good evening and welcome to politics nation. tonight's lead, the count down is on. in just two days, the house of representatives will convene for the first time for the 116th congress second session. and all eyes will be on the democrat and republican leadership to see how they will solve the issue of impeachment that has been in a state of stand-off, a crisis mode, an impasse, a political crisis. all that with the iowa caucuses just four weeks away and democratic candidates on the campaign trail continuing to push to convince voters to pick them out of the pack. a pack that has become much less diverse recently. and later on in the show, is there greater tolerance for

intolerance under president trump? and does it lead to the rise in anti-semitic hate crimes? but we start with the question that has been on my mind since the u.s. attack that killed a top iranian commander that was ordered by president trump. and that is, if, as the president claims, there was a clear and imminent danger, why were top democrats in the house not notified in advance of that threat? one thing for sure, the killing caused a massive outpouring of tens of thousands of people in iran mourning the death of that country's top military general by the u.s.. and last night, trump tweeted out a harsh message to iran by threatening to destroy their cultural sites if iran attempts to hit the u.s. back for the

killing of the general. remember, targeting, bombing and destroying cultural sites is a war crime directly violating the haig convention. so we start tonight with the dramatic unfolding political aftermath from all of this attack and all the unanswered questions. so joining me to do that, two political strategists, democrat lori watkins and republican rick tyler. lori, let me start with you. if we were in imminent danger, why would the president not have informed the group of eight that we were in imminent danger? it would seem to me to be the normal course of action in such a crisis that was imminent, that he would call the group of eight in, forget about partisan politics.

this is something traditionally done, and say, we have an imminent problem here that i have to make a move. >> thanks for having me on, rev. unfortunately, members of congress shouldn't be too surprised at what has unfolded, specifically to iran. and i mention that because just last month before members of congress went home for recess, the ndaa, the national defense authorization act, was signed into law by the president and that was voted on by members of congress. you had 41 democratic members who voted against that because amendments such as the language that was inevitably stripped out of the ndaa, this amendment language put authorization in there for the president to have to go to congress to get authorization before committing a strike, committing troops, deploying troops out into theater. he did not do that. he, according to law, the ndaa that just passed, he did not need to do that so that's

exactly what needs to happen immediately, is congress needs to not just continue griping about not being informed. they need to put their foot to the gas pedal when it comes to going back into session next week and making sure that this issue is addressed, that we address that the president -- there is language in that authorization act that actually allows this president to do this, and we need to fix that so we can fix the powers of war. >> rick, if we were in imminent danger, i want to drill down on this and i hear what lori is saying around the nda. if we were in imminent danger, then how could killing one general stop us from imminent danger? he was immediately replaced. what would ever plans put us in a state of imminent danger could have been carried out anyway? it would have had to involve more than one man. how does killing one man take us out of imminent danger? it just doesn't make sense to

me. >> well, it doesn't make sense because -- you're right, taking out kazqassem soleimani doesn't take us out of imminent danger. they talked about killing of soleimani doesn't mention imminent danger. it was only later they talked about imminent danger and there was an imminent plan. but if there was an imminent plan, those cells that were activated, iranian militias would still be in place. maybe they are still in place or would have been still in place, and the american people have a right to know what kind of imminent danger our interests, our troops overseas are in for the president to take this kind of action. >> both of you, i want you to listen to secretary of state mike pompeo this morning when he was asked about the president's threat to commit war crimes by targeting iranian cultural sites. >> chuck, the american people should know that we have

prepared for this, that we are ready -- >> we're going to -- >> that our responses are lawful, and that the president will take every action necessary to respond should iran decide to escalate. we hope that they don't. we have communicated clearly and crisply to them with respect what it is we have an as an expectation. and we have communicated clearly and crisply what we will do in spobs if they choose another path. >> lori, we are hearing the president now. we've shown the tweet saying they are going after cultural sites and other things, not that we're going after cells that were part of this imminent danger, not that we're going after locations, but that if you in any way retaliate, we're going after everything, including cultural sites. this is, in many ways, hurts the image of the united states around the world because we're talking war crimes here. >> this is absolutely outrageous. this is absolutely outrageous

that this president is dictating foreign policy through way of tweet, that he has not consulted with allies in the region, let alone allies around the world, and that he has still not consulted with members of congress. consulting with one person, lindsey graham, is not consulting with members of congress. this president needs to start communicating. he needs to start releasing the information which is evidence as to why this president made this decision to -- to take an aggressive action like he did in taking out the commanding general there. >> now, rick, when we look at the fact that we now have a situation where the president of the united states has made this personal call himself to kill the general soleimani and then follow-up, no one is a sympathizer of the general. he was a bad actor. had all kinds of blood on his

hands. but we're talking about the act, and we're talking about the fact that now we are upping the ante, talking about war crimes. he, when he took office, one of the first things he did, was to take the united states out of the 2015 pact, the iran nuclear pact that was negotiated under president obama. had that stayed in place, do you think we would be sitting here tonight not knowing if we're going to see retaliation, not knowing if we could possibly be even in the brink of a war? >> no, rev. but, look, there are different views about how to handle iran and the middle east in general and, in my view, they're rational views. but president trump campaigned on one of those views. and one of those views was to get the united states out of the middle east. >> correct. >> and he attempted to do that when he did that by abandoning our allieds the kurds, to allow the turks to essentially annihilate them. and now we're adding 3500 more

troops to get into iraq because you talk about the jcpoa, which was the joint agreement that we had. >> right. >> remember, wars are avoided by building coalitions. that's what would happen. people can disagree whether the jcpoa was a good or bad deal. i'm not a big fan of it, but it was the status quo, and the status quo kept iran in check. they were obliging by the jcpoa as far as i can tell and our allies were all in ask you port of it. that is was the status quo. that's what the united states agreed to and it should have been left alone. so this makes trump -- despite the fact that soleimani -- and he has a right to take out soleimani. that's the way the law works. was it justified? probably, but set aside the imminent threat which i think needs to be explained, soleimani as you say was a bad guy. he's gone, now no one cares -- people care. we don't care in terms of we're safer without him. but the point is what is trump's

foreign policy? it's incoherent. he runs on the fact that we're supposed to get out of these foreign wars, endless wars, he talked about them and he's been provocative toward iran, bringing us closer to war with iran, not further away. >> now, we have seen, and i played it, lori, on this show last night where the president had once said that barack obama as president was going to start a war with iraq because his poll numbers was down and that's the only way he could get reelected. there are those who wonder whether the president is playing politics himself now because he planted this in the public mind about barack obama and has not been very clear on what the imminent danger was that caused him to call for the assassination of soleimani. >> trump has not released any information about the justification for why he decided to commit this very aggressive

act towards a leader from another nation. but to talk about how i think that the, the situation that's playing out is going to be effective or affect elections and primaries here within our own country and our election system, i will go back to the announcement earlier that the rate of oil has surged today just as talks of the war. let's not forget the most important factor. the military families, they are the ones that are dealing with this new announcement that 3500 troops have been deployed. just after coming after new year holiday, folks were visiting with family, only to find out that they had three days before they had to report for duty and that they were going overseas and they were being deployed. so that's how i think this is going to affect the 2020 election because as tyler said, my counterpart said that the trump ran on the fact that he was going to bring these troops

home, that he was not going to start war, that we had enough war, enough blood shed on our hands, that america was spending too much -- investing too much in war and that's exactly what this president is doing. >> and that has been your point, rick, that he campaigned saying we'd be pulling out. and now we start the year with 3500 troops being cesent into t middle east which is absolutely the opposite of what he campaigned on and promised. >> look, rev, we can't always predict the actions of our enemies. and if we are attacked, we do have to respond. but that's not what happened here. we had the status quo, jcpoa. it was going fine as far as anyone could tell. it wasn't ideal, but it was going fine. trump ripped it up unilaterally against the wishes of all our allies and destabilized the region, then he put in sanctions against iran which did have a crippling effect on iran. but again, it destabilized iran. iran struck back, we struck

back, we hit soleimani, they'll hit us again. i doubt they want to go to war with us. maybe it will be a cyberattack, but it will do something. it's escalating -- we're bringing more troops. all his actions belie what he promised his supporters what he would do. and elections are based on what candidates say they're going to do. and trump said that he was going to end these endless wars. he's done the exact opposite. >> all right. we'll have more with lori watkins and rick tyler later in the show. up next, why are anti-semitic hate crimes on the rise? is there greater tolerance for intolerance under president trump? but first, my colleague richard lui with today's other top stories. richard? >> hey, rev. these are some of the stories we're watching this hour. one u.s. service member and two department of defense contractors are among those killed after al-shabaab extremists overran a key

military base in kenya. that base is used by u.s. counterterrorism forces. it's the first-known al-shabaab attack against u.s. military in the country. five attacksers were killed. leaders from the extremist group says the assault has nothing to do with the current situation in the middle east. five people were killed and dozens more hospitalized in an early-morning crash on the pennsylvania turnpike. officials say it was a chain reaction crash involving a tour bus, three tractor trailers and passenger car. the victims range in age from 7 to 52. more than two years of a wave of assault sexual allegations, disgraced harvey weinstein will start a trial. weinstein's trial on rape and other charges. stick around. more politics nation with revere reverend al sharpton after the break. eak. now with boneless wings.

only at applebee's. 1 in 5 people you meet wear yeah. that many! but right now, is not the time to talk about it. so when you're ready, search 'my denture care'. poligrip and polident. fixed. fresh. and just between us.

i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424.

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

comes back, i'm going to propose a new law for the state of new york that calls this hate what it is. it is domestic terrorism. these are terrorist and it should be punished as such. >> governor andrew cuomo speaking to new yorkers at this morning's no hate, no fear solidarity march. the event was planned following a rash of anti-semitic incidents in the tri-state area including the shooting at a kosher grocery

store in jersey city and the attack in new york. but it's not just new york. president anti-defamation league has recorded nearly 1900 anti-semitic attacks in the u.s. in the year 2018 and 2019 is likely to be on pace. joining me now, jonathan greenblat, c.e.o. and director of the antidefamation league. there is a national rise in hate crimes and anti-semitic attacks, whether it's southern california, pittsburgh, charlottesville, and particularly concerning to me has been what has happened in the last couple of weeks in new york. as you know, some of us stood national action network, rabbi snead and others to say we must condemn this.

something that i learned 30 years ago we should have been more forward in how we dealt with a situation in the crown heights section of brooklyn. we didn't do a lot of things people accuse, but we're going to do more and we're going to make sure we do that this time. this is a national problem. what is the basis of this? >> i think you're right to point out it is a national problem. so from 2015 to 2018, we have had a doubling of anti-semitic incidents in the country. here in new york, there was a 55% increase in 2018. and i think in 2019 it will be even greater. and we've already seen the stats from the n.y.p.d. can you imagine that if you total up all the hate crimes committed against all the minorities in the city of new york, the greatest city in the world, again, arab americans, muslim americans, african americans, asian americans, et cetera, add that up, it's still less than the hate crimes against juice in 2019. >> why do you think this is happening? >> i think there are a few things at play here. one, i think we are in a charged environment.

people are on edge. and in those moments when leaders fail to leap in and interrupt intolerance when it happens, extremists fill the vacuum and they exploit that anxiety and find someone to blame for the problems and that's almost always the juice. secondly, i'll be honest, we have leaders on both sides who have almost weaponized anti-semitism for partisan gain. so when you traffic in conspiracy theories and you accuse, let's say george soros of paying migrants to cross the border, or when you accuse juice of buying congress saying that's all they're interested in, these kinds of situations allow people on both sides to use anti-semitism as a political weapon. when that happens, we all lose. >> even leaders, we may have had tensions in the past -- >> right. >> -- must come forward in an aggressive manner. >> that's why what you are saying is so important. we can all do better to call this out. today, i must say it was really inspiring to be on that bridge. so it was inspiring because you

had jews, orthodox and reform, jews of color and jews by choice. upwards of 15,000 people. >> some with the national action network said there were 15,000 people. >> you had not only jews marching but non-jews, a seventh-day adventist minister, to see these inter faith, inter group connections all saying whether you wear a black hat or long coat, that is an attack on a jewish person is an attack on every one of us. anti-semitism is anti-american. that is incredibly inspiring for a jewish community feeling vulnerable now. >> you can't fight hate in your community without fighting hate in every community. hate then becomes normalized. >> um-hmm. >> and i think that it's important that everyone stands up, not for your silo, but stands up when anybody feels a victim of hate. >> this is really key.

we're not going to solve anti-semitism with a single march. we're not going to end hate with one day. but it takes all of us to show the courage to call it out on our own side and to stand with others even when it's inconvenient, even when it doesn't seem necessary. that's when we can really show what's so great about this country. that's why i think governor cuomo had it right. anti-semitism is anti-american. attacks, hate-based bigotry, that attacks at the core of what makes us american and it's got to stop. >> now, when we look at the fact that -- and i saw you there with the governor. i think you were the one with the shades on. >> that was me. >> i wanted to say that for your son. >> thank you. >> but i wanted to point out that one of my concerns also is that our political leaders have to also join in as civil rights leaders and others and aggressively watch what they say. and mrs. king 21 years ago, coretta scott king, got on me

said, you're taone, your rhetoric -- forget what they say. your tone, your rhetoric is important. i raised this last night and i wanted to bring this example to you. that is when you looked at the study of where "the washington post" said the counties that hosted a 2016 trump rally saw a 226% increase in hate crimes. now, no one's saying that he went and personally incited incidents. >> right. >> but if the climate coming out of your rallies increased this in counties, shouldn't that be of concern how he talks and what he says because you can't be part of setting a climate that people with mental issues or other issues, or just haters, feel like they can somehow exercise their hate? >> i think it's important to say our collective immune system gets weakened when our leaders traffic in tropes and stereotypes. i don't care whether you're the president of the united states

or the president of a local school board. you're a member of the house of representatives or member of the local city council. we need people in positions of authority to step up and stop using hate for partisan gain. so the president's got the biggest megaphone in the country, maybe in the world. he can show leadership on this and stop this once and for all. and then at the federal, state and local level, other electeds should follow his lead. it's important you bring this up because we're getting into this election cycle. >> right. >> i'm not naive. it could get ugly. i will tell you right now we need all our political candidates to not allow people to demon eyes the jewish people or the state stabbed up when they hear stereotypes to stand up and say no more. >> we should do it across the board with racism, homophobia, anti-semitism when we see it on the rise is even when the news cycle goes somewhere else. >> when the cameras are off is when it matters the most. and i expect all leaders will do that.

>> jonathan greenblat, thank you for being with me tonight. >> thank you, reverend. >> coming up, which states propose to celebrate black history month, highlighting mostly white people? the answer next. since my dvt blood clot

i wasn't sure... was another around the corner? or could things go a different way? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot. almost 98 percent of patients on eliquis didn't experience another, and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be worth waiting for. ask your doctor about eliquis.

for this week's gotcha, i'm taking aim at the state of wisconsin. well, maybe not the whole state, but there's a lot of nonsense happening in america's dairy land lately. let's start with their flagship school, the university of wisconsin madison. in a state where almost 7% of residents are black, the university had just about 1,000 black undergrads enrolled this fall out of a total of 30,000 students. this fall the student home coming committee posted, then deleted, a home coming hype video in which every featured student was white. this despite spending at least an hour filming with alpha cappa alpha, a historically black

sorority. students responded on campus. but their efforts were met in some cases with derision. one telling "the new york times" that the upset students of color could leave if they didn't like the way things were. certainly the university needs to do a better job of teaching racial justice and empathy to their students, but perhaps those students are just following the lead of white republicans in the wisconsin statehouse, one of whom suggested the state celebrate the annual black history month by honoring a list of -- wait for it -- mostly white people, six white abolitionists, four black slaves and unnamed members of a local native american tribe. perhaps worse, the lawmaker said his intent was to appeal to his white republican colleagues who

have tried to disrupt the observation of black history month in the past. i cannot believe this lead saying, but black history month is meant to honor the historical contributions of, well, black people. there's nothing stopping any legislator from recognizing white abolitionists and allies during any of the other 11 months of the year. but instead, the wisconsin gop would rather steal black people's thunder. i know you some wisconsinits refer to yourselves as cheese heads. but when it comes to race, maybe you could be a little less literal about it. i gotcha.

welcome back. we're less than one month away from the first votes being cast in the democratic presidential primary. this week the candidates released their last fund-raising totals before the iowa caucuses. senator bernie sanders is in the lead with $34.5 million, nearly 10 million more than his closest rival, pete buttiegieg, who raised almost 25 million. the other two front runners in the poll, former vice-president joe biden and senator elizabeth warren, were just behind with about 23 and 21 million

respectively. but no democrat was able to come close to the president's fourth quarter haul of $46 million. joining me now is new mexico representative deb holland, coe chair of the warren 2020 campaign. congresswoman, why do you think miss warren, senator warren, your candidate, has not raised the money she's raised in the last two quarters? >> well, you know, i raised -- i was out raising money this quarter, too. the fourth quarter is historically very -- it's a difficult quarter, right, because you have christmas and thanksgiving and all of that. >> it worked for bernie sanders. he raised $34 million. >> she did an amazing job, over $21 million. on the very last day of the quarter she raised $1.5 million. 4 million in the last week of

the quarter. i think she's doing a great job. this in spite of the fact her average donation is $23. she got almost a million donations this quarter. i think elizabeth warren is doing extremely well with her fund-raising and she'll keep it up. >> i noticed an article in "the new york times" -- i'm sorry, politico, she's going to move her wine cave offensive and stay above the fray style, which was her style as she was rising and became in the top one or two in some polls. the wine cave, of course, referring to her attack on former mayor pete buttigieg raising money in the wine cave with the big spenders or the elite. do you think her attacks, her coming off of her kind of above the fray style has hurt her?

>> well, i don't think it's actually hurt her. i think it's a good idea to focus on what she's done so well, which is to connect with voters. she -- you know, she often talks about the number of selfies that she takes with folks at her campaign rallies. that gives her an opportunity to connect with so many voters at every single rally she does. she does that so well. connecting with voters, talking about the things she'll do as president. for working families me, a single momon fo single mom on food stamps, she does well connecting with voters. she's running a terrific campaign. she'll do quite well, i think, working hard for every single vote. you know, i've been there. i've seen it. i've been to south carolina. i've been to iowa on the

campaign trail. and she does connect with voters extremely well and that's her -- you know, that's a good thing for her. >> something interesting today. listen to what senator elizabeth warren said this morning, questioning the wisdom and the timing of the president's latest escalation in iran. >> we are not safer because donald trump had soleimani killed. we are much closer to the edge of war. the question is why now? why not a month ago, why not a month from now. the administration can't keep its story straight. it points in all different directions. >> now, she is verbalizing what a lot of people including me are questioning, on why now, what was the imminent danger. do you think she will bring this into the debates in a few days in iowa, into the iowa caucuses

and be a part of raising these questions until we get answers on what was the need for the timing? no one questions the bad actor that soleimani was, but why now? is this political, is this about the political race, is this about the pending senate trial? >> exactly. well, i think that's a question on a lot of people's minds. president trump, i wouldn't put anything past him. this decision that he made, it is absolutely made us less safe as a country. and i suspect that the next debate, there will be a lot of foreign policy in that debate a lot of foreign policy discussion. she's not the only one who is asking that question. i suspect there are americans all over the country who are saying why now. and i, i just -- i have felt

from the very beginning trump has led an extremely privileged life. he does whatever he wants. he doesn't listen to anybody. and so perhaps, yes, it turns out that he was at mar-a-lago during -- having a campaign meeting during the time he okayed the strike that killed the general. so, yes, we can all ask that question, and i think she's on point in raising that issue the way she did. >> julian castro withdrew from the race this week, which again brings down the numbers of people of color in this race. and when we look at the platform of candidates that started out very diverse, something the democratic party brags on, it is becoming less and less. how does the warren campaign

view that and what commitments to the communities of color, black community, latino community and others, would give the feeling that your candidate even though they don't see someone that looks like them on the stage, she understands their plight and knows firsthand how to deal with some of their unique differences in terms of the economical justice gaps based on race? >> thank you, reverend al, for raising that issue. as one of the first native american women elected to congress in the country's history, i am supporting senator warren for that reason. she fights for people like me. as i mentioned earlier, single mom, i have lived paycheck to paycheck almost my entire adult life. and i understand exactly what that's like.

she understands so much the disparity that's happening in our country right now between the rich and the poor and she has the policies. she has the know-how. she wants to make sure that working families have an opportunity to succeed. and when i look on the teenage her, those are the policies she's putting forth and those are the folks she's fighting for. i feel extremely comfortable knowing elizabeth warren is out there fighting for me and she's been doing that even before she was elected to the u.s. senate. so i feel very strongly that people of color can see a champion in her when they see her on that debate state of emergency. and i am positive that she is going to fight harder as time goes on. and as president she will know how to fix this broken system to make sure that people have an

opportunity to succeed in this country. >> all right, new mexico congress won deb holland, thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> let's bring our panel back of political strategists, democrat lori watkins and republican rick tyler. rick, with the iran issue now front and center in the minds of americans, on the democratic side, does this benefit joe biden that we're talking foreign affairs? who is the beneficiary politically of our having to even deal with whether or not we're going to war, how do we deal with iran or possible revenge or retaliation? does this fall more toward helping biden who seemed to have experience or no? i think the static analysis would be to help bide ebb because biden does have the mostly important policy experience. there aren't a lot of other actors on the stage who have foreign policy experience.

current be events and crises bring out leaders. currently biden's gotten the most mileage -- i'm speaking very politically raw here. yeah, he would have the advantage dealing with foreign policy because he can articulate a vision that's counter to donald trump's. donald trump's vision for foreign policy is come plily incoherent. if he can put together a coherent policy people can understand and support, any candidate who can do that would do well to do it. >> lori, you're a political strategist on the democratic side the. if you were running the campaign, could you say take this with a coherent strategy that would be showing the defense between them self were they to become president? >> i believe showing signs of

strength would not necessarily mean to be reactionary to show what has happened. flexing can happen through daily weekly messaging coming out of these campaigns. do find that there is an opportunity for pete buttiegieg, for vice-president biden, even for amy klobuchar to come out and speak on these experiences, lived experience. even though mayor pete didn't serve in the military for 15, 20 years. he served in the military. vice-president biden, decades, decades long experience negotiating with foreign leaders and being diligent and disciplined in the kind of behavior and professionalism that one needs to do this job effectively and be successful, not just for the american

people, but what's happening around the world and making our american people in the country safer here at home. >> i talked to the congressman about the lack of diversity that is increasing now among the democratic contenders, something that many of us wanted to see and something the dnc was happy and boastful about. now that we are getting a dwindling amount, does it put pressure on the person to have a person of color or black or latino or woman as a running mate? >> i think it does. you have to look at iowa, new hampshire, white majority states, large majorities. you also have to look at the fact the debate qualifications are to play in a pole. and i can agree with those qualifications but there's palomino been no polls.

there were two iowa polls, one south carolina polls. there's been six polls they include as qualifiers. to qualify in a national poll, it doesn't do you any good to campaign in iowa if they're calling people in idaho. and it only benefits millionaires and billionaires who are running, if i might sound like barnes for a second, and the establishment. so i think the dnc has to answer for that. >> lori, do you -- let me put it this way. when julian castro said we ought to change the calendar and not start the whole process for democratic nominee in iowa and new hampshire, which are clearly overwhelmingly white states. it does not reflect the democratic voting base. your reaction to what he said. >> well, i agree because you've seen states over the last few

years, maybe over the last decade. my home state of florida, for example, tried back in 2008, if you can remember, to -- which caused a whole situation with the dnc. but trying to move up that primary date. primary date. that caused some issue with hillary clinton and barack obama here in the state of florida. but that was the entire purpose, was states want to feel relevant. their voting bloc, their electorate wants to feel relevant, and they want to feel that they have some say in who that nominee is going to be. >> all right. laurie watkins and rick tyler, thank you both. we'll be right back. $12.99 all you can eat now with boneless wings. only at applebee's.

you likei sure do!ith us? my friends are getting healthier thanks to the breakthrough treatments discovered at st. jude. and we freely share our research to help save kids with cancer everywhere. s'more? s'more? i haven't had one yet! give thanks for the healthy kids in your life, donate now at stjude.org or shop wherever you see the st. jude logo. you ate them all! i did not. who, me? - do that are degrading?ideo tapes, film reels, or photos, legacybox professionally converts them to dvds, thumb drive, or the cloud. legacybox is simple and safe, with over half a million satisfied customers. visit legacybox.com today, and get 40% off.

americans come to lendingtree.com to compare and save on loans, credit cards and more! but with the new lending tree app you can see your full financial health, monitor your credit score, see your cash flow and find out how you can cut your monthly bills. download it now to see how much you can save.

stick with msnbc tonight. kasie hunt is back with the stacked lineup on caskasie dc. chris coons will be on the show to discuss how the president skirted congress to authorize the airstrikes in iraq. and potential procedure going forward. and maxine waters, chair of the financial services committee, will be live to discuss the latest in the impeachment standoff. that's all coming up later at

7:00 p.m. eastern right here on ms nbc. up next, my final thoughts. stay with us. so i know there's a big need for gas-x maximum strength. it works fast. relieving pressure, bloating, and discomfort before you know it. so no one needs to know you've got gas. gas-x

so no one needs to know you've got gas. the good news? our comfort lasts all day. the bad news? so does his energy. depend® fit-flex underwear offers your best comfort and protection guaranteed. because, perfect or not, life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®.

as the congress and senate comes back, there needs to be the question raised and the demand for answers. on why this president ordered the death of general soleimani.

no one argued he was responsible for deaths, blood on his hands, but the question was, what was the imminent danger you did not tell the group of eight, that you did not warn about if we were in such immediate and imminent dangero that you only told two or three republican leaders in the congress. or the senate. and what was the imminent danger that only one man taking him out would automatically wipe out the imminent danger? what about who would be part of that? what about the cells and where they would have been? he has been already replaced within 24 hours. why wouldn't the new general go forward with the same kind of strategy? president trump needs to have to answer. now, they will say there are things we can't divulge, but they must divulge them to the

head of the intelligence committee and congress. and the speaker. and those that have the authority in that group of eight to know what is imminent and what is not. that does it for me. thanks for watching. i'll see you back here next saturday at 5:00 p.m. eastern. up next, "meet the press" with chuck todd. this sunday, growing tensions. the u.s. kills a top iranian military commander, sparking fears of an all-out war. >> we took action last night to stop a war. we did not take action to start a war. >> the administration insists qasem soleimani was in the late stages of planning attacks on americans. >> last night was the time we needed to strike to make sure this imminent attack that he was working actively was disrupted. >> tens of thousands across iran gather to mourn soleimani as iran and president trump