itreat them all as if, they are hot and energized. stay away from any downed wire, call 911 and call pg&e right after so we can both respond out and keep the public safe. we're late. my thanks to most of all to you for watching. "mtp daily" with chuck todd starts now. tp daily" with chuck starts now welcome to thursday. it is "meet the press daily" and good evening. i am chuck todd here in washington. an indelible mark has been left on the trump presidency and the immediate fallout has been

intense. president trump reeling a bit. just look at his tweet storms. the personal attacks he unleashed at his rally last night, which we're going to get to in a moment. house speaker nancy pelosi, meanwhile, is floating what looks like a trial balloon to potentially temporarily withhold the articles of impeachment from the senate. over concerns that senate majority leader mitch mcconnell isn't going to run a fair trial. mcconnell has admitted he's not acting as an impartial juror and that he's working hand in hand with the white house counsel's office on the senate trial. during our press conference today, pelosi reiterated that she is waiting for the senate to act before she proceeds. she then met with senate minority leader chuck schumer. this afternoon, schumer met with mcconnell. just moments ago, schumer's office said in the meeting, schumer reiterated his demands for witnesses and documents. look, it's possible pelosi is simply trying to give schumer some leverage in negotiations about a trial. even though it's also possible mcconnell may want her to withhold the articles because then he gets to at least temporarily avoid the spectacle of an impeachment trial

altogether. president trump, on the other hand, seems eager for a trial. at the heart of the partisan disagreement is whether the senate should hear from witnesses. but for now, there appears to be little movement as both sides today retreated to their predictable corners. >> the vote did not reflect what had been proven. it only reflects how they feel about the president. the senate must put this right. >> we ask, is the president's case so weak that none of the president's men can defend him under oath? is the president's case so weak that none of the president's men can defend him under oath? if the house case is so weak, why is leader mcconnell so afraid of witnesses and documents? >> let's get right to capitol hill. our own garrett haake up there.

so, garrett, like i said, the definition of a trial balloon is what democrats have done. nancy pelosi is not saying she's doing this for any other reason other than waiting. you know, she hasn't talked about any larger motive that other lawmakers have speculated on. how's the trial balloon playing? i guess is probably the first question to ask. at least among house democrats and senate democrats. >> so far, so good, chuck. although, there's been some confusion among democrats over what exactly the plan is here. everything i've heard thus far has been supportive. the reality is the house just locked up their doors for the rest of the year. they're not coming back until january. they never selected the managers for the impeachment case. so they -- they weren't ever going to move these articles over to the senate side before january anyway. that makes the next two weeks impeachment purgatory, right? there is a lot of room for these behind close doors negotiations and discussions between the leaders as they try to work out some kind of trial format that everyone will at least not hate.

if they don't love it. so pelosi can hold back the articles here without it having any actual effect on what they're doing going forward. now, whether this becomes a strategy that goes into further into january or even february, it becomes politically dangerous for any number of reasons. not the least of which is democrats just spent the last month arguing that there is an urgent need to impeach this president now. you would think then there's a fairly urgent need to continue to the trial. you've got democratic senators who are running for president who are probably going to want to be running for president in late january and early february. not waiting to be called back for a trial. but in this moment here, what pelosi's decision does is it creates some space for mcconnell and schumer to have this negotiation about what the rules will be. to at least get this thing moving in a direction that both parties can agree to. >> all right. help me out with the calendar here. when do they come back into -- out of recess? is it going to be that friday, january 3rd? or is it not until the 6th? >> the house is back on the 6th.

the senate hasn't said yet. we might get that announcement from mitch mcconnell later in the evening. this is, again, so many moving target squs moving pieces in all of this. the senate was in part waiting to see what the house would do in terms of impeachment. you know, remember on the senate side, they weren't entirely convinced that the house would finish up their impeachment work before they went home for the break in the first place. so the senate calendar for january is a big giant question mark at this point. >> and i just one final sort of point of clarification. when the house sends over the articles, it is automatically has to be top priority for the senate. >> that's right. >> so hypothetically, they send 'em over on january 6. does the senate have to deal with 'em that day, 24 hours, 48? is there an understanding of what that timetable is of when they have to begin to act? >> i think that'll be part of what gets negotiated out. remember, in the clinton impeachment, the house voted and sent the articles over in the same day. so there's just not a lot of

precedent to go with here. but mitch mcconnell's made clear they're not going to, you know, dilly-dally around on this. they're going to get the articles. they're going to go work. it's going to be a six day a week process. senators are essentially going to be bolted in their chairs for this whole thing. they're putting off their vote on usmca, which a lot of republican senators would love to see passed so they can have something to tout back home. even that will wait. >> let me pause you there. they just passed usmca. almost an astonish bipartisan levels of support. almost equal on both sides. it -- it -- beyond stunning that i wish i had more time to talk about the trade thing. and we will talk about it late in the hour. but have they sent that over? or did they also not send over usmca yet? >> unclear if they've sent it over. but even if the senate -- the senate would have to get unanimous consent. there is a million other things that would have to happen for them to get that done before they leaf town. i mean, there is the smell of jet fumes is overwhelming in this building right now. a lot of lawmakers are just trying to get out of dodge right

now. >> yeah. the jet fumes. they smell awfully good right now from national airport is my guess. garrett haake starting us off on capitol hill. i can already hear more echo in your voice, which means fewer people are there. joined now by one of the house's top democrats when it comes to decisions involving impeachment. he's chairman of the house foreign affairs committee. congressman engel, good to see you. let me start -- it looks like a trial balloon to us here in the -- in the cheap seats here. this idea of delaying sending the articles over. how long are you comfortable delaying sending over those articles? >> well, i'm comfortable right now with the way nancy pelosi has conducted herself. and has worked with all of us during impeachment. i want to see a fair trial. i want to see a free trial. it is very troubling when the senate majority leader and other

senators said they have no intention of being impartial jurors. which is really what they're supposed to be. so hopefully, they'll -- they'll realize that this does not help anyone. let alone everybody in our country: a country. and they'll cooperate, at which point i think they'll move ahead expeditiously and very quickly and we can -- we can continue. but i think it's not helpful when the senators, and particularly the majority leader, is saying that he's not going to follow the constitution and be a impartial arbiter. >> well, let me ask you this. the -- mitch mcconnell may not like how nancy pelosi runs the house. you guys and nancy pelosi may not like how mitch mcconnell runs the senate but really one doesn't have a lot of say over the other. >> no, that's true. but the constitution does provide the parameters for impeachment. and if the senate is going to

not follow that, then i think that's something that we have to call to everybody's attention. i would like this to move as quickly as possible. i think it's important. you know, we knew when we brought up articles of impeachment that the senate has a republican majority and the chances of them doing anything are -- are not very great. but we followed the constitution. that's all we're asking of the senate. follow the constitution. >> well, there's only one sentence here in the constitution about this. article one, section three. the senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. it doesn't describe what that trial should look like. >> no, but the -- the thing that we can go back to would be the -- the impeachment of president clinton. i was here during those -- those days. and both the senate and the house cooperated. the republicans said that they would not coordinate anything with anybody. and -- and -- and the senate and

the house seemed to work together. here, right off the get go, we're hearing all kinds of things that block smooth -- smooth moving. i'm hoping this is only a blip and that we can move. i don't see why we can't. i'm hoping calmer heads will prevail. but we have an obligation to our country and to our citizens to follow the constitution. that's the whole problem, frankly, with the republicans. they don't want to follow the constitution. >> let me ask you this, though. how much should public opinion matter here? the country is right down the middle divided on this. and it -- it's one of those, at the end of the day, public opinion does count for something, does it not? >> it always counts for something. but i think more important than public opinion is to try to do what's right. >> i understand that. but do you get to a point where in some ways, is it not

legitimate if the senate decide to worry about where public opinion is on this question of whether it's better to let the voters decide? versus the institution of the u.s. senate to decide? >> well, chuck, when we went into -- into impeachment, i mean, we knew then that the senate has a majority of republicans. and the chances of getting them to cross over was minuscule. but we thought it was important to do. again, to follow the constitution. so i don't think public opinion should sway anything one way or another. we have obligations. the house has fulfilled its obligations. we're calling on the senate to fulfill its obligations. >> i'm marveling at the overwhelming bipartisan support there is for usmca. sans, 41 members of congress and you're one of the 41 that voted against this trade agreement. most of your democratic colleagues voted for it. i'm just curious what was your

reasoning? >> well, you know, in a large bill like that, there are things you like in it. there are things you don't like in it. and there certainly were some very good things in it. for me, we had a problem with the environmentalists who are very unhappy with it. they convinced me that this wasn't the best bill that we can come up with. again, there are things in that bill that i liked. but you -- you can't vote 80% one way and 20% another way. you got to vote yes or no. and i thought that -- that i would vote no and show my concern with some of the environmental -- lack of environmental proposals in the bill. >> are you basically saying you agreed with 80% of this trade deal? >> well, i think it's -- i think the trade deal, you know, i've voted for a few trade deals through the years. most of the time, i voted no. and i think that this trade deal is -- is better than most. but i don't think it's good enough because you're, again, you're attaching lots of things

to it. and the environmental things are very important to me. i have 100% voting record on environmental matters. and i like to keep it that way. >> fair enough. eliot engel, democrat from new york city. thanks for coming on sharing your views. appreciate it. >> always a pleasure. thank you, chuck. >> let me turn now to a future juror in the senate trial. it's senator michael bennet. democrat for colorado. member of the senate intelligence committee. presidential candidate. so this trial has got all sorts of ramifications on you. senator bennet, you're here. knowing you the way i know you, i assume you've already reached out to a handful of rank and file republicans that you have a good relationship with in the senate wondering is there anything you guys can do that mcconnell and schumer can't? so let me ask. is there any talks that aren't involving mcconnell and schumer between a bipartisan group of you that may figure this out? >> you know, i think that we're getting out of here just in time. nerves are frayed and i'm

usually the guy who says we ought to stay here and finish our work. i think it's time for everybody to go away for a few days. and i hope, over the course of the coming days, we'll be able to start those conversations, chuck. to see whether we can get to a place where we can get to an agreement on how we conduct a fair trial in the senate. that can elevate the reputation of the senate and everybody around here. that would be useful. and -- and in current, you know, sort of recent days, sort of unheard of. >> i mean, but what's plausible here? i mean, at the end of the day, you -- you -- it is sort of a everybody's got to agree to some pain, perhaps, that they may not like in the rules in order to do this. and everybody's got to agree to some things that -- that they might like. you really think we live in a world that can do that these days? >> i don't -- i don't know. i mean, hope springs eternal. i -- i think that the more likely outcome is that mcconnell will end up doing whatever

mcconnell wants. but you asked, you know, will we have discussions about it? and i think we'll -- we'll make an effort. >> well, there's some things. mcconnell, on one hand, he's got some power here. but it's limited once the trial begins, is it not? >> you mean because he's got to get 51 votes? >> 51 votes to do things during the trial. >> right. >> so i mean, is there a point where there is an agreement. but once the trial starts, it could go -- it could go in any direction? >> it could. >> what's your sense? >> my sense is that right now there's no negotiation really going on. i mean, obviously, senator schumer has put his position out. and mitch mcconnell's put his position out. and i assume that the two leaders will begin to negotiate. and those of us that can be helpful will be helpful. i would rather have it wrapped up before we actually start the trial. and we're giving everybody something.

but if that doesn't work, it is true that he's got to get 51 votes to sustain his position. and democrats could get 51 votes to sustain our position with respect to witnesses. it's not clear to me that the republicans share mitch mcconnell's view tonight. that the right way to do this is with no witnesses at all. i think the american people -- >> i had -- i had a -- i had a republican senator on sunday. pat toomey, who is not yet: he's not winced they shou not convinced they should do this without witnesses yet. he's keeping an open mind. >> which makes sense because the american people -- you know, they still are coming along to -- to focus on this. they -- many of them have not yet focused on it. and the senate has the opportunity to be able to lay the facts out in front of the american people in a fair trial. which is what i hope we'll do. >> speaker pelosi is withholding sending the articles over. do you endorse that tactic? how long do you endorse that tactic? at one point, does it look too

much like a tactic? and not enough about getting a fair trial. >> i think she's done a pretty good job lately negotiating stuff like the trade agreement you were talking about earlier. so i'm not going to second guess her on this. at some point -- at some point, you know, it may look like a tactic. in which case, i'm sure she'll -- she'll relent. but i think what she's trying to do is send a message that she -- that she's not -- that she's still got some cards to play. and as long as she's got them, she's going to play those cards. >> what -- you brought up the trade deal. i'm curious. where do you plan to vote on this? on usmca. i'm struck by the almost near unanimity in a polarized environment that democrats and republicans in the house are this close on trade? >> you know, it's interesting. so i have not taken a final position yet. i'm still studying it.

but there are hugely-beneficial things in this trade deal. the interesting thing about it is, it was the speaker that got them into the trade deal. the deal that the president negotiated with mexico didn't have the labor protections, the labor inspections of mexico that are in this trade agreement. so here is a rare case where washington actually worked the way it was supposed to. donald trump negotiated a deal that he thought was adequate. it wasn't adequate for the democratic majority in the house. the speaker of the house said, you know what, we're -- we're not going to take it the way you've written it. but if you can accomplish this, this, this, and this, non-negotiable, we might be able to vote for this. and they changed it, to their credit. the administration changed the deal. lighthizer changed it. and now, you're getting a big vote on the floor of the house of representatives that'll pass with a big vote in the senate. it's a reminder this place is not built just to have dueling press releases.

this place is -- is built so that people of -- with disagreements, different points of view, can fashion a result that represents the broad views of the american people. not a lazy consensus in the middle. but results. >> who knew that two of the most productive times in my lifetime and your lifetime, senator, of congress working together would be during impeachments. maybe we have a -- maybe we have a new reform for congress. have 'em focus on impeachment. take the arrows and quietly actually negotiate behind the scenes. being a little cynical but maybe not. >> i would do that without impeachment. a better reform might be to ban members of congress from becoming lobbyists after they leave here. i think that would have really salutary effects. >> fair enough. senator mike bennet, democrat from colorado. >> have a great holiday, chuck. >> you too, stay safe on the

trail. >> thanks, chuck. >> up ahead, impeachment. it's historic and yet it hasn't changed a thing. (woman) when you take align,

you have the support of a probiotic and the gastroenterologists who developed it. (vo) align helps to soothe your occasional digestive upsets 24/7 with a strain of bacteria you can't get anywhere else. (woman) you could say align puts the "pro" in probiotic. so where you go, the pro goes. (vo) go with align.

the pros in digestive health. and try align gummies. with prebiotics and probiotics to help support digestive health.

strategy for the senate trial. >> we think that what they did is wrong. we think that what they did is unconstitutional. and the senate is very, very capable. we have great senators. republican senators. >> welcome back. that was president trump this afternoon in his first public comments on impeachment since the house's vote yesterday. you heard him there talking about a potential senate impeachment trial. c comes as lawmakers clash over what that trial is going to look like. for more, kimberly atkins. headed over to the american enterprise institute and msnbc analyst, howard fineman.

k kimberly, this is the definition of trial balloon. right? nancy pelosi threw it out there. didn't let others define what it could mean. she simply said i'm not ready type of thing. what do you sense the reception's been? >> i was just thinking less than a year ago when there was all these questions about whether she was right to be speaker of the house. now, you hear -- >> the michael bennet. oh, nancy pelosi. whatever she says goes. nobody crosses her now. yeah. >> she led this process through. got it over the finish line. and she's still wielding her power that she still has until she sends those articles over with that last message to mitch mcconnell saying, you know, you still have to deal with me before we move forward. now, how long this lasts, we don't know because there is this pressure from democrats as well. democrats have been making this argument that there is an urgency. that the reason we had to impeach was because the president is continuing to -- to do these unconstitutional things. so if that's their argument, it really undermines it to say, well, no, let's put the brakes on it now. but so far, she is a foe to

president trump, who's seen as pretty effective. >> howard, i want to step back. if you are a historian of this stuff and you sort of like the idea of what's -- legislative leaders. how do they exert power? you got to say mitch mcconnell and nancy pelosi as a pair. first of all, formidable on their own. formidable against each other. you don't have a pairing this savvy going at each other in some time. i mean, it -- it -- >> they're good. they're good. and mcconnell this morning in his speech, i call him old pappy procedure. he was making all the procedural arguments. exactly the reverse of all the arguments he made during clinton, obviously. but he made a couple of clever points. on the history. which is, there isn't a criminal statute mentioned. that was his big thing for the republicans. and -- and -- and also they didn't -- dems didn't go to the courts first. but what really struck me was that mitch mcconnell did not

spend one instant defending donald trump's behavior in any way. so he was all senate procedure. and nancy pelosi's going to try to challenge him on all that. and on that point, back in clinton's time, they did have witnesses. videotaped presentation by witnesses. >> you know, matthew, josh holmes was a long-time advisor to mitch mcconnell on the political side. implied this in one of the quotes i read this morning, which is you might be doing mitch mcconnell a favor by not sending this over right away. he does not enjoy this. he's got seven sitting senators in particular in six states. georgia. let's put up that full screen here. we know who these senators are. instead of the house democrats in trump district, you now have the vulnerable senate republicans in purple states. and so there's part of me thinking why, as josh holmes said, wait you pulled the pin on the grenade and you're not throwing it. >> deterrents is holding at risk something of value to the

opposition. well, in this case, what is valuable to mcconnell? >> i don't know. >> so i think josh is correct. i think mcconnell be happy for the trial never to occur. i also think there are several democratic senators, who as you suggested in your interview with michael bennet, would like the trial to be over with so that they can go on the campaign trail and actually try to win the voters' judgment in november. so pelosi's move here baffles me. but i assume it's just this kind of shadow dancing that always precedes some type of deal. >> they want -- the democrats want to get some chance to affirmatively make their case. >> right. >> on the floor of the senate when people are watching. because most of it will be televised. not necessarily all because during clinton's time, some of it was done behind closed doors. but they want another chance in the circumstances of the senate to lay out their case.

and they feel they need some witnesses to do it. >> but the managers are the ones who do that. i mean, in the absence of witnesses. there were not in-person witnesses, as howard mentioned, there were three videotaped depositions. what's interesting to me is the house hasn't appointed any managers and i wonder if there's politicking on the d side in the house about who do we want to make our case? >> i would assume part of that has to do with are you looking for impeachment managers that are presenters? are you looking for impeachment managers that need to do some cross-examining, right? we don't know what their job is going to be. and i guess, by the way, i can't remember who does the witnesses? managers or senators? i think both. >> that's part of this whole process that pelosi is saying. we can't make these choices unless we know what we are going to get on the other side. she does not have an unlimited amount of time to make some -- >> she really doesn't have that much leverage. mcconnell didn't have much leverage over the house rules. >> to make the best point they possibly can, what else do they

have to lose? it seems the result will be predetermined. but at least at the very least, you have the opportunity to make this case not just to the senate. but also, to the american people. and to these vulnerable senators. >> i don't mean to be asso-- ha already eliminated the first week of january, which all of a sudden squeezes us slightly closer. if they haven't sent them over today, house is in recess. earliest they can send them over is the 6th. okay. so we've already now lost a week in january. i would argue. >> well, without getting too obsessed with the clock and the calendar. >> obsessed is not the right word. but it is significant. >> it does matter. and i think this is an interesting -- a week or two when people are going to go home, members are going to go home. the country is going to kind of exhale to the extent they've been following this. >> michael bennet was like everybody needs to take a timeout. >> he's right. >> and take a breather here. >> yeah. >> but let's not forget the momentous nature of what happened last night. and the democrats would like to

re-energize after the new year that sense of momentous history being made. and at least the scolding, if not the banishing, of donald trump. and they feel they've made that point once. they want to make it again in january. >> here's always the unknown wild card. donald trump doesn't want to stay quiet for two weeks. and you never know. >> i also think he feels public opinion has shifted slightly against impeachment when you look at the real clear politics average of polls. >> it's like a point or two but yeah. >> but that's enough, right? and if he feels the momentum's that way, then he want toss kind of charge ahead and make his case. >> pause it here, guys. stick around. coming up, going to do some 2020 politics. democrats are getting ready for their last debate of the year. and their first debate since the president was impeached. plus, got some new nbc news/wall street journal poll numbers on the race itself. that's next. al poll numbers on the race itself. that's next. before we talk about tax-smart investing, what's new?

-audrey's expecting... -twins! ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. [ "turn around, look at me" ♪ there is someone ♪ walking behind you ♪ turn around ♪ look at me ♪ there is someone ♪ look at me i receivelize travel rewards.

going new places! going out for a bite! going anytime. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. for a limited time, get a outb4-course meal your holidays even better! starting at $15.99. treat yourself to the perfect gift today, because the aussie 4-course won't last long! and now, get a $10 gift with every $50 in gift cards. 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. asbut when your team is always dealing with device setups, app updates, and support calls... you can never seem to get anywhere. that's why dell technologies created unified workspace, powered by vmware. ♪ a revolutionary solution that lets you deploy, manage, support and secure all your devices from the cloud. so you can stop going in circles, and start moving forward. that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar.

it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. welcome back. tonight in 2020 vision, almost exactly 24 hours after the house voted to impeach president trump, the democratic presidential candidates will be on the debate stage in los angeles. and according to our latest poll, democratic primary voters. they want those candidates tonight and what they're being -- addressing tonight. they're kind of torn on how the party should counter president trump. our polls showed an almost even split among democratic primary

voters who want to focus more on impeaching and removing president trump right now versus those who want to keep the focus on defeating the president at the ballot box in november. if you dig into the numbers even more, you see a pretty interesting demographic split on this question. support focusing right now on impeachment is highest among women. those who identify add quote strong democrats, non-white members of the party, and those 50 years and over. that's also the preference of democratic voters who tell us they are backing joe biden. that's right. the biden and impeachment constituencies are nearly the same. on the other hand, support for folks defeating president trump in november is highest among men. those who are not strong democrats, white members of the democratic party, and people under the age of 50. coming up, we've got more numbers from that poll. plus, we will head out to tonight's debate site in los angeles to take a look at how the candidates on that stage plan to dance in and around impeachment. we'll be right back after this.

(children playing) (dog barking) ♪ (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. with retirement planning and advice for what you need today and tomorrow. because when you're with fidelity, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. because when you're with fidelity, we don't see who you're against, through or for,rs, whether tomorrow will be light or dark, all we see in you, is a spark

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

while the focus of the political world in washington has been on the i word, impeachment. there is a democratic primary campaign going on. and to prove it, we've got a new "wall street journal" poll numbers. take a look. joe biden back to being the front-runner in the democratic race followed by bernie sanders, who is back to being number two. elizabeth warren, now in third. lost a little bit of ground. followed by pete buttigieg, amy klobuchar, michael bloomberg, and andrew yang. folks, 2020 democrats have campaigned nearly an entire year and the only major thing that has changed and the emergence of pete buttigieg. joining me now from los angeles, the site of tonight's democratic debate, ali vitali. still with us here, kimberly, matthew, and howard. so, ali, i've -- part of me thought these candidates all secretly hoped that labor dispute would kill this debate. simply because i think this feels like a debate where you can only do harm that there

isn't -- it is hard to do positive. that said, have you discerned a strategy tonight for anybody? >> i just think you have to look at the stage and realize that of the seven candidates on there, and that's the least number that we've ever had together on one stage throughout this entire primary process. the stakes are different for the core four i would argue. bernie sanders, joe biden, elizabeth warren, pete buttigieg. and then the other three candidates on the stage. if you're in that core four, who we have seen kind of having popcorn moments over the course of the last few months. be it in viral media cycles or just in terms of them popping to the top of the field in polls. then you need to, if you're pete buttigieg, continue the momentum. elizabeth warren, kind of stop the bleeding a little bit and reenergize your campaign. so for those four people on the stage, that's their stakes. for the three people on the stage, yang, steyer, and klobuchar, who need to at this point take advantage of the fact that the field is whittling and the strategy for someone like amy klobuchar has been stay in

this race long enough so that once voters see less candidates up there, you can give yourself a good, solid pitch and they'll pick up what you're putting down. so now is really the time for someone like her to have a big moment on the stage. and if you look at it, amy klobuchar has actually been pretty adept at making something out of these debates. she's been able to have fundraising milestones that she's reached which have allowed her to not just stay in the race but build out on the ground. so the stakes are different for everyone on that stage. especially, if you're a senator because the other i word, if you are a 2020 democrat, yeah it's impeachment but it's also iowa. that's a place they may not be seeing in the future if you're a senator having to be in washington. >> i'm curious, a lot of times campaigns telegraph what they may want their news to be out of this debate. you getting a sense of that? >> i'm not necessarily getting is a sense of that. i really do think when you say it's do no harm, it's make a strong enough, lasting impression that if you are a senator, you can potentially last going through this impeachment process. or if you're anyone else on that

stage, going into the holidays as people go home and start talking about politics with their families, they're starting to make decisions in these early states. just make a good enough lasting impression. do no harm in what you're saying, which is that make a strong enough impression. i also think when you talk about impeachment, watching how it manifests on the stage tonight is going to be interesting. interested to see what those points are tonight. >> howard, on paper, it means we should all expect a sort of -- i don't want to say rah-rah debate but they probably will pull a punch if thinking about launching one. >> i think so because i think that the vote last night and it is historic. let's not forget that. i mean, lining up the newspapers this morning. those are big headlines. that is going to permeate this thing tonight. and put it in the shadow. and, to me, the only person of interest after last night, temporarily, is joe biden.

because this was all about the impeachment vote was all about the attack on biden's family in the ukraine. that's what the substance of the impeachment thing is. so what he has to say about it will be of interest because it's part of the impeachment story. and larger point is, if donald trump wanted to pick out joe biden because intentionally either because he was afraid of biden or because he wanted to set biden up because he thought he was the best guy to attack. well, be careful what you wish for. who knows? >> top priority to attack biden tonight? >> if you're a democrat. yeah. you know, the big takeaway for me from the past year is how little the debates have mattered in this primary, right? i mean, as you point out, we're basically where we began. with biden and bernie and pete's rise, especially in the early states. but what i think democratic voters are looking at, rather than debate performances, are issue positions and electability. and on medicare for all, i think

has been a loser for the two liberal senators. >> okay. you say the debates haven't had an impact. i would argue that if the debates haven't had an impact, it's been on the entire democratic party taking a huge step back from medicare for all. >> sure. right. but also, though, the confusion of warren and harris came after the debates. right? >> true. no doubt. but it did help sort of accelerate that, whoa. >> then there's the electability question. and i don't think any of the challengers to biden have been able to dent this perception that he's the best one to run against trump. >> i'll be honest, in an electability, like, question, how do you get that out of a debate? i think it's an impossible -- it's unknowability. >> i think electability is built into who you want to vote for. right. in some ways, really problematic ways, we've referred to it. and i think in this sense, right, look, tonight i think howard is right. everybody is going to be looking at joe biden because he is a central figure in the impeachment. and also, so far on the campaign trail, he hasn't answered

questions about it very well. and so if he comes tonight and he can't clearly explain, put to rest any questions about his son's involvement in burisma. and be able to make an effective case on why this impeachment is important and look presidential while doing it, that's going to be a big problem for him. >> the sensational thing would be if other democrats decided somehow to -- >> i don't see that happening. >> i cannot see that happening. >> ali vitali, are you getting a sense at all that the bernie and warren camps are starting to eye each other with a little skepticism yet? or are they still going to be team -- team progressive? >> i still think you're going to have a little bit of team progressive. but as one progressive democrat pointed out to me several months ago, this idea that they can differentiate between themselves without attacking the other. because at the end of the day, on medicare for all, for example, elizabeth warren did come out in a different place than bernie sanders did. in a place that he doesn't necessarily agree with the what i she got there. so i think those differences exist. but i'm not sure that we'll hash

them out in the weeds just yet because you still have the majority, frankly, of the people on that stage against the idea of medicare for all. i'm not sure it makes sense to start breaking that down quite yet. >> yeah. i will say this on the -- if there is a way to make an electability case at a debate, no one could -- needs it more than bernie sanders because he actually has an opportunity because he seems to be getting his groove back. getting his base back. if he could ever prove electability. >> we might hear about wine cellars tonight. >> okay. it is l.a. ali vitali, enjoy having a debate. and before a normal dinner time since you're out west. enjoy that. we won't. we'll have to eat our dinner and some midnight snack. kimberly, matthew, and howard. one more round with you guys. the slow death of decency and the everyday degradation that shouldn't be every day. 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.

at to cover the essentialsyou have in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. because when you're ready for what comes next, the only direction is forward.

and i approve this message. climate is the number one priority. i would declare a state of emergency on day one. congress has never passed an important climate bill, ever. this is a problem which continues to get worse. i've spent a decade fighting and beating oil companies, stopping pipelines, stopping fossil fuel plants, ensuring clean energy across the country. how are we going to pull this country together? we take on the biggest challenge in history, we save the world and we do it together. the zip code you're born into can determine your future. your school. your job. your dreams.

your problems. (indistinct shouting) but at the y, we create opportunities for everyone, no matter who you are or where you're from. for a better us, donate to your local y today. welcome back. tonight i'm obsessed with crossing the line. as william hertz character said in broadcast news, it's hard not to cross the line, they just keep moving the little sucker. that's my concern. not that it's hard not to cross the line, but that our politics become so pugilistic, the line has been moved so far it might not exist at all. consider the president taking aim at democratic congresswoman debbie dengal and her late husband. >> debbie, i didn't give them

the b treatment. i didn't give him the c or the d. she calls me up. it's the nicest thing that's ever happened, thank you so much. john would be so thrilled. he's looking down he would be so thrilled. maybe he's looking up. i don't know. >> yeah, that was the president of the united states implying the longest ever serving member of congress is in hell. that casual cruelty is what i'm concerned about because it isn't just that the president attacks his political opponents, it's that he casually attacks less known people, civil servants, folks who aren't political opponents, folks who don't have a way to fight back, who aren't in the arena, if you will. >> i was never a fan of john mccain and i never will be. i'm not a fan. he was horrible. even the kind of funeral that he wanted, i didn't get thank you. that's okay. that guy's got a serious weight problem.

go home. start exercising. hunter, you know nothing about energy. you know nothing about anything frankly. hunter, you're a loser. lisa page and her wonderful lover. i love you peter. i love you too, lisa. lisa, i love -- lisa, lisa, oh, go god, i love you lisa. >> look at that. consider this list of many of the people president trump has insulted on at this time twitter alone since he was elected. we removed the names of u.s. politicians, members of the press, there were a lot of those too, we took out all the repeats because we had to draw line. that leaves us with two questions. when it comes to basic human decency, where is the line and who gets to draw it? before we talk about tax-smart investing, what's new?

-audrey's expecting... -twins! ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. it's an honor to tell you that [ applause ] thank you. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ 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. what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of.

he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing.

i just think sometimes people need to remember that we're all human, and you know, one of the -- i don't like the tone of the rhetoric in this country right now. i've said it many times you know it's been one of the things i've worked on for years. i think we need to get back to a time of civility. you can disagree, but you can do it agree bli. i don't -- i don't know why he decided to do what he did last night. but to say it didn't work would not be the truth. >> welcome back, that debbie dengal, responding to comments president trump made about her late husband last night. matthew, i have this theory that

actually this is -- if trump doesn't win re-election, it's going to be due to things like this and that he exhausts his own supporters, he exhausts the country. they're like i stood by you but i can't do another four years of this. >> the big question is independent voters who backed donald trump in 2016. >> reluctantly. >> mainly because they thought the alternative would be worse. that's the audience trump has to make enroads with to win re-election. comments like this don't help. even republicans, while they support this president, they wish the tweeting would stop. >> they rationalized everything he's done except that. >> in the absence of this personal behavior, you would have a record that would easy go to re-election considering the state of the economy and the other accomplishments in office. >> leaving aside the personality

that drives him to be cruel -- >> i don't think you or anybody else has enough degrees to figure out why he does this. >> i'm leaving the psychology side and looking at the politics. he wants to be in wrestling terms the heel. >> right. >> in professional wrestling, there's a bad guy that everybody just has to come out to see, that has to pay money to see. and he's going to run this campaign as the renegade president. he has to always be the renegade. and he will be the -- run as the renegade president which is a contradiction in terms, but that's what he's going to do. >> but that works when he has an opponent in makes sense. in this case, the only reason that debbie became his opponent in this is he happened to be standing in michigan and she happened to just have voted to impeach him. he attacks her in a way that attacks her late husband. >> i'm not defending what he's doing. >> i understand that.

i understand that. >> it's a piece of the nature of his appeal, what he thinks is the nature of appeal to the people that voted for him last time. >> by the way, if you notice, we actually as collectively as a media, we don't cover these everyday degradations the way we used to. part of me wonders has that lack of coverage helped normalize it for him? are we making a mistake. it's almost as if we got burned out. >> i actually think with a lot of -- you know, there's an expression online. don't feed the trolls. >> yeah. >> so, sometimes when you don't pay attention, then that actually minimize the comments. >> but at the same time, donald trump proved he was this way before he was elected with the khan family. to say people who voted for him couldn't have known about this -- >> they did vote for him and they'll do it again. >> exactly. >> he thinks it works. it worked last time. he thinks it's going to work again. the badder he is, the better it

is in his mind. >> we are in the process -- and i'm going to have to leave it here. you're going to hear it in 15 seconds. mitch mcconnell is giving an update on where things stand. i'm going to leave it to ari. that's it for me at "meet the press daily." ari melber, you got the breaking news. >> thank you, sir. good to see you, chuck. as we come on the air, the house and senate are jousting over what to do about last night. speaker pelosi clearly trying to rattle the white house with a new curveball after impeaching president trump. we have reporting from an insider who can speak direct i will to the closed door meetings to pelosi's strategy as he formally threatens to withhold the impeachment from the senate. tonight we have a special report on what it would look like to put donald trump on trial. this is a breakdown i can tell