letter. i think it's absolutely a little bit crazy.

there's something strange about that letter. however, i believe he's laying down the predicate for what he hopes to be his campaign next year. so i have said to our colleagues. read this letter carefully. be prepared to respond to every element of it because we are going to be faced with that the next year. it's worked for him before. he thinks it will work again. we must be on guard to make sure it does not. >> jim, it's always great talking to you. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me. >> we'll see you soon. claire mccaskill, the mistake that the media has made are laughing at some of donald trump's more preposterous campaign tactics. talking about read the letter, digest the letter, i remember

one of the most depressing momentings of calling you up and saying how is it going there. you actually said the leaprosy nonsense, the caravan nonsense, that they were coming to bring leprosy to america, that was actually resinating with voters in missouri. no, you gave me one example after another example that these preposterous fairy tales cooked up in donald trump's mind actually connect with certain voters. >> yeah, now it's calcified. you talked about baked in. the people who feel strongly that this president is being treated unfairly are totally convinced that this is the swamp and this is not a problem of a

president who frankly is is just bizar bizarre. that letter is nuts. it's crazy town. in the fact that people that work in the white house helped him write it is even more disturbing, including steven miller who in any other presidency would have been run out of town for his incredibly racist comments he's made. so it is really sad that we got to this point. i think we can recover, especially if the democrats in the senate stay focused on the facts. and stay focused on the facts get the president hiding witnesses. that appeals to a lot of people who voted against hillary clinton instead of for donald trump. >> final thoughts. what are you look iing at today? >> i did want to mention the president's letter doesn't look

a lot different than the one the white house counsel originally sent out about the president's refusal to recognize the constitutionally of the impeachment process. it was very close to that. hovering over it. but the long and short of it is, i us think that's what's extraordinary. the approach to the entire impeachment process is what distinguish this is from prior impeachments. and the pull that he believes he needs to have on the senate majority, the effect on the independence of the judgment is a measuring of what make this is different. >> less than 30 minutes from the gavel in to the full house of representatives. set up the day for us. what people tuning in this morning are going to see. >> bottom line, you'll start with a debate over the rules to then have the floor debate. you'll have hours of that debate. the time applies to automatic members. so you could go five hours or

longer if it gets really late. there's a question of where the house doesn't want to do this historic impeachment vote too late. another thing to watch for is the last time of the impeachment of bill clinton, there were more than a dozen democrats who supported the probe and the impeachment of president clinton. that next ticket was one of bill clint clinton's chief critics from that same set of allegations. we're not going to see people crossing party lines even though the experts of the "new york times" and many independents have said this looks far worse. it's a reminder when you're dealing with the congress, even on an historic vote, you're looking at the external facts and also who is in that congress. and that's something that joe mentioned that i think also applies today as we watch this

historic vote. we just had a a major amount of turnover with that record high midterm turnout. the voters may also keep an eye on this. not only on the vote, but how this is conducted, who looks like they are taking it serious lip this is one of the days where we're living history and we just don't know how americans will react. >> thank you very much. bob bower, thank you as well. on this momentous day. still ahead, new information on what to expect when the house convenes in less than a half hour from now. moments ago speaker pelosi has asked her to pride over the proceedings. t she said, this is a a sad and somber moment in our nation's history. and the responsibility to preside is something i won't take lightly. a andrea mitchell joins us ahead and more with tom freedman and claire mccaskill. keep it here on "morning joe."

can you heal dry skin in a day? aveeno® with prebiotic triple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™

hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

it can cause damage to the enamel. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. with pronamel repair, more minerals are able to enter deep into the enamel's surface. the fact that you have an opportunity to repair what's already been damaged...it's amazing. i think my go-to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. male anchor: ...an update on the cat who captured our hearts. female anchor: how often should you clean your fridge? stay tuned to find out. male anchor: beats the odds at the box office to become a rare non-franchise hit. you can give help and hope to those in need.

i pray for the president. i pray for the president all the time. so don't mess with me when it comes to words like that. >> yesterday in his six-page diatribe, president trump blasted nancy pelosi for saying she prayed for him. he wrote, you are ompbding americans of faith by continually saying i pray for the president when you know this statement is not true. unless it's meant in a negative sense. this morning the president is now asking his twitter followers to say a prayer. before he's set to be the third president impeached in american history.

>> his biblical reference is ko ritz y corinthians. he likes -- he doesn't have a favorite verse. >> amazing that he doesn't understand even understand enough about the christian faith that jesus said, you pray for those who are not your friends. you pray for those who even consider themselves to be your enemies. that is at the heart of jesus' message, not that donald trump would know that because apparently he doesn't know biblical text. but that's at the center of the christian faith. whether you're a catholic or gel call, it's something, trust me, i know because my parents made me go to church all the time.

that's something you learn from the time you're 5 years old. >> the practice is not questioning people's faith, but he's lecturing others about faith is ironic. we have known long enough to say his questioning nancy pelosi on that is billy at best. that's part of faith is praying for people not just who you love, but who you hope will do better. >> joinening us is former chief of staff at the cia and department of defense national security analyst jeremy bash. and nbc news chief foreign affairs correspondent and host of ann drdrea mitchell reports, andrea mitchell. >> you have seen an impeachment or two before. tell us what your thoughts are on this morning's very historical day in washington, d.c. >> i wouldn't say that it's

prayerful because i wouldn't want the president to jump in, but all of us who have all covered this and witnessed it are struck by the sadness of it. the weight of it. i was so im pressed with the interview with you guys early yore today. having watched her deal with that town hall meeting and then seeing her today, when she described what she did to prepare for her decision, reading the constitution, reading the testimony, reading the arguments on both sides, setting it the way she was trained to do as a cia analyst, that's what they should all be doing. not dismissing the arguments out of hand. saying that your mind is made up. having seen the way they covered bill clinton all those years ago. it really is astounding they are

not taking it more seriously. and i know nancy pelosi, as you all do, and know she's very sober and prayerful in this moment. she's a person of tremendous faith. that's the way she was raised. and i think that she's taking it very seriously. she did not come to this position lightly. >> and jeremy bash, we get the news today that bill taylor is leaving. a a man the trump administration asked to come in and help in ukraine. he did just that. he did what was asked of him and it's been vilified by donald trump and those around him. just like the ambassador to ukraine, he gets no defense from the secretary of state. not a word since. >> i think the right word is revere reverent. you see high reverence for the

institutions, for the rule of law, for the constitution it's not just democrats. we have heard from important voices in the previous weeks. we have heard from william webster, a former federal judge who at 96 years old servesed a fbi director, cia director, who said this assault on the rule of law by the president cannot stand in our democracy. people like ad myrtle mckrachb craven who led the raid on osama bin laden's hideout. people like him saying the president assault on the institutions, on our military and our undermining of national security really tears at the fabric of our country. you put all of those voices together, i think you have the whole of the rational for why a president must be impeached even in his first term in office. >> what an inconsistency between the republicans and white house has been saying since this

process has started and about to come to completion. and what senators are now saying. >> one addition and then i'll address that. no one can say that they were not warned. durp the election, the extraordinary step was taken by gop national security experts to issue a letter saying he was a threat to national security. on the process, i have sat through hours because i have covered wall to wall here of republicans complaining and that the defense here is really about the process. this is a tainted, unfair, bad process that they have not been able to get witnesses. their voices have been silenced. the huge irony here is that now that this moves over to the senate, they control literally everything. all they need is 51 votes, once those articles are physically walked over to the the senate, republicans control almost the entire process. and that's why you see chuck schumer saying i want a commitment up front because what he's not saying is he knows that

they are going to not have much leverage unless they can get two republicans to break off and work with them. so this is the huge irony. i would even say the lie to all of this about republicans really wanting these witnesses because based on my reporting, when republicans got a chance to get their witnesses behind closed doors, to get that position, which trey gowdy says is the best way to get at the truth, they only requested adam schiff, who knows nothing about why the aid was held up and the whistleblower, whose reports have been corroborate in public testimony. >> so let's turn the corner to the new year. let's assume this the way we think. mitch mcconnell says there's no chance his senate will con vikt the president of the united states. let's say he's acquitted. as we look into a 2020 presidential campaign. where does that leave the

president? where does that leave the country? >> very good question because i do think back to bill webster and i sat with him along the lines of that op-ed. there's real issue here's. and the rule of law is is at stake. no guardrails, you referred to the fact that william taylor is leaving with not a word from mike pompeo. he may be facing the voters in 2020. they are aware of what's been happening. and i don't think you can just go to kansas and think it was disconnected from the country or the world. so i have real concerns we have the end of the year deadline of north korea's threats against us. what will this president do once he's acquitted given what he did with ukraine the day after he felt he got free of bob

mueller's testimony. we don't know what's going to happen. i think it's hard to predict whether this will help with his face baste. they have been monetizing it and raising so much money. and he's going to be at a rally tonight at the same time as the final vote. is this going to put him over the top? is this going to throw back against the democrats? i don't know. let's see how thought fful the debate is is and the trial that we expect will follow. and whether or not we can do our jobs as we have been trying to. and inform people, as you do every single day. >> andrea mitchell, thank you very much. >> greatly appreciate it. important to have your voice this morning. and tom freedman, we're talking about ukraine this morning. but while we're talking about ukraine and while the president, we look at how recklessly the relationship with the democratic

ally who has been invaded in russia. you expand out and you look at the costs to american influence across the globe, to our well being. and you see now because of donald trump, you have vladimir putin and russia in the middle east for the first time since 1973. putin, a king maker in that region. you see vladimir putin's own words. it's not a real country. you see people on television parodying vladimir putin's language. you see republicans in the senate going on sunday shows the propaganda that the intel community beged them not to. you have china moving closer to europe because europe knows they can no longer trust the united

states. you have russia moving closer to china. and north korea moves closer every day. to being able to deliver a a nuclear war head in milwaukee, in detroit, to columbus, to pensacola, florida. and donald trump, he gets the photo opt, leaves, and even kim jong-un, this is a geopolitical disaster that is occurring every single day. >> i want to say a couple things. i really think it's so important when this moves to the senate, it's going to get more complicated. and if i were democrats, my t-shirt would be simple.

i'm a believer to name something to own it. if you can name the issue, you can own the issue. trump wants to name this a coup. it's krit call for democrats to ask every morning, everywhere they go, why won't you let the witnesses speak? let him speak. why know the most are the ones you are hiding. and you just have to ask that question every morning. why won't you let the witnesses speak. >> and how cynical of mitch mcconnell to say that they want us to do their work when of course it was donald trump that wouldn't let the witnesses come forward. and it was donald trump that was stopping everybody, the omb, and national security -- >> can i clarify on that. when i said it was a lie that they wanted witnesses, it is because they didn't request any fact witnesses to give depositions. they don't want fact witnesses in the senate either. when all of the requests were being made in the house for

hunter by khun hunthunt bid biden, that was all for public consumption. they didn't want it behind closes doors. >> so they should say why won't you let the witnesses speak. pompeo, rudy giuliani, and you talk about -- we have a secretary of state who basically was ordered by his president to take out the u.s. ambassador behind the state department and metaphorically shoot her in the head. and he said -- he didn't say i'll resign if you make me do that, he didn't even have the decency to pull her aside and say i really got to do this, i'm not -- i feel so bad about it. think of what his deputy said, sullivan, when he testified to be ambassador to moscow because he couldn't run from the question the way pompeo is. he said she did a good job and that she was unfairly treated. that is a guy whose office is about 20 feet from the secretary

of state. >> tom friedman, thank you very much for being on the show this morning on this very historic day. today's vote is a profile in courage for many. jon meacham has a look at some other courageous votes and how history judges them today. we'll be back in one minute. when you shop with wayfair,

you spend less and get way more. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com with us now from the washington examiner magazine, jay caruso. >> and in op-ed entitled republicans face political risks, but hhistory shows not a

lost, and overand over again, we are told that the great fact of our politics and the age of trumplected representatives fear crossing the aisle because they will pay a price at the polls. a courageous or course will be rapidly followed by defeat and exile from office. but there is a problem with this prevailing piece of conventional wisdom. it is wrong. over the past sikts dex decades courageous votes have not cost them their seats. from the civil abilities right to republicans who backed medicare and medicaid in 1965 through the clinton impeachment in the 1990s, tough votes have been difficult. but not necessarily fatal. >> a story i tell all the time. trust the voters. and '95, '96, we voted to cut

medicare because it was going bankrupt. got talked for it. i made it the center piece of my campaign. and seniors voted for me in extraordinarily high numbers. so trust the voters. but jay, i went to the hill yesterday and talked to a lot of my conservative republican friends. you know behind closed doors, they still talk like conservatives. you ask them about the record debt. they shake their head. you ask them about the soaring deficit. you ask them about tariff taxes. you ask them about the -- and nobody is particularly happy about it, but when i left the hill, i sat there thinking i've never seen this city controlled -- and i know donald would love to hear this -- controlled so much by one man because there is no check on

capitol hill from any republicans. nobody will say no, no, no mr. president, tariffs, no. you can't do that. nobody will stand up to him. and it was remarkable leaving the hill. my god, nobody is -- not one republican will stand up to this guy. forget about impeachment. on any conservative matter that we fought for for years. >> most remarkable one was the emergen de emergency declaration for the funds for the wall. if they couldn't stop that, then you have to wonder, you know there is probably nothing that they will do. and you're right, i've had conversations with people about how they seem to have forgotten about the debt and deficit. and there are a lot that i don'. what is he winning on?

they always look at the judges, so, yes, he's been good on judges. and he cut taxes. what other legislative victories has he had. this is a guy who said that he could persuade anyone and get things done. he consistently blames the failed repeal of obamacare on john mccain. he is one of the worst negotiators i've ever seen if we look at what happened in north korea and elsewhere. it is terrible. and at some point i think that republicans are thinking that if he loses, they could just go back to everything that they are doing before and i don't know if that can happen. >> and on the wall, democrat, talk about bad negotiations, you want 20, $21 billion to build your wall? we'll give it to you. let's just take care of the d.r.e.a.m.ers thing that 77% of americans support. and stephen miller scuttled that bill. he could have had the wall built and he couldn't even bring that deal in for a landing. >> so in terms of profiles in

courage, or just a sense of value of the truth, you know a lot of these members of the senate. is there in your estimate anybody on the republican side of the senate that you think actually thinks donald trump didn't do what he is accused of doing? >> no. i think that they all know he did it. the question is how many of them will take this moment in history and realize that no matter how these folks vote, half the people in country will be mad at him. and i always said that was true you in my state a lot. no matter how i voted, half the people were mad at me. but it frees you up to do the right thing. it should free you up. and the worst thing that happens is that you come out here in the real world. fine, guy, come on out. that is the worst thing that happens. if you do not do the right thing, then you will have and at tri asterisk by your name in the history books forever. >> and the odds of any of them

doing that are low. i don't think that we will see any republicans today and we heard from congresswoman sl slotkin, she said if i don't have my job in 2020, no one dies. in other words, this vote today and ploeblgtsing trotecting the is far more important than my job and i'm not sure republicans voting today or perhaps next month in the senate can say the same. >> you probably see a look at the political landscape and wonder what is going to happen. yeah, as it stands right now, trump has such a grip on the party, that if they do vote for impeachment, particularly for removal in the senate, they know that somebody is going to get a primary opponent. and you have vulnerable people like susan collins, like cory gardner, and if they decide to

break from the president, there will be hiell to pay. nancy pelosi calls her the worst in that letter, there has been people tweeting out a copy of a newspaper where donald trump wrote you are the best several years ago. so it just goes to show he loves everyone until he doesn't. >> we'll bring in chris matthews right now as he will be leading the coverage. chris, talk about what is at stake as the president is accused of high crimes and misdemeanors. >> well, in addition to the constitution, in addition to this incredible showdown between the speaker and the president, there is the psychiatry of this president. it seems only recently he has discovered how horrible an impeachment is. he is calling it ugly. he is all e