sense of his candidacy, but i heard a lot of love for mayor pete, elizabeth warren, some folks who said they think biden is likely to be the nominee. while they showed up to hear from bloomberg, they were already sort of developed this affinity for another candidate. >> one of the big issues are about the obama voters that swung and voted for president trump. you have been doing deep dives into that. what are you hearing about how the obama turned trump voters feel like about somebody like mike bloomberg? >> other candidates in the race are shying away from winning back those voters. mike bloomberg is going hard after them thinking that is a winning strategy. i don't think it's wrong to not ignore those voters but instead of calling trump corrupt or dangerous or a liar, like we heard, he goes through a laundry list of promises that president trump made to these voters in 2016 that he hasn't been able to keep since he became president. that's an interesting way of showing these voters what president trump has done wrong and his shortcomings without bashing him in a way we hear

voters are sick of from democrats. >> thank you so much. great to see you here in new york. thank you very much to everyone. we will be reading axios am. sign up. that does it for us on this thursday morning. "morning joe" starts right now. this is on par with reagan's tear down this wall speech. >> mr. gorbachev, open this gate. >> your campaign of terror, murder, mayhem will not be tolerated any longer. >> mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. >> the historic accomplishents shades -- >> this is on par with reagan's speech. >> good morning. and welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, january 9th. that spoke for itself. along with joe, willie and me, we have white house reporter --

>> lindsey, it's not worth it, lindsey. it's just not worth it. >> god. >> whatever you're getting, it's just not worth it. >> what's he got on you? >> being a republican nomination in south carolina, not worth shaming yourself that way. >> the editor and chief of the atlantic magazine, jeffrey goldberg. >> whatever you're getting, being on "morning joe," not worth it. >> no. >> shaming yourself like that. >> just don't do it. >> not worth it. >> okay. former chief of staff to the dnc and strategic communications for hillary clinton's presidential campaign, adrian elrod with us. an msnbc contributor. and u.s. national editor at the "financial times," edward is with us. >> ed loose, ed loose, hold on. willie, are you getting the transatlantic -- >> check it out. >> rolling out right now. >> transmission. >> yep. >> cable is coming in.

what's it saying about that we brought ed loose on the show to talk about. >> look at the cover of "the new york post". i don't know if you have a newspaper. ing mexit. coming back to the u.s. for a commoner's life. what's going on here, my friend? >> well, they are doing something that a lot of people at this time of year would like to do, which is resigning from their family. most of us are unable to do. of course it follows their uncle andrew having been fired from his family and it's like a lot of business restructuring going on in what prince philip likes to call the firm, the royal family. i guess we can all sympathize with meghan. the british tabloids are a rav va nous pack. she didn't play the game they

wanted her to play. the one that kate middleton plays so well and meghan markle reportedly fell out with kate middleton which is a part of all of this. she probably was subjected to some dog whistle racism in some of the tabloid coverage. you can fully sympathize with their desire to, you know, feel the wind in their hand and spend half their time on this side of the atlantic. but i think -- >> but, ed, ed, did they not watch "the crown"? like did they not -- the history of the duke of windsor, it's like pacino in "god father 3" they pull you back in. you're never half royal, half commoner. it doesn't work for anybody, does it, ed? especially the tabloids. >> unless you're financially independent. he still wanted money. they said they wanted to be

financially independent and set up their own company and they announced this on their own website. instagram. and it was almost sort of modern corporate branding speak, the language with which they announced it. if they're prepared to say we don't witness any money from the family, then they're not going to get rid of the paparazzi but might get rid of the royal family. >> well -- >> coming up, next break, after the next break, britney spears hairstyle for the spring. >> no. >> now to mika with the rest of the news. >> okay. >> mika? >> we begin with president trump backing away from the brink of war with iran, saying he will respond to tehran, targeting u.s. forces in iraq with economic sanctions and not military force. first reported by "the washington post," a senior administration official confirms to nbc news that when it became clear tuesday night there were no casualties, the president told his top advisors in the

situation room that he did not want to escalate the crisis. he began his address saying, quote, as long as i am president of the united states, iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon, and then he addressed the attack. >> i'm pleased to inform you the american people should be extremely grateful and happy. no americans were harmed in last night's attack by the iranian regime. we suffered no casualties. all of our soldiers are safe. our great american forces are prepared for anything. iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing for all parties concerned. nations have tolerated iran's destructive and destabilizing behavior in the middle east and beyond. those days are over.

iran has been the leading sponsor of terrorism in their pursuit of nuclear weapons threatens the civilized world. we will never let that happen. as we continue to evaluate options in response to iranian aggression, the united states will immediately impose additional punishing economic sanctions on the iranian regime. these powerful sanctions will remain until iran changes its behavior. the civilized world must send a clear and unified message to the iranian regime, your campaign of terror, murder, mayhem, will not be tolerated any longer. it will not be allowed to go forward. today, i am going to ask nato to become much more involved in the

middle east process. the american military has been completely rebuilt under my administration at a cost of $2.5 trillion dollars. u.s. armed forces are stronger than ever before. our missiles are big, powerful, accurate, lethal and fast. under construction are many hyper sonic missiles. s the fact that we have this great military and equipment, however, does not mean we have to use it. we do not want to use it. american strength, both military and economic, is the best deterrent. >> willie, before getting to the speech, i think i should probably ask, is britney spears still a thing or should i use -- >> no. i think she's got the residency in vegas but we will have to update your references going forward. but proceed. >> let me know. i want to at least be like

2007/2008 -- >> is the president okay? >> so willie, that speech, i believe, i'm curious to see what you and the rest of the panel think, it was measured by donald trump's standards and i would argue it was measured by the standards of any american president after iran launched, you know, a couple of dozen missiles into a u.s. base. it does seem as if the president understood, despite the tough talk, which again i would suggest any american president would use the day after, despite the tough talk, despite the increased economic sanctions, this was a noticeable step back from war and there wasn't the level of gloating that we feared going into the speech yesterday. >> yeah. if you look at that speech through the prism of donald trump's presidency and his personality, more than that even, i think the world was holding its collective breath as he walked out.

what was he going to say, what was he going to do? and he -- there was a sigh of relief at the end of it, frankly. he did not escalate. he obviously blamed president obama, his obsession with president obama continued for things with some bad facts in there. but the fact that this was tamped down, jeffrey goldberg, i think most analysts believe was the right thing to do, but was certainly not inevitable, given who donald trump is, that he could have come out and said you fire rockets, ballistic missiles at our bases we're going to hit you back one more time. the fact that he, according to jonathan's reporting and others, immediately said, i think we've accomplished what we want here, let's go out and sort of put this to rest, it was a relief to some people. >> right. well, a, that was yesterday. today, tomorrow, can bring completely new set of policies regarding iran depending on what provokes him and doesn't provoke him. keep that in mind. >> yeah. >> real-time analysis gets overcome by events.

b, it's important to note that we probably weren't heading to what people think of as all-out war with iran anyway because iran is smarter than that. iran is not going to go into a face-to-face confrontation with the united states. the united states can destroy iran and iran cannot destroy the united states. but, what he's promising, what the president is promising, something that can't be promised. this is part of a continuing low-grade war that's been going on if you want to go back to 1979 you can. you're going to see, i'm sure that in tehran right now, there are many, many iranians in the irgs and other organizations thinking of clever ways to hurt america and american allies. our allies in the middle east are frightened because they know that iran has the possibility that the -- the capability of hurting them through proxies and directly and they don't know what the president of the united states, who does not have an affection for allies, they don't know what he's going to do when the next round comes. we're in a pause right now and we're not going to war, which is

great, but the low-grade war is going to continue in various ways and we don't know if he's subtle enough to manage that. >> take us inside the white house as this played out the other night. obviously the military was prepared, they knew these missiles were inbound, gave military men and women some time to take cover, blew up a few hangars that had been evacuated, spaces in sand, what was happening inside the white house as this played out and the president's mindset? >> there was an anticipation iran would retaliate and after soleimani's funeral which is what occurred here. from intelligence from the iraqis and the early warning systems they have in the area they were able to get sort of a little bit of a head start, some notice these rockets were coming and move people around. it also out of harm's way. it also seems like iran telegraphed this a little bit and sort of a face-saving measure, these are missiles that were launched and could have caused damage but perhaps there was some calculation to have a response, but not one so

dramatic that it would require trump to then hit back harder. in the white house that night, you had the president and his top aides monitoring this in the situation room. there was a consideration of an oval office address that evening. they backed away and decided to let the moment breathe. they wanted to see what sort of casualties and thankfully there were none, may have amounted. yesterday there was a real decision to try to deescalate. we saw that from the president in his speech yesterday. this is the pattern he's had, as much as iran didn't want an all-out conflict, the president didn't want it either. he's been reluctant to commit boots on the ground for an assault. he was looking for an off ramp as well. this continues for the pattern of his foreign policy where he is one to talk tough, use limited strikes, to try get out of a crisis, mind you a crisis sometimes of his own creation, and then when he's able to, without committing to the all-out assault, able to claim some sort of political victory and say we're projecting strength, killed this guy, but at the same time can apiece

those who supported him who don't want -- who wanted him to follow through on his promise not to commit america to the forever middle east wars. >> ed loose, the president interestingly enough guaranteed while he was in the white house, iran would not have nuclear weapons. it's the same guarantee he made of north korea, actually as we know the actions of last friday, make it far more likely iran will get nuclear weapons sooner rather than later. and yet, most white house advisors and certainly the president and those closest to the president, believe that this entire episode was a smashing success for the trump administration and for the united states. a terrorist taken off the battlefield and the consequences were minimal. what is the view among allies, not only across europe but across the world? >> i think if you judge this from the european perspective, particularly germany, fraps

france, britain, that have signatory deals with iran, and you judge the events of the last few days by their likely consequences, what your au seeing is, one, iran is putting out any sort of remaining iranian enrichment restrictions from a jcpoa, in other words it's potentially going to make a dash for the bomb, and two, all the demonstrations that were against the iranian regime, partly because of the economic impact of the trump administration's sanctions on iran, those demonstrations have now stopped. there's now a sort of unified national feeling in support of the iranian regime and likewise in iraq. remember, it was drektds against the iraqi government. the third likely consequence here is american withdraw or asked to withdraw from iraq. the iraqi parliament has already voted and asked for that and the

iranians, the ayatollah said our goal is to kick the americans out of the middle east. if those are three of the sort of more easily foreseeable consequences, from the point of view of america's allies in europe and, indeed, in the region, the united arab emirates and the saudis in particular, this is not good news at all. these are bad consequences and these are steps backwards in the goal to restrain the iranian regime. >> our allies across the region, jeffrey goldberg, do have, i believe, the most to be concerned about, whether your au saudi arabia or israel. chances are very good that iran's going to make the calculation that they can attack our allies whenever they want. the united states will not respond. but let's talk about iraq for a moment. they did take that non-binding vote. i'm curious what you think the future of the u.s. presence in

iraq is going to look like over the next six months? >> you know, i -- >> will we still be there or will they kick us out? >> i would bet, not much money, but i would bet we're still there and across the board less changes than we think could change. except for the overwhelming fact that soleimani, who was in a way almost the indispensable iranian man, is gone out of the picture which is what trump can claim. i don't imagine that u.s. forces will be gone from iraq. remember that vote, that vote was only the shia in parliament voting, barely had a quorum. the sunnis and kurds boycotted and stayed away from that vote, a nonbinding vote, and so we can overread the symbolism of that. when people calm down, remember, until this incident, iran was on the back foot in iraq. i mean you recall, there were demonstrations, fatal demonstrations, against iranian influence, interference in iraqi

affairs, so if the president plays this more subtly than he's playing it and allowses the iraqi people to assert their nationalism not against the united states but against the iranians, the u.s. could wind up being sort of a -- go back to being a semi quiet presence inside iraq. >> and so adrian elrod, the next one for you, his obsession, the president's obsession with barack obama continued. president trump also blamed the obama administration for paving the way to tuesday's iranian missile strike. >> the missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for with the funds made available by the last administration. iran's hostilities substantially increased after the foolish iran nuclear deal was signed in 2013, and they were given $150 billion, not to mention $1.8

billion in cash. >> this is another series of despicable lies by president trump. the fact that three and a half years after taking office he remains -- or three years after taking office he remains obsessed with president obama, just shows president trump's extreme weakness and insecurity. the facts about the iran nuclear deal are that it effectively halted and rolled back iran's nuclear program. >> so adrian, i will give you the job of trying to explain his obsession with president obama, and how this may impact 2020 and how the candidates respond. >> well, mika, he does remain relentlessly obsessed with dismantling every policy he can that president obama and his administration put in place. you know, we all recall how difficult it was for the obama administration to put together this deal with iran. it was a very meticulous

process. it was very, you know -- a difficult process that took a long time to put together. trump comes into the office and immediately wants to dismantle it. it's no surprise that he is taking this tack, however, i think the events we've seen over the past few days have shown that president trump remains temperamentally unfit to handle some of these major policy decisions. i think next week's debate, which will take place in iowa, assuming that the impeachment process does not cancel this debate or move it later into the month, but we'll see on tuesday night, i think you will see bernie sanders and joe biden take center stage in discussing this issue. i think foreign policy for the first time will be the number one topic on that debate stage. i think you will see the two of them draw a major contrast. bernie will, you know, take the tack of i'm the dove in this race and i don't support intervention. i think you will see joe biden remind voters, i am the one candidate in this race who can

call foreign leaders, who have these relationships, and who can return america to a more stable time, not just -- not from just a domestic standpoint but from a foreign policy standpoint as well. i think you will see foreign policy take center stage and i think this is something that joe biden can use to his advantage, especially going into some of these early caucus and primary states. >> first and foremost as you pointed out, a question of war and peace for the president, for now he avoided a war by not escalating in his speech, but there are politics to it as well. as adrian is talking about 2020. how does the president position himself coming out of this? as joe said in his mind, it took out one of the most dangerous and worst people on the face of the earth, in exchange lost a couple of airplane hangars at a base in iraq. that's a deal he would have taken going into it. how does he use this as he moves into 2020 and the campaign? >> that's how his team absolutely views it. they view this as a win. to jeffrey's point, this could change. we're in a pause right now, but the iranians are not the most

exactly trustworthy regime. some fear whatever they do next will be far more subtle, cyber attack or a proxy militia group harder for the u.s. to pin on iran. the white house and election campaign are thrilled. the president has told people in recent days he compared it to the hit that killed al baghdadi, which has become a staple in his campaign commercials and rally speeches. he has a rally tonight in toledo, ohio. this will be his first since this standoff with iran. i suspect we will hear quite a bit about it from him. they feel like this is an attempt to, as i was saying, to flex american military muscle, keep iran at bay, take shots at his predecessor but not go too far to the point where there was a lot of his supporters and some republicans around him who don't want to see a great longer involvement in the middle east in a war, who don't want to see troops on the ground, another seemingly unending commitment

and the president, that's one of his true sort of instincts for foreign policy. as someone who doesn't have a lot of consistent ideology, one is to not put these troops in harm's way for extended period of time. for now he's able to avoid that. they're going to try to spin this as a win, but this could go sideways again. >> all right. we've got a lot more to talk about pertaining to this. >> by the way, mika, an update. >> uh-huh. >> no. i don't want to hear about biteny. >> it's the birthday of kate middleton, the duchess of cambridge. >> it's not. >> yeah. willie, it is, is it not? it is. >> i don't know. >> why would you know that? >> we -- >> it's not. >> alex, did you not tell me -- >> yes she's 38 years old today. >> well, i think she's great and i think she likes her privacy. let's move on. still ahead on "morning joe" -- >> okay. >> empowering the enemy? >> that is fundamentally an theatrical to the constitution. i love lindsey graham.

he's a fantastic guy. we worked closely together on a lot of issues. he's dead wrong in he's suggesting this is playing a game. mr. graham, the constitution of the united states is not a game. >> hey, lindsey, like called him a communist or something or said he was aiding and abetting the enemy or something because mike lee talked about the constitution and believes that article i powers are still relevant, even in the age of trump. lindsey, they are. you probable should read the constitution again. >> this is an incredible aspect of this story. senator mike lee, dresses down the trump administration and its senate backers for what he calls the worst military briefing ever on iran. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. we made usaa insurance for members like martin.

an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa our retirement plan with voya gives us confidence. yeah, they help us with achievable steps along the way... ...so we can spend a bit now, knowing we're prepared for the future. surprise! we renovated the guest room, so you can live with us. oooh, well... i'm good at my condo. oh. i love her condo. nana throws the best parties. well planned, well invested, well protected.

voya. be confident to and through retirement. relevant, even in the age of on iran. relevant, even in the age of on iran. this round's on me. hey, can you spot me? come on in. find your place today, with silversneakers. included in most medicare advantage plans. enroll today by calling the number on your screen or visit getsilversneakers.com

oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows. they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks. download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome.

i'll pass. ♪ it's 28 past the hour. welcome back to "morning joe." trump administration officials held two classified briefings yesterday on last week's drone strike that killed general soleimani and lawmakers came away with vastly different conclusions. republican senator marco rubio tweeted national security officials gave a compelling briefing to senators just now. >> yeah, go team. >> they answered every important question. anyone who walks out and says they aren't convinced action against soleimani was not justified just oppose everything trump does. we can decide to which of

rubio's two categories republican senators mike lee of utah and rand paul of kentucky fall. >> probably the worst briefing i've seen at least on a military issue in the nine years i've served in the united states senate. one of the messages we received from the briefers was, do not debate, do not discuss the issue of the appropriateness of further military intervention against iran. and that if you do you will be em boldening iran. i find it insulting and demeaning to the constitution of the united states to which we've all sworn an oath. having to leave after 75 minutes while in the process of telling us that we need to be good little boys and girls and run along and not debate this in public. i find that absolutely insane. i walked into that briefing undecided as to whether to support a resolution under the war powers act introduced by senator king.

that briefing is what changed my mind. that briefing is what brought me on board together with the amendments that senator is cane has greed agreed to make. >> i think they're overreacting. go debate all you want to. i'm going to debate you. trust me, i'm going to let people know that at this moment in time, to play this game with a war powers act, which i think is unconstitutional, whether you mean to or not you're empowering the enemy. >> aid you're empowering the enemy. >> that is fundally anna theatrical to the constitution. i love lindsey graham. he's a fantastic guy. we worked closely together on a lot of issues. he's dead wrong suggesting this is playing a game. mr. graham, the constitution of the united states is not a game. >> willie geist only in the age of trump would actually reading the constitution and believing article i says what article i, only in donald trump's washington would -- would a

republican senator call that empowering the enemy, lindsey graham's word about a fellow republican, because he wanted to debate a strike, an air strike, wanted to debate intel. lindsey called that empowering the enemy and yet, it's lindsey graham and donald trump and the entire republican party who has been castigating and slandering the men and women of the fbi, cia, nsa, you name it, every intel agency across washington, d.c. it's hard to say that this is lindsey graham's most shameful performance, but i would say that accusing mike lee of empowering the iranians because you want to actually defend the constitution of the united states, that's up there. >> well, remember, this is the

same day that lindsey graham said the president's speech was better than reagan's tear down this wall speech. that's where lindsey graham was yesterday in defending the president. jeffrey goldberg, the picture painted by not just mike lee, but rand paul and others, was of a briefing from pompeo and gina haspel and secretary esper where for 75 minutes they said here's what happened, this is not open for debate, we don't need you in front of tv cameras arguing with us about this. as mike lee put it, senator lee said go be good little girls and boys and defend the president effectively is how he summarized it. every once in a while we get a glimmer from a republican in congress, a principled glimmer of someone who says, i'm not going to just rally behind the president, i'm not going to defend him when i come out. when i see something wrong and violates the spirit of the constitution and the way our government is supposed to run, i'm going to say something. >> you know, one of the things that surprised me yesterday about that was that senators have healthy egos. everybody in the senate believes

he or she should be president. we know that. >> right. >> when you talk down -- one of the things they hate the most is being talked down to. it's surprising more people didn't come out of that briefing that mike lee had that reaction to and come out and say look, you can't -- you administration bureaucrats cannot tell elected american representatives of the american people what to talk about and not to talk about. it goes to the larger theme of discipline within the republican ranks. they have 95% of that party in total lockstep. the other interesting angle, if you want to step back in history, doesn't really matter if you supported the iraq war or didn't support the iraq war, when you think about it in this context, but we've seen plenty of instances in which legislators have, after the fact, regretted not asking hard questions. they might have come out, again, on the side of saying this is a justified military action in iraq or elsewhere. but the idea that we never learn

from previous mistakes and we never see senators sort of saying you know what, my job is actually to pressure test what this administration is selling me, it's kind of astonishing. >> it's rare when republican senators break with this president. foreign policy occasionally has been a moment, heard some criticism of it. part of it yesterday, there was a 75 minute presentation only fielded a few questions and abruptly ended the briefing. some senators on both sides of the aisle were upset about that. senator lee and senator paul, libertarian leanings, it's not too surprising they would be against the foreign involvement like this but it goes to show this administration has the trouble making the case why the strike had to happen now. even the rudimentary congressional breefgs over the weekends aides said some of the intelligence was compelling, soleimani was up to no good and there would be threats against americans, but it was never clear when or where. and the president sort of making the argument through doing this now saying an attack was imminent and seems like they have not been able to make that

case, willie. >> joe, they've gone back and forth the white house from imminent threat to this was a response to the american contractor being killed. this was a response to the attack on the u.s. embassy inside the green zone in baghdad. democrats came out and explicitly said that the intel agencies did not make the case yesterday in that hearing and that briefing, and then you heard mike lee and rand paul effectively saying the same thing for the republican side. >> it seems they lied when they talked about an imminent threat. you could see mike pompeo backing away from that over the weekend. "the wall street journal" editorial page, others who had fallen in lockstep behindp donald trump for the most part over the past three years, started that retreat sunday into monday, saying it really doesn't matter whether it was imminent or not. this was a bad guy. so donald trump had every right to kill him whenever he wanted to. you know, jeffrey goldberg spoke about republican loyalty. i am, again, taken aback by what

marco rubio said about this briefing that was by all accounts what mike lee said, ed loose, the worst briefing that mike lee has seen since he's been up there in nine years. marco rubio called it a compelling briefing. they answered every important question. of course what marco neglected to say, ed, was they basically talked at the senators when they were finished and when they didn't like the questions being asked, they got up and abruptly left. >> yeah. i think some of america's european partners felt the same way. they don't expect to and never are given advanced notice of a strike, a drone strike such as the one that killed soleimani last week, they weren't given that for bin laden or baghdadi, that's not normally something shared in advance, but they do

expect post explanation for the intelligence that leads to something, particularly since they are partners in iraq and elsewhere, nato partners, and they didn't receive that. this idea of an imminent threat by soleimani in the coming days and weeks wasn't fleshed out in the transatlantic telephone calls that secretary pompeo had with his british, german and french counterparts. i think probably if you caught them in the corridors after talking to him and asked them off the record what they thought of this explanation, they would have sounded a lot like senator lee. they were like that old saying, like mushrooms, they're kept in the dark and fed manure. i guess what's surprising about this, isn't senator lee or senator paul's response. it's why people like senator rubio feel the need to go that extra mile and say not only it was an adequate briefing, but the best ever.

that's what psychologically puzzles me. >> yeah. it puzzles me as well. again, lindsey graham comparing donald trump's press conference yesterday to one of at least the republicans believe, conservatives believe, one of the great speeches in the second half of the 20th century, one of the most significant, ronald reagan telling mr. gorbachev to tear down the wall. does he need primary votes that badly? marco rubio saying the briefing was swell when by all accounts it was a horrific briefing. this is, of course, not sure what's happening to marco, but the same marco rubio who said he wanted the next g-7 to be held at the international home for the bed bug association in -- >> doral? >> i can't say it without

itching. they've had a bed bug infestation. lots of bed bugs. >> it's vintage trump. >> but marco said, oh, that would be great for our community. unless he's talking about doctors having to treat bed bug bites, that's a direct violation of the emoluments clause and again, i don't think florida voters, maybe i'm wrong, what do i know about florida voters, but i don't think they want a senator who is cow tailing like this to donald trump. >> in this case you have to wonder about trump's patterns, very vintage trump, is to dig up dirt on people or exchange some sort of favor and he has them understand his thumb to say things that are just ridiculous, to say things like that was the best briefing i've ever seen in my life. you have to wonder if that's the case here. still ahead, president trump tried to pin some of the blame for the iran crisis on the obama

administration and former vice president and 2020 candidate joe biden is hitting back. president obama's former white house deputy chief of staff, jim mesina, joins us for that discussion. "morning joe" is back in a moment. >> i thought it was a good sfwleefg i sat through one of the best briefings i've had since i've been here in the united states congress. >> it was very well done. i think they've done an excellent job of outlining the rationale. rationale. "morning joe" is presented by --

this is the all-new chevy silverado hd. it's beautiful. you want to take it for a test-drive? definitely. we're gonna go in that. seriously? i thought we were going on a test drive. we are. a heavy-duty test drive. woo-hoo! this is dope. i've never been on a test drive like this before. this silverado offers a 6.6 liter duramax diesel that can tow up to 35,500 pounds. awesome! let's take these logs up that hill. let's do it. wow! this truck's a beast. are you sure there's a trailer back there? this is incredible. best test drive ever. [chuckle] and my lack of impulse control,, best test drive ever. is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road,

and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby! narrator: delivering results since day one. narrator: congressional democrats passed sweeping lobbying and anti-corruption reforms. news anchor: the democratic house voted this morning to provide greater transparency for campaign financing. narrator: now house democrats have passed the most aggressive crackdown on prescription drug prices ever. mitch mcconnell: as long as i'm the majority leader of the senate, none of that is going anywhere. narrator: call your senator. tell them to pass the house bills. narrator: call your senator. go where the new year takes you with t-mobile. get free smartphones when you add new lines. so you can stream like this... ...because we give you that and we also give you that.so you can stargaze like this...

game like this adjust this. re-adjust this. and you can do all this, because of that. so do this, on that, with us. hurry in to get free smartphones now.

if you give this president, the benefit of the doubt, there was intelligence there was an imminent attack. >> he's not been -- well it could be true but i don't give him the benefit of the doubt because he's lied so much about virtually everything. on the issue of dealing with international relations and our standing in the world, i think that -- i'm happy to put my overall record against anyone running for president, particularly this president. >> former vice president joe biden in an exclusive interview with nbc news last night at his

first d.c. fundraiser of the year. biden mentioned the unfolding situation explaining that trump is, quote, emasculating his foreign policy establishment. biden also prodded at the president's public statement on the missile attacks, tweeting that trump misled, quote, the country on the obama/biden record. it's time he stops blaming president obama for his failures. joining us now, politics and journalism professor at morgan state university, at the root, and an msnbc contributor, jason johnson. with us ceo of the messina group, jim messina, served as white house deputy chief of staff to president obama and ran his 2012 re-election campaign. >> jason, respond to what joe biden said and talk about whether joe biden's record is one that democratic -- the democratic base will be comfortable with as we move

closer to iowa and new hampshire this month. >> so joe, the first response to this by many in the democratic base is going to be, you voted for the iraq war, you have no credibility on this issue, and that i think is an important thing to understand going forward. now if you look at all the polling numbers, by a large margin, like 45, 48% of democrats say that they actually think that joe biden is the person they would trust most to deal with iran, so pretty much what he says is going to be considered credible and it's the kind of thing that makes people comfortable, which is more or less his brand. it depends on if anything else happens. look, be we basically lucked out. we have no idea what could have happened, what continual escalations could come, and if this turns out to be a hot war, if iran continues to retaliate against our own escalation of continued sanctions and this war becomes something that we're talking about two or three months down the road, perhaps an anti-war canned like bernie sanders or elizabeth warren who called this an assassination as opposed to a killing, they might

become more popular. >> adrian elrod, i'm thinking this obsession with joe biden and these comments constantly focused on the obama administration, actually helps biden? what's your take on that? i mean, in a sense it sort of reminds people of what things were like before they became chaotic with this president. it may work with his base, but does it work beyond that? >> yeah. i think it does, mika, for a couple reasons. first of all, people get to the point that jason just made, when you watch president trump yesterday give that statement, we were all sitting on pins and needles so nervous about what would come out of his mouth, how he would react. was he going to react with, you know, with bluster and with aggressiveness or was he going to retaliate in a calmer way, and at least we saw a calmer version of trump in terms of how he wanted to handle the crisis at the moment. that's what we're always wondering. you contrast that with joe biden, very experienced leader,

very strong relationships with our allies across the globe. you contrast that with trump. i think if i was joe biden's campaign and i think you are starting to see this more and more, i would go out there every single day and highlight my foreign policy credentials. the fact that i do have these relationships, the fact that i was the chair of the senate foreign relations committee, the fact that i did handle a lot of the foreign policy work when i was vice president for the obama administration, so i think you can you combine that with the fact that people do long for the good old days of president obama and the white house, especially a lot of those independent voters, a lot of people who voted for trump because they wanted some version of change in 2016 and realize, i regret this vote, go back to a time when the country was more stable and when i didn't become so nervous every time that i saw my president, current president, trying to deal with a foreign policy crisis. i think it does play well for biden and i think, again, if i was him, i would go out there

every single day and really hone in on the fact that i'm the stable person who has the experience to provide the leadership that we need at this time when it comes to foreign policy. >> jim messina, what we've heard from joe biden and others already in the last few days int few days that is president trump is a hot head who nearly dragged us into a war with iran, who knows what he's going to do next. on the other side of it what we'll hear tonight at a roll from president trump is i took out one of the most dangerous men in the world and the cost was a couple of hangars at a base in iraq, i'll take it. i also took out al baghdadi. how do you handle, if you're running one of these democratic campaigns, how do you handle this foreign policy question with president trump? >> well, it's interesting. i'm part of this project looking at these obama/trump voters in the midwestern states that are probably going to decide this election. and these voters get really tired of donald trump continually blaming president obama. they look back and say, look, we voted for obama, we voted for trump. trump has now been president for

three years. why is he obsessed with obama? why can't he just live up to what we wanted him to do, which is focus on the economy. to adrienne's point, stop being so bizarre and stop scaring them every time he walks them into one of these international conflicts. in the primary i really think this is helpful to the vice president, right? biden sits back here and any day he can fight directly with donald trump and avoid back and forth in the democratic primary, he wins. he's the defender of barack obama, who's the hallmark of the democratic party, who's beloved by this. and we've all given biden a little bit of grief for continuing to say barack obama every time he opens his mouth. this is an issue where he doesn't have to. he can defend the record and talk about his foreign policy experience and it's really helpful. we're all talking about joe biden and his credentials and that is really, really helpful for him as we near iowa. >> jeffrey goldberg, let's move

beyond presidential politics for a minute and just talk about foreign policy and donald trump's versus barack obama's, because as we talk about the good ole days of barack obama, it's important to remember, and you certainly spoke with president obama a good bit and wrote extensively about his foreign policy, but it is important to remember that barack obama, first of all, was criticized by a lot of foreign policy thinkers for not having a clear-eyed world view. he once described it as not doing stupid stuff. and also i heard joe biden talk about how donald trump ema emasculated his foreign policy team. i heard the same thing on a smaller level from barack obama whose foreign policy decisions by the second term seemed to boil down to himself, ben rhodes

and occasionally denis mcdonough, his chief of staff. >> first of all, i think we have a newfound appreciation for don't do stupid stuff these days, so we can establish that as a baseline of reasonable behavior. but look, on the positive side of the ledger, it is absurd for anyone to blame barack obama for iranian behavior in the world. >> right. >> in 1983, 241 marines were killed by an iranian proxy force in lebanon, causing by the way, a republican president, ronald reagan, to leave lebanon very quickly. that operation was not paid for. the 1983 operation was not paid for by the 2015 iranian nuclear deal. so let's just -- we have to be fair and put this stuff in context. on the other hand, you're right. what we're going to see over time is -- or probably even tonight in fact is trump and his surrogates arguing, look, the problem with the obama administration was -- the

problem with president obama is that our adversaries were not frightened of him, he didn't deter, and i am deterring. they're scared of me. it might be true. it's not a stable platform on which to build a foreign policy, but it might be true. and it is -- it is true that the iranian nuclear deal both ensured that today iran does not have a nuclear weapon but wasn't as strong as it probably could have been. obviously there were foreign policy failures along the way. but there was a policy, that's what's interesting about this moment, there was consistency in a policy. our allies knew, even if they disagreed with it, they knew what the obama white house was thinking about from day to day, minute to minute. not only our allies don't understand what donald trump is doing, the people who work for donald trump don't know what he is doing and that is causing a level of instability that most presidents would try to avoid. >> jeffrey, not to be difficult,

but that's just what i do. don't do stupid stuff was not sufficient for a lot of foreign policy thinkers. >> it's a baseline for behavior. >> well, listen, i understand that. all i'm saying, though, is, again, if we can move donald trump out of this conversation and just talk about the fact that many people would say across the world that the united states in the 21st century has lacked a cogent foreign policy vision, a cogent world view, an analytical construct that followed naturally from where we were in 2000 through the bush administration, the obama administration, and now the trump administration. and, yes, i don't need the tweets saying you're comparing donald trump to barack obama. i am not. this is a much bigger question about where america finds itself after one-fifth of the 21st century is behind us. >> look, look, to be fair to what you're saying, barack obama -- barack obama's policies in the middle east, for

instance, you could see trump's as a kind of continuation of them. obama was very interested in withdrawing from the middle east. he told me in an interview once, and this caused a lot of problems for him in the middle east, he said iran and saudi arabia are going to just have to learn how to share the middle east. there were a lot of comments like that, a lot of suggestions that he wasn't interested, wanted to get out. and you know and we've talked about this before, geopolitics just like nature abhors a vacuum. so if the u.s. pulls out of the middle east or pulls out of europe or pulls out of asia, that vacuum is filled by iran, by sunni extremism, by russia, by china, and president obama was in the minds of many people just too comfortable with the idea of america as a receding force in the world, and i think that's what you're getting at. >> and risking the danger of driving this tractor completely into the ditch, our allies

complained the same way. and again, this is not directed specifically at barack obama, this is directed at the united states, us stepping back and looking at this entire period, this entire century where we were in 2000 at the turn of the century and where we are in 2020. my god, there have been actually way too many missteps with this current president, the 45th president, but i don't remember our allies giving the 43rd or 44th president at least the leaders high marks when it came to presenting an american world view where we actually were a force for good across the globe that leaned forward. >> that's been a definite from the european perspective, there has been quite a lot of continuity between trump and obama, completely opposite ends

of the spectrum stylistically. but in terms of not being interested in the constant gardening of being a global power and maintaining alliances, continuity, the one really big difference, though, in the middle east and where the obama administration probably the single best example of the obama administration going beyond the don't do stupid stuff is the iran nuclear deal. and of course trump has withdrawn the united states from that deal. and that deal, the groundwork for the jcpoa was laid by the eu 3 and then obama, i think, got china and russia involved and constructed what was a pretty good deal based on the premise that this will empower moderates within iran and lead over the long term to a change in the nature of the iranian regime. there were some signs that that was working. so mostly continuity, i'd agree

with you. but massive difference there in terms of the iran nuclear deal. >> okay, some 2020 news just in. this morning pete buttigieg has received his first endorsement from a member of the congressional black caucus. former maryland lieutenant governor anthony brown has announced his support for the former mayor. brown will serve as a national campaign co-chairman, the first endorser the campaign has named to that position. adrienne elrod, first your take. >> this is pretty big news for pete's campaign because he has suffered to an extent with african-americans. he's polling at under 1% nationally. he's struggled a little bit in south carolina so this should help his campaign i would think in some of these early states and going to super tuesday. my question for jason is do you think that this puts him on the right track to getting more support among african-americans, knowing that mayor pete has had

a difficult time building a diverse coalition? is this the first day of a new chapter in mayor pete's campaign when it comes to broadening his base of support? >> i can already -- it doesn't matter what chapter it is, i'm at the end of his book. this raises his popularity with black voters to maybe 1%. the problems that mayor pete has had with african-american voters are because of his own policies and his own behavior and his age and what the policy history is that he has in south bend, indiana. it's not because he's not a nice guy, it's not boss heecause he' gay -- >> wait wait wait, jason. you really don't think -- >> i do not believe that not from the polling, not from the people i've talked to, not from the people in south carolina. i'm serious about this, joe. we do power rankings at the root.com. we talk to nothing but african-american seniors this week. these are black-on-black conversations so people will be candid. his age comes up, his behavior in indiana and south bend comes

up much more than sexuality. sexuality hardly ever comes up. >> i was just going to say black pastors across the southeast and others have certainly told me off camera, of course, that this was -- this had a big impact in how well he was going to do in south carolina, in the churches, how well he was going to do in super tuesday in the churches. that's all i'm saying. it's what preachers and other civil rights leaders have told me. but -- >> things are changing. >> let's talk about the generational split here. the only reason i'm talking about this is it is a critical issue. you've got a guy doing very well in iowa and new hampshire but he can't break into south carolina. do you think there's a jen ra s generational issue here as there is with white voters and i suspect hispanic voters as well. it really doesn't matter to younger black voters but it does matter to older black voters

sitting in the church pews? >> i don't think so. i don't think it's generational. the highest number that mayor pete has ever had with black voters is like 4% and he had that a couple of months ago so that's not generational. that means you're failing across generations, it doesn't matter what the age is. yes, pastors are always going to be more conservative, but at the end of the day you have to understand i think this is a key thing. i say this about buttigieg, i say this about warren, i say this about sanders. african-american want to see trump defeated. african-american voters are the base of the democratic party. if mayor pete can't crack that black vote, then he is not the most successful and not the most effective candidate. at some point we have to start putting the responsibility on the candidate themselves. there's nobody else who has an excuse of blaming the voters. hillary clinton couldn't go out and blame voters for being sexist. barack obama couldn't blame voters for being racist. he had to go out and do the hard work to win his base. if mayor pete can't do that, he shouldn't be the nominee. that's the bigger issue here.

there are plenty of black people who have endorsed him, it's not moving the numbers. >> so jim messina, i wonder what your take is? i've been saying for some time that this is a fascinating field because the democratic party has always been split between the bill clinton faction and the bill bradley faction. bill bradley, of course, representing the more progressive white elite northeast coastal democrats who are very important to winning the nomination. but it seems that joe biden is the one person on the bill clinton side and everybody else is on the bill bradley side and i wonder if that really does stop people like mayor pete and elizabeth warren having a shot at winning this nomination? >> well, right now joe biden has the two things you really want in a democratic primary and that's african-american votes and older votes. to jason's point, look, 25% of

all voters in the democratic primary are african-americans. mayor pete has zero, no chance of the democratic nomination if he can't move with african-american voters. and one endorsement, i love anthony brown, i used to work for him, but his endorsement is not going to move here. >> jim, why don't you think he's getting -- why don't you think he's getting -- mayor pete is getting african-american votes? >> because i think he thinks it's about policy. i think he thinks it's about endorsements and it's not. it's about what's in his heart. it's about what he feels. it's about how comfortable he's talking about his positions. every time i go on tv and talk about this, his team calls me and says we have the best positions. we did this 100-point policy paper, we're amazing on these issues. that's not the point. the point is you go out there and have to communicate with these voters in a way that makes sense to them and talks about their hopes and dreams and not about a bunch of policy stuff. it's why he's not going to be the democratic nominee for president. >> so, jonathan, we've got just

a few weeks before the voting starts in iowa. you've got sort of a four-way tie, elizabeth warren a little farther back from the pack in iowa, new hampshire looks a little bit that way as well. as the president steps back, it seems to me based on what he says, based on what you hear from surrogates when you talk to them privately, joe biden is still the guy that they fear most. >> that's right. the president and his team are projecting confidence. they feel pretty good about their chances against anyone right now despite some of the polling that still shows him under water. joe biden has remained i think the biggest threat in the president's own mind for a few reasons. we talked about his obsession with barack obama earlier. he links biden with obama. he knows that coalition is still out there, that worries him a little bit. more than that, he thinks biden is the one candidate here who could siphon away some of those working class white voters who went for him in the rust belt the last time around, where he knows his margins were so very slim in 2016.

he thinks biden does have some appeal there, he speaks their language and so on. this is what the president has told people around him. he thinks that is someone that could disrupt it. he's always had a real low pressure -- real respect for bernie sanders. he doesn't attack bernie sanders like he does some of the other candidates. i think there's a little overlap there, some of the populist ideas between trump and sanders. i think that's another one who he feels might play pretty well in the midwest. >> mika, there's another way donald trump fears joe biden. he held up military aid to get dirt on joe biden and was impeached for it. >> he was impeached in the house because of his obsession with joe biden, which actually i think, joe, has helped joe biden's campaign a great deal. >> i think joe biden -- again, we've talked about how horribly he's done in all of the debates. you know, call him teflon joe. >> stylistic stuff.

>> he calls people fat, talks about pushup contests. >> people love him. >> he's gotten away with everything. >> because they love him. >> they love him but also -- >> no buts. >> also, am i on snl? but also, willie, mika brought up the great point that donald trump is scared to death of him. he literally held up $400 million in military defensive aid for a democratic ally that was invaded by vladimir putin. he held that aid up because he was so freaked out by joe biden that he was telling them he needed to get dirt on biden's son. >> sent rudy over there. >> so we've been talking about it. i think i misread it. i only misread nine out of ten things but i think i misread this one too, where i thought

that this would really damage joe biden. no, and i guess we need to go to jim messina here after i talk to you, willie, but every time they hear donald trump attacking joe biden, they're thinking, oh, my god, donald trump is scared of joe biden. every time hthey're hearing all of the illegal things he's done, all of the unamerican things he's done to try to hurt joe biden, they're thinking he's freaked out by joe biden. i would also say every time the other democrats are attacking barack obama on the debate stage, you're just playing right into joe biden's hands. so a lot of things have happened. those first three debates biden did horribly but the other candidates did worse because they were attacking barack obama on health care, they were attacking barack obama on border security and they were attacking barack obama on everything. >> yeah, look, i totally agree. i totally agree. if you look at this, every single time that people whale

away on barack obama, joe biden wins. the reason why donald trump is obsessed with joe biden is because in the midwestern states, michigan, pennsylvania, donald trump only won by 77,744 votes. the candidate who is best with these swing voters who voted for barack obama and donald trump is joe biden. joe biden is the easiest sale to them. to mika's point, they like him. they think he's a guy they understand. they think he'll go back to days where we understood what the president of the united states is saying and he says what he means and means what he says and that's a helpful thing on joe biden. one more point, i want to go back to bernie sanders. the reason that donald trump is not talking about bernie sanders is because he wants bernie sanders in the general election. bernie sanders would be the weakest candidate against donald trump in a general election with these same swing voters and that's why you're not seeing him whale away because he's hoping that sanders moves and becomes the democratic nominee.

>> so, jeffrey goldberg, before you leave, i want to ask you about the atlantic. what are you -- what are you guys working on right now and what stories -- a couple of stories you have out there talking about the guardrails of nuclear proliferation are off. also the risks to china expansionism. a lot of great stories. but what are you guys working on now and what should people be reading in the current issue? >> well, the current issue, we're counterprogramming in the current issue about the future of boys in america. maybe that's not actually totally counterprogramming, and we hope people read that. we're working on -- i don't want to tell you what's coming because then other people might do it. >> can we talk about the future of boys, because it actually does -- >> i guess we're gonna. >> it actually does play into american politics in a very significant way. i'm not going to get into it. but donald trump and his people

certainly would. but talk about the future of boys and the story. >> well, it's a very long story. i'll try to give you a very, very short version. >> you're the editor and you described this -- you sell this story by saying it's a very long story. >> our readers like long stories. people aren't scared of long stories, thank god, by the way. that's the business model. >> so a lot of pamgges, but are there a lot of pictures in there? >> great pictures too. no, no, it's a very serious thing. you can find it on the website and find it in print. it's about how we raise boys in a kind of emotionally constricted way and that boys are not given language to express themselves and, therefore, anger is the only emotion that boys tend to learn growing up in many cases in many ways and it's calling for an expansion of an understanding of how boys can be raised and what boys are capable of. it's kind of a new frame on what

masculinity could be. from what we're hearing so far parents are finding it incredibly useful to read because there is a problem with boys and anger and negative behavior and we don't pay enough attention to it. >> well, i tell you what, it's an important topic. we're going to have a roundtable discussion on it -- let's have a roundtable discussion on it the next couple of days, mika, if we can do that. >> that would be great. jeffrey goldberg, jason johnson, jim messina, ed luce, thank you all. >> jason, can i ask you very quickly because we've got three hours. we can blow through another 20 breaks. we're less than a month out and you're one of the smartest guys i know on this stuff. how right now would you place iowa? who are you looking at, the one or two candidates that you really do believe, despite all of the talk, all of the chatter, all the horse race speculation, what do you think are the two candidates that are in the best

position in win iowa? >> i think bernie sanders and mayor pete are in the best position. bernie sanders has the best on the ground caucusing organization of anybody. he had it in 2016, he has it in 2020, he has a tremendous amount of enthusiasm. mayor pete has always been one or two for the last several months in iowa. i think they are in the best position. but i don't think iowa is necessarily going to be as predictive. the sources that i talk to even within the biden campaign say they wouldn't care if they miss iowa or the first two states because we think we're going to win nevada and south carolina. so mayor pete or bernie sanders but that's not necessarily going to propel them the way it has in the past. the top four candidates have a lot of money and none of them are giving up soon. >> jim messina, do you agree that joe biden could fare poorly in the first two states and still edged up with the nomination? >> i do. i think iowa and new hampshire are less predictive than they used to be because democrats moved the big states like

california and texas up into super tuesday. early voting in some of the super tuesday states start the day before the iowa caucus. they are just going to be less predictive than they have been in the past. i agree with jason. >> all right. >> all right. and our thanks as well, thank you, jim, to adrienne elrod, by the way. she has an amazing column at knowyourvalue.com. why having a mentor is crucial for every stage of your career. adrienne, i love that you and susan have teeramed up as democratic and republican strategists working together to help women. another great column, thanks very much for that. you can find that at knowyourvalue.com. >> you know, mika, you're my mentor. >> yeah? i know i am so now you can stay quiet so i can do the tease. under pressure from members of her own party, house speaker nancy pelosi is holding firm in her battle with senate majority leader mitch mcconnell over those articles of impeachment. kasie hunt joints us with her

latest reporting. and senator chris murphy will be our guest. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. ♪ ♪

♪ everything your trip needs for everyone you love. expedia. ...depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, with trusted protection for all out confidence... beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer,

or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity.

this melting pot of impacted species. everywhere is going to get touched by climate change.

at the end of her rally last night in brooklyn, senator elizabeth warren showed off a few dance moves. let's see how that went. the bad news is that's the whitest dancing i've ever seen. the good news is that played huge in iowa. >> she's fun. with us now msnbc contributor mike barnicle, white house correspondent for pbs news hour, yamiche alcindor and capitol hill correspondent, host of

"kasie d.c." on msnbc, kasie hunt, who is burning the candle at both ends. there is a growing chorus of senate democrats who say it's time for house speaker nancy pelosi to transmit the articles of impeachment against president trump to the senate. >> we are reaching a point where the articles of impeachment should be sent. >> the sooner we receive this, the sooner we can find out if we're going to have a real trial or not. >> all right. senator dianne feinstein told politico yesterday, quote, the longer it goes on, the less urgent it becomes. so if it's serious and urgent, send them over. if it isn't, don't send them over. two sources on the hill tell nbc news that senators feel optimistic that the articles which the house approved last month will be sent sooner rather than later and potentially as early as today. however, pelosi continues to firmly stand by her decision not to transmit the articles until

the senate process is explicitly laid out. >> are the articles going to be transferred tonight? >> no. >> any time soon? >> i said when we saw what the arena is that we would be sending members in, then we would send over the articles. we haven't seen that. so i don't know how many more times i have to say that or how many times you want to ask it, but when we see the arena in which this will happen, we will be prepared to send the articles and the managers. >> kasie hunt, a couple of things. it makes sense to me to wait because, first of all, every day that goes by more information comes out, which can help the case if you're working on this. and then also how can you send this to the senate if there

isn't a fair process for information to come out? i can sort of see why there's a delay. >> so that's exactly the argument that democrats on both sides of the capitol house and senate are making. look, we know more than we did before about some of the content that democrats want to drag into the public domain that came out over the break, whether it was those documents or the news from john bolton that he's willing to testify. however, i think you are seeing increasing pressure on pelosi from inside the democratic party to move on this. you know, she's got her own calculus, she's got pressure to hold it back. she does see some fruits of the strategy. i do have to say nancy pelosi will have to answer that question over and over and over and over again until she sends these articles of impeachment over to the senate. but, you know, i do think at the end of the day she's trying to

extract concessions from mitch mcconnell. she's worked with mitch mcconnell for decades. she knows better than anybody the chances that he's going to release the outline of the rules of this trial so she'll send the articles over, the chances of that happening are slim to absolutely zero and i think she's aware of that. i think all of us on capitol hill would be pretty surprised if we don't see these articles of impeachment go over pretty soon. >> let's bring into the conversation a member of the senate foreign relations committee, democrat chris murphy of connecticut. senator, you've said it's time for those articles of impeachment to be transmitted to the senate so you can get the trial under way. what do you believe was the strategy from nancy pelosi, and what is she getting out of this ultimately? >> well, listen, i understand speaker pelosi's case here. in fact we're looking at new emails that have been disclosed just overnight by another freedom of information request. you know, none of that might

have been before the senate had we rushed to a trial. you know, i do think we're going to get started pretty soon here. i don't think there's going to be any injustice in the amount of time that we've waited for the articles to come over. but i do understand her case. the fact of the matter is we've had some bombshells, including john bolton's offer to testify before the senate. had mitch mcconnell tried to rush through a process in december, perhaps allowed for republicans to bring a motion to dismiss, then we wouldn't have some really important information before us. so, listen, i think that we are getting ready to start this trial, but i also understand why she is reticent to send over the articles when there are so many unanswered questions about the process and so much new information coming out. >> but as we heard a minute ago, speaker pelosi's argument also is that she wants to make sure the arena is fair, that there will be a fair trial in the senate.

you've already had mitch mcconnell saying for weeks i'm not an impartial juror, i am in fact coordinating strategy with the white house and there is no way this president will be convicted in the senate on these impeachment. so how can you call that a fair trial? in other words, what are the circumstances under which speaker pelosi will see an arena worthy of her transmitting those articles? >> it's really unfortunate that the republicans have chosen to apparently open this trial with a completely partisan vote. but i still believe that there are enough republican senators who are willing to vote with democrats to make sure that we have a fair trial. to us that means requesting documents and witnesses. of course there's one bombshell witness that apparently has a story to tell and i just think it's untenable for republican senators to look their voters in the eyes and say that they willingly boxed their ears and covered their eyes when john bolton wanted to talk to them

about what he knows about this scandal. so i wish that we were able to get that agreement before the trial begins, but i'm optimistic that we will be able to get enough republican votes to be able to move forward on those witnesses. >> senator, let's go to the briefing yesterday on the killing of soleimani and the potential of being on the brink of war with iran. we have seen all the sound bites, we've heard all the sound bites, but let's get some details from you from people who are watching right now to understand what happened. how long did the briefing last? how many senators were there? where was the briefing held? did you get the opportunity to have a good back-and-forth with the briefers? >> so, first of all, it's exceptional that it took six days for the administration to come to congress and explain their rationale for striking a foreign government. and then once they got here, this briefing was held in the basement of the capitol in a secure facility, a secure room. once they got here, they were in front of 100 senators and they

walked out after about 75 minutes. now, they didn't walk out in a huff. i think they were scheduled to be there for an hour and 15 minutes but that's not enough time to be able to explain the complicated and nuanced rationale for this strike. there were only about 15 questions that were asked by senators. and frankly just when the questions started to get tough, they left. now, the questions were starting to get tough because it was becoming apparent to those of us in the room that there in fact was not evidence of an imminent, detailed attack against the united states. and without evidence of a specific imminent attack, the administration does not have the authority to strike without congress. and the temperature was rising in that room because apparent t as we asked more questions. >> can you describe what a tough would be, or was? >> no, i probably can't detail the questions that were asked. all i can say is that sort of

vague notions of plans for attacks against the united states are not enough to strike a foreign power, to execute the second most powerful person in a country without coming to congress first. the reason for that is because there are enormous national security consequences to doing that and we've already seen them. the united states troops being kicked out of iraq, the nuclear program in iran restarting. so they have an obligation to come to us. without that information being presented, it just, i think, started to get people very angry that there hadn't been prior notification of congress. >> all right. y yamiche alcindor, i want to see what you're looking at with what the white house is saying is next with iran. the president seemed almost physically restrained yesterday as he was delivering his updata dress. >> well, the president spent hours and hours with top

national security officials at the white house contemplating what to do about this iran strike. i was told that he was very relieved that there weren't american casualties, but i was also told because he was really waiting in the situation room, thinking through this, that he then settled on this de-escalation policy and de-escalation stance because he didn't want to escalate any further this iran strike. he did decide on more sanctions. i was on the hill talking to democrats who said this shows there may be an escalation of this. iranian officials are saying this is just the beginning of this and smart iranian experts say iran does take its time to seek revenge and this could be the beginning of this. so we saw a different side of president trump saying that he wanted peace and saying this was something that he thought about very carefully. but this is not something that's done all the way yet. if i could put a question to the

senator, senator murphy, i'm really interested in this idea that senate democrats are breaking with nancy pelosi when it comes to this issue of sending over the impeachment articles. do you at all worry or are you concerned that senate democrats breaking with house speaker nancy pelosi undermines democrats' ability to push for a fair trial and that it plays into the hands of mitch mcconnell? >> i don't think we're breaking with speaker pelosi. i've said i completely understand her reasons for holding the articles and i think there's been some really important information that's come out. i don't think there's really any disagreement. speaker pelosi has said that she wants to be assured of a fair process. we're going to start this trial. we're going to start it without any injustice being done to the constitutional requirement of impeachment. ultimately this is going to be a decision by republicans. all democrats have made it clear that we want to have a fair trial. we want to actually try to find out the facts. and so in the end if we don't,

if they try to whitewash this, if they try to cover up what the president has done, it's only republicans that are going to have to answer for that. >> senator, jonathan lemire here. talking about the timing of this strike, there have been some candidates, senator warren among them, saying that the president struck now to distract from impeachment. there has been an argument that the administration has not presented the immediacy of this threat. so my two questions for you. first on that, do you think this strike had to happen now? second, just big picture, after what happened is the united states safer today than it was before the president killed the iranian general? >> the united states is absolutely not safer today than before the strike on thursday. and let me just outline again what has happened in just one week. in just one week iran has taken all the constraints off their nuclear program. they can speed towards a nuclear weapon faster than a week ago. our troops are in danger of being kicked out of iraq and that means isis will grow

stronger. the iranian people have gotten behind their government just weeks after they were protesting their government. similarly in iraq, those people have been turned against the united states. those are a cataclysmic events in terms of national security and they all happened within a week. what we also know is that this strike didn't actually restore deterrence. republicans are saying we convinced iranians there are skn consequences for their action. well, i'm very glad, grateful that no americans were killed. but the department of defense has stated iran was trying to kill americans in that attack, they just failed. so the strike didn't deter iran and the supreme leader is on the record saying that he doesn't believe that the consequences are over. so it doesn't appear that this strike succeeded. the united states is less secure and iran is more powerful today. and again, i'll just say it again, there was no evidence in

that briefing that this attack that iran was planning was imminent or certain. and without that evidence, anything that you're contemplating of this kind of size and scope can't be done without getting the approval of the american people. >> senator murphy, it's kasie hunt. to turn back to looking ahead to impeachment and picking up on what john lemire was saying in terms of them being linked together, i'm wondering what your sense is on any sort of realistic possibility that there could be twists and turns in this trial that are not predictable because people are actually willing to cross party lines. you know, i wonder if nancy pelosi is holding this a little bit longer in part because of what's gone on with iran, but i also wonder if there is a real belief that if you guys hold a vote to say call john bolton, you may see republican senators act unpredictably or side with

you. do you think there is a realistic chance of that? >> i do think there's a realistic chance of that. and it's because ultimately republican senators, many of them, are up for re-election, are answerable to their constituents. you know, you may think, well, regular voters out there really plugged into the process of impeachment? i think they are. i mean i think there are a lot of folks out there who actually may be supporters of president trump but actually want to make sure that the senate conducts a trial that honors the constitutional responsibility. and so i think there's a really good chance that there may be a handful of republicans, especially those up for re-election in 2020, that are going to support us on the process. now, they may vote to acquit the president in the end, but i think they know that it will be harder for them to explain to their voters an acquittal vote if they have also voted

repeatedly to try to bury witnesses and documents. that's the thing, there are going to be votes. there are going to be votes to produce documents. there are going to be votes to subpoena john bolton. so republicans will have to go on the record and that's going to be really uncomfortable for a handful of their members. >> all right. senator chris murphy, thank you very much for coming on the show, always good to have you. >> thanks. still ahead on "morning joe" independent senator angus king joins the conversation. plus, the president has a penchant for spending time at trump-owned properties. now it seems his administration doesn't want to admit what it's costing american taxpayers. "morning joe" will be right back. we made usaa insurance for members like martin.

an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa this round's on me.eat. hey, can you spot me? come on in. find your place today, with silversneakers. included in most medicare advantage plans. enroll today by calling the number on your screen or visit getsilversneakers.com

you're stronger than you know. so strong. you power through chronic migraine, 15 or more headache or migraine days a month. one tough mother. you're bad enough for botox®. botox® has been preventing headaches and migraines before they even start for almost 10 years, and is the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. botox® is for adults with chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting 4 hours or more. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. go on with your bad self. you may pay as little as zero dollars for botox®. ask your doctor about botox® for chronic migraine.

you got this. until i found out what itst it actually was.ed me. dust mite droppings! eeeeeww! dead skin cells! gross! so now, i grab my swiffer sweeper and heavy-duty dusters. duster extends to three feet to get all that gross stuff gotcha! and for that nasty dust on my floors, my sweeper's on it. the textured cloths grab and hold dirt and hair no matter where dust bunnies hide. no more heebie jeebies. phew. glad i stopped cleaning and started swiffering.

i'm going to fight for every american in every last part of this nation. we have -- we have a president who doesn't fight. he goes out and plays golf all the time. if you love what you do, you don't take vacations, you're happy. i love working, i'm not a vacation guy, right? like obama, he plays golf in hawaii. if you're in the white house,

who wants to take a vacation? you're in the white house. what's better than the white house? why these vacations? i promise you, i will not be taking very long vacations if i take them at all. there's no time for vacations. we're not going to be big -- we're not going to be big on vacations. >> oh, my god, he's the biggest. >> that's all he does. >> the biggest. the bloated vacations. can you imagine how much all of his vacations to all of his properties are costing american taxpayers, mika? working class americans are paying so much so he can hang out at his resorts. >> right. >> all the time. it's unbelievable. >> well, the answer just has to be something we imagine because his administration is trying to delay the secret service from disclosing how much it spends --

>> wow! >> -- protecting president trump during his travel. this is a really big job for the secretary of treasury. like he has nothing to do but stuff like this. the delay comes as secretary steve mnuchin has been drafting a proposal to move the secret service from the department of homeland security to the treasury department. in exchange, democratic senator dianne feinstein requested more transparency, asking that the cost of the president's travel be included in the proposal. since the start of this presidency, president trump has been to a trump-owned property 31% of the time. >> oh, my god. >> according to "the washington post." in fact the gao found that one trip to costs the federal government $3.4 million. president trump has visited mar-a-lago 26 times during his presidency. trump has also been a critic of president obama for taking vacations while in office. often criticizing him for golfing.

tweeting about it at least 27 times. so far estimates show that president trump has played golf 242 times. >> wait a second, that can't be right. >> yeah. >> is it? >> that's it. >> he has golfed since being president 242 times? >> that is correct. >> wait. how much is that -- $588,000 spent on golf carts alone? >> yeah. from third-party vendors. >> oh, my god. so jonathan lemire, one out of three -- i mean this guy after criticizing barack obama for golfing, this guy has spent one out of three days of his presidency, one out of three days of his presidency at a trump-owned facility. and just one trip to mar-a-lago

costs $3.4 million. what could the justification be for hiding this from the american people, not letting american taxpayers know how much all of his golf outings and all of his golf vacations are costing him? >> there isn't much of a justification. they just simply don't want to tell us. the president has never eaten dinner outside of a restaurant in a trump hotel. then it's trips to bedminster, new jersey, his club up north or of course down south to mar-a-lago. i was just there last week as part of his lengthy vacation. he was -- he stayed at his palm beach resort 16 days. all but two of them he made the short drive across the water to his golf course in west palm beach. all but two he spent time there. the president is entitled to a vacation, all presidents are. but he does so and spends time at his property and spends time outside of the white house at an

extraordinary rate. >> one out of three, though. you say every president is entitled to vacations. one out of three days at like a golf resort? one out of three days as president of the united states at one of his golf resorts. >> right. the second part of that sentence was going to be the idea that he does so at an extraordinary rate. presidents are entitled to a week or two off for christmas but he is there all the time. when he leaves the white house he doesn't go to camp david with any frequency, he goes to his properties where the secret service and the traveling white house package has to go with him there and that costs the taxpayers money. he adoes so at a rate we have never seen before from any of his predecessors. >> so lazy. >> to put it in some perspective, the president spent one out of every five days in 2019 at one of his golf resorts. and also we remember or we should remind people of his obsession with president obama's golfing. he'd be on a campaign stop in new hampshire and say this guy plays more than people on the

pga tour. he couldn't believe how often the president played golf. he couldn't believe how often he was away on vacation. the implication was that president obama wasn't serious about his job and all he cared about were the trappings of the job. president trump has exceeded president obama by leaps and bounds. >> well, this is why it's so newsy is the fact that president trump made it a campaign message, made it one of the central things that he was talking about when he talked about president obama, essentially calling president obama at least trying to say that president obama was in some ways lazy because he was taking too many vacations. then you fast forward to his own presidency and he's someone who has enjoyed the golf resorts that are in his name. i will say that i think the president is also a businessman and someone who understands that these trips are not only going to be covered but staying at bedminster and doral and mar-a-lago and that's going to make people wanting to go and possibly become members there. i think there are a lot of these properties that have been well documented that are struggling

financially so what you have is possibly some people, some critics of the president saying that he's using federal government money to bolster and help his properties. that's of course a pretty serious charge there, but that's a charge that is being made by some people. he obviously was trying to have the g-7 at doral. he had to pull back on that because it was seen as something that was so outlandish. but i think what you see is the president using the powers of the presidency in some ways, critics would say, to bolster his own property. so this isn't just about vacations and whether or not he's working there, because there are times when he's working. he's making national security decisions from these golf resorts. but there are people really concerned about whether or not he's violating laws and violating the emoluments clause by going to some of these resorts and seeking to have federal money go into these resorts. >> joe, we've done some quick math around the table here, and the president of the united states has played more rounds of golf than the top three pga

winners last year and his greens fees average out to about $1.2 million a round. >> that's unbelievable. i played one round of golf. >> how did you play? >> over the past year or two. horribly. horribly. one time -- of course, willie, thank you for bringing up the green jacket 1987, nobody remembers it. >> congratulations. >> it's quite a year. yeah. i played three or four times that year so my backswing is doing much better. i had a lot more control on my wedge closer to the greens. but it is -- it's really incredible. if you think back, let's put this in perspective. i remember people making fun of george w. bush because when he was governor he would take an hour and a half, sit at his desk and play video golf back when video golf used to be a big thing, you could play it on your computer. everybody, we all thought that was the funniest thing. this guy sits as governor and wastes an hour and a half

playing video golf. and then of course barack obama, mika and i were shocked to find out that he walks upstairs at 6:00 at night and a lot of times felt like, well, he had done his service to america and that was it. here you've got a guy who, again, is so lazy, he's taking one out of three days off as president, hanging out at a golf resort that taxpayers pay for so he can get richer while he's laz lazying around on the job playing golf. he is screwing working class americans who are paying him to not do his job at his resort while making him richer just sitting around in golf carts, waddling around playing golf. >> waddling? >> this is absolutely incredible. have you seen him in the golf shirts? have you seen him walking around lately?

i mean it is -- it is such a scam for people who are working 40, 50, 60 hours a week. they pay their taxes and then they are paying the costs of the president of the united states taking a squad of people down to one of his resorts so he can lie around, play golf, eat, do next to nothing but occasionally kill an iranian general and then they have to pay for it. plus, they have to pay for all the secret service people and all the other people, the support people that are staying at donald trump's place. so he's skipping school, getting richer, and working class americans in wisconsin and michigan and ohio and pennsylvania and florida and in every other state is paying for it. it is outrageous and, willie, especially outrageous because he criticized barack obama for playing too much golf. have you ever seen barack

obama's golf swing? he didn't play enough golf. this is just -- it is such a joke that donald trump is getting away with this. such a joke. >> and the thing with president president trump was that for donald trump, it wasn't like an offhand once or twice thing, he said. it was a theme of his campaign. he was suggesting that president obama is lazy from playing golf. as jonathan said, presidents should get away. they should clear their heads. but don't make it a central part of your presidency that you're on a golf course that you own that you're marketing and giving publicity to by being there. obviously, the hypocrisy is plain based on what he said about president obama for years. >> one out of three days of his presidency spent at a resort of his own that taxpayers are paying for while he's off the job. >> yeah.

and they use, like, dump trucks and stuff to move trees to give him privacy. so he can play golf. >> and even when he's in the white house supposedly doing his job, you look at those schedules, his executive time, sometimes he accidents even get into the white house until like 11:00. get into the oval office at 11:00 in the morning for a meeting. the laziness is incredible. i've never seen a lazier guy at any time. not just in the white house, but anywhere. one out of three days he's off. he ambles into the white house sometimes at 11:00 in the morning. laziest guy we've ever elected to the presidency. >> maybe it's for the best. yamish, thank you very much. >> so lazy. still ahead, president trump says iran is backing away from an armed conflict with the united states. it seems he, too, was looking

for a way out. listerine® cleans virtually 100%. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™

for today, nancy pelosi is going to be presenting her war powers solutions regarding iran and the united states power to conduct acts of war against iran. what are we expecting? >> this is exactly the debate they were saying they shouldn't have in public. mike lee was so insinced. he was told it was un-american to debate what they should have in public. we expect the vote later on today. they want to take this opportunity to keep this conversation going. it may be part of why you're not

seeing too much movement on impeachment yet. not that that is the job of the united states congress. still ahead, national security collides with politics. president trump holds a rally tonight in ohio. how he will likely use his handling of iran before his supporters. "morning joe" is back in two minutes. ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪

you always want to be able to for your patients.f get them out of pain, get them out of pain fast. we have a new product out there: sensodyne rapid relief. if you use it on monday, by thursday, you'll be enjoying that chocolate ice cream again. they can start it, and 3 days later, i know that they're going to have the results they were looking for. this is on par with reagan's tear down that wall speech. >> mr. gorbachev, open this gate. >> your campaign of terror, murder, mayhem will not be tolerated any longer. >> mr. gorbachev, tear down this

wall. >> these historic accomplishments changed our strategic priorities. >> this is on par are reagan's tear down this wall speech. >> good morning and welcome to "morning joe." along with joe, willie and me, we have white house reporter of the associated press jonathan lamere. >> it's not worth it, lindsay, it's just not worth it. whatever your getting, it's just not worth it. >> what has he caught on? >> the republican nomination in south carolina, not worth shaming yourself. >> also with us this morning, the editor in chief of the atlantic magazine, jeffrey goldberg. >> jeffrey, whatever your getting being on "morning joe," not worth it, shaming yourself like that. >> just don't do it. >> not worth it. >> okay. former chief of staff to the

dccc, adrian elrod is with us. she's an msnbc contributor and u.s. national editor at the financial times, edward luce is with us this morning. >> ed luce. hold on. willie, are you getting the transatlantic -- >> check it out. i think it's rolling out right now. >> cable is coming in. >> and what is it saying that we brought ed luce on the show to talk about? >> it's a shocking development. >> ed luce, what is going on here, my friend? >> they are doing something that a lot of people this time of year would like to do, which is resigning from their family. most of us are unable to do.

of course, it follows harry's uncle andrew having been fired from his family. so there's like a lot of business restructuring going on in what prince philip likes to call the firm of the royal family. i guess we could all sympathize with meghan. the british tabloid is a raf ennus pack. she didn't play the game that they wanted her to play, the one that kate middleton plays. she probably was subjected to some dog whistle racism in some of the tabloid coverage. so you can fully sympathize with their desire to, you know, feel the wind in their hair. and spend half their time on this side of the atlantic. >> but, ed, did they not watch the crown? have they in addition not

watched the crown? it's like pachino in godfather three, they keep pulling you back in. you're never half royal, half commoner. it doesn't work for anybody, does it, ed? especially the tabloids. >> unless you're financially independent. they said they wanted to be financially independent and set up their own company and they announced this on their own website. on instagram. and it was almost sort of modern corporate branding speak, the language with which they announced it. so if they're prepared to say we don't want any money from the family, then they're not going to get rid of the paparazzi, but they might get rid of the royal family. coming up after the next break, britney spears' hair style for the spring. >> no. >> now to mika with the rest of

the news. we begin with president trump backing away from the brink of war with iran. saying he will respond to tehran targeting u.s. forces in iraq with economic sanctions and not military force. first reported by "the washington post," a senior administration official confirms that when it became clear tuesday night that there were notice casualties, the president told his top advisers that he did not want to escalate the crisis. he said as long as i am president of the united states, iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. then he addressed the attack. >> i am pleased to inform you the american people should be extremely grateful and happy. no americans were harmed in last night's attack by the iranian

regime. we suffered no casualties. all of our soldiers are safe. our great american forces are prepared for anything. iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing for all parties concerned. nations have tolerated iran's destructive and destabilizing behavior in the middle east and beyond. those days are over. iran has been the leading sponsor of terrorism and their pursuit of nuclear weapons, threatens the civilized world. we will never let that happen. as we continue to evaluate options in response to iranian aggression, the united states will immediately impose additional punishing economic sanctions on the iranian regime. these powerful sanctions will remain until iran changes its behavior. the civilized world must send a

clear and unified message to the iranian regime. your campaign of terror, murder, mayhem will not be tolerated any longer. it will not be allowed to go forward. today, i am going to ask nato to become much more involved in the middle east process. the american military has been completely rebuilt under my administration at a cost of $2.5 trillion. u.s. armed forces are stronger than ever before. our missiles are big, powerful, accurate, lethal and fast. under construction are many hyper sonic missiles. the fact that we have this great military and equipment, however, does not mean we have to use it. we do not want to use it.

american strength, both military and economic, is the best deterrent. >> willie, before giving the speech, i think i should probably ask, is britney spears still a thing or -- >> no. i think she has the residency in vegas, but we're going to have to update your references going forward, but proceed. >> let me know. i want the to be at least like 2007, 2008. >> so, willie, that speech, i believe, i am curious to see what you and the rest of the panel think. it was measured by donald trump's standards and i would even argue that it was measured by the standards of any american president after iran launched, you know, a couple of dozen missiles into a u.s. base. you would suggest any american

president use the day after, despite the tough talk, despite the increased economic sanctions. this was a notable step back from war and there wasn't the level of gloating that we feared going into the speech yesterday. >> yeah. if you look at that speech through the prism of donald trump's personality, i can the world was holding its collective breath when he walked out. what was he going to say, what was he going to do? and it was a sigh of relief at the end of it, frankly. he did not escalate. he blamed president obama for things with some bad facts in there, but the fact that this was tamped down, jeffrey goldberg, i think most analysts believe was the right thing to do, but was certainly not inevitable given who donald trump is, that he could have come out and said you fire rockets, ballistic missiles at our bases, we're going to hit you back. the fact that he and others

immediately said i think we've accomplished what we want here, let's go out and put this to rest. it was a relief to some people. >> a, that was yesterday. today, tomorrow can bring completely new set of policies regarding iran depending on what provokes him and what doesn't provoke him. just keep that in mind. realtime analysis gets overcome by events. it's important to note that we probably weren't heading into what people think of as all of war for ranl anyway because iran is smarter than that. but what he's promising, what the president is promising is something that can't be promised. this is part of a continuing low grade war that's been going on. if you want to go back to 1979, you can. and you're going to see, i'm sure, that in tehran right now there are many many iranians and other organizations thinking of

more clever ways to hurt america, hurt american allies in particular, our allies in the middle east are incredibly frightened right now because they know iran has the capability of hurting them indirectly. we don't know if he's subtle enough to navigate that. >> they knew these missiles were inbound, gave military men and women some time to take cover, blew up some hangars that had been evacuated. what was happening inside the white house as this was played out? what was the president's

mind-set? >> it's sort of a face saving mesh, the measure. there could be perhaps some calculation to have a response, but not one so dramatic that it would require trump to hit back even harder. yesterday there was a decision to try to de-escalate. this was sort of the pattern that he's had. as much as iran didn't want an all-out conflict, the president didn't want it, either. he's reluctant to commit boots on the ground for an all-out

assault. he was looking for an off ramp, as well. this continues for the pattern of his foreign policy. he's able to say claim some sort of political victory. he's saying, hey, look, we're projecting strength. he can appease those who supported him who want him to follow through on his promise not to commitment america to these middle east wars. still ahead on "morning joe," among the take away is on president trump's address on iran. he still thinks about barack obama a lot. we'll get into that. but first, here is bill carin wes a check on the forecast. >> good morning to you, mika. a high impact storm is about to arrive into the middle of the country. first it's moving through california. looks harmless. just bringing rain to san francisco and sacramento this morning. we're going to have an incredibly warm period and

because of that, with all the humidity coming in off the gulf, we have a severe weather threat. we could have a tornado outbreak here as we go into our friday and continuing into saturday. 28 million people at risk into friday. the storms will form on top of dallas and towards san antonio and dallas. then into the evening hours into saturday morning they'll be moving through louisiana. we'll have additional tornados down along any storms coming off the gulf coast and a wind threat slamming through mississippi and alabama and eventually making its way into georgia later in the day. from dallas to st. louis up through chicago, and that will be with the heavy rain friday and saturday.

they could get about 6 to 9 inches of snow in this area of of blue and red could be 6 to 12 inches of snow. everyone is pretty much okay today, and by the time we get into your friday travel, that's when the storm really begins to moving in. you have to watch out. you could be cold enough saturday night that a lot of this rain goes over to a freezing rain event and we could be dealing with significant icing in a few areas, too. we'll see how all this plays out. besides that, we're probably going to set dozens of record highs even with areas like new york city on saturday and sunday. middle of january, middle of winter. we'll be in the mid 60s. yeah. an unusual storm for this time of year. tremfya® helps adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis uncover clearer skin that can last. in fact, tremfya® was proven superior to humira® in providing significantly clearer skin.

tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya®. uncover clearer skin that can last. janssen can help you explore cost support options. wean air force veteran made of doing what's right,. not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa

this round's on me.eat. hey, can you spot me? come on in. find your place today, with silversneakers. included in most medicare advantage plans. enroll today by calling the number on your screen or visit getsilversneakers.com

the missiles fired last night at us and our allies were

paid for with the funds made available by the last administration. iran's hostilities substantially increased after the foolish iran nuclear deal was signed in 2013 and they were given $150 billion not to mention $1.8 billion in cash. >> this is another series of despicable lies by president trump. the fact that 3 1/2 years after taking office he remains -- or 3 years after taking office he remains obsessed with president obama just shows president trump's extreme weakness and insecurity. the facts about the iran nuclear deal are that it effectively halted and rolled back iran's nuclear program. >> so, adrian, i'll give you the job of trying to explain his obsession with president obama and how this may impact 2020 and

how the candidates respond. >> well, mika, he does remain relentlessly obsessed with dismantling every policy president obama and his administration put in place. we'll remember, we all recall how difficult it was for the obama administration to put together this deal with iran. it was a meticulous process. it was a difficult process and it took a long time to put together and trump comes into the office and immediately wants to dismantle it. so it's no surprise that he is taking this tack. however, i think the events that we've seen over the past few days have shown that president trump remains templementally unfit to handle some of these major policy decisions. i think next weekend's debate which will taike place next wee in iowa, on tuesday night i think you'll see bernie sanders and joe biden take center stage

in discussing this issue. i think foreign policy for the first time will be the number one topic on that debate stage. bernie will take the tack of i've the dove in this race. i don't support intervention. i think you'll see joe biden remind voters i am the one candidate in this race who can call foreign leaders, who has these relationships and who can return america to a more stable time not from just a domestic stvpt, but from a foreign policy standpoint, as well. so i think you will see foreign policy take center stage and i think this is something that joe biden can use to his advantage, especially going into some of these early caucus and primary states. coming up, the trump administration's fact-challenged briefing on iran was unacceptable to senator mike lee and the utah republican let everybody know about it. that is next on ""morning joe."

apps are used everywhere... except work. why is that? is it because people love filling out forms? maybe they like checking with their supervisor to see how much vacation time they have. or sending corporate their expense reports. i'll let you in on a little secret. they don't. by empowering employees to manage their own tasks, paycom frees you to focus on the business of business. to learn more, visit paycom.com and you know what they isay about curiosity. it'll ruin your house. so get allstate and be better protected from mayhem,

like meow. you always want to be able to for your patients.f get them out of pain, get them out of pain fast. we have a new product out there: sensodyne rapid relief. if you use it on monday, by thursday, you'll be enjoying that chocolate ice cream again. they can start it, and 3 days later, i know that they're going to have the results they were looking for. i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there.

so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows.

they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks. download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. i'll pass.

trump administration officials held two classified briefings yesterday on last week's drone strike that killed general soleimani and lawmakers came away with vastly different conclusions. republican senator marco rubio tweeted it was a compelling briefing to senators just now. they answered every important question. >> we love donald. >> anyone that walks out and says they aren't convinced action against soleimani was justified is either never going to be with convinced or just oppose everything trump does. we can decide until which of rubio's two categories mike lee and rand paul. >> probably the worst briefing i've seen at least auto a military issue in the nine years i've served in the united states senate. one of the messages we received from the briefers was do not debate, do not discuss the issue of the appropriateness of

further military intervention against iran. and that if you do, you'll be enboldening iran. i find it insulting and demeaning to the constitution of the united states to which we've all sworn an oath. they had to leave after 75 minutes. while they're in the process of telling us that we need to be good little boys and girls and run along and not debate this in public. i find that absolutely insane. i walked into that briefing undecided as to whether to support a resolution under the war powers act introduced by senator king. that briefing is what changed my mind. that briefing is what brought me on board together with the amendments that senator cane has agreed to make. i'm now going to support it. >> i think they're overreacting, frankly. go to debate all you want to. i'm going to debate you. trust me, i'm going to let people know that at this moment in time to play this game with the war powers act which i think

is unconstitution is whether you mean to or not, you're empowering the enemy. >> he said you're empowering the enemy. >> that is fundamentally anty threat k thetical. mr. graham, the constitution of the united states is not a game. >> you know, willie geist, only in the age of trump would actually reading the constitution and believing article 1 says what article 1 says, only in donald trump's washington would a republican senator all that empowering the enemy, saying that because he wanted to didn't a strike, an air strike, wanted to debate intel, lindsay called that empowering the enemy and yet it's lindsey graham and donald

trump and the entire republican party who has been castigating and slandering the men and women of the fbi, cia, nsa, you name it. every intel agencies across washington, d.c. it's hard to say that this is lindsey graham's most shameful performance. but i would say that accusing mike lee of empowering the irania iranians because you want to actually defend the constitution of the united states, that's up there. >> remember, this is the same day that lindsey graham said the president's speech was better than reagan's tear down this wall speech. but jeffrey goldberg, the picture painted not just by mike lee and rand paul and some others was of a briefing from pompeo and haspel and they said here is what happened. this is not out for debate.

we don't need you out in front of tv cameras and arguing about this. but every once in a while, we do get a glimmer from a republican in congress, a principled glimmer of someone who says, no, i'm not going to just rally behind the president. i'm not going to reflexively defend him when i come out. when i see something wrong and something that i think violates the spirit of the constitution and the way our government is going to run, i want to say something. >> one of the things that surprised me yesterday about that is senators have healthy egos. everybody in the senate believes he or she should be president. we know that. one of the things i hate the most is being talked down to. it's surprising that more people didn't come out of that briefing. and come out and say, look, you can't -- you administration bureaucrats can not tell a leftist administration of the american people what to talk about and what not to talk

about. it goes to the larger theme of discipline within the republican ranks. they've got 95% of that party in total lock step. the other interesting angle of this, if you want to step back in the history, and it doesn't really matter if you supported the iraq war or didn't support the iraq war when you think about it in this context. but we've seen plenty of instances in which legislators have, after the fact, regretted not asking hard questions. they might have come out, again, they might have come out saying, well, you know what? this isn't justified military action in iraq or elsewhere. but the idea that we never learn from previous mistakes and we never see senators sort of saying, you know what? my job is actually to pressure test what this administration is selling me, it's a dysfunction. coming up, you don't have an impeachment trial without the articles of impeachment. nancy pelosi is ready to let go of them just yet, but our next guest says it's time to get the

show of the road. independent senator angus king joins the conversation straight ahead on "morning joe." e conver ahead on "morning joe. "1917" is the winner of the golden globe for best director. we need to keep moving! and best picture, drama. tomorrow... experience "1917". i remember thinking about things i did

and wondering if that was the last time i was going to do that thing. coming to the cancer treatment centers of america, they treat the whole person. everything is here. imaging, infusion... i don't have to go anywhere else. they care about me as a person beyond just being a cancer patient. they're my second family. because you didn't have another dvt. not today. one blood clot puts you at risk of having another, so we chose xarelto®, to help keep you protected. xarelto® is proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt or pe blood clots from happening again. almost 98% of people did not have another dvt or pe.

don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of blood clots. while taking, a spinal injection increases the risk of blood clots, which may cause paralysis- the inability to move. you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. help protect yourself from another dvt or pe. ask your doctor about xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com. and how janssen can help, oh, your she's landed.ed. and she's on her way to our house. what. i thought she was coming next weekend. i got it. alexa. start the coffee. set the temperature to 72. start roomba. we got this... don't look. what? don't look. lets move. ♪

mom. the lexus es, eagerly prepared for the unexpected. lease the 2020 es 350 for $389 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

yes, i think it is time to send the impeachment to the senate and let mitch mcconnell be responsible for the trial. >> breaking the house speaker nancy pelosi earlier this morning when it comes to withholding the articles of impeachment against the president. joining us now, independent senator angus king of maine. great to have you on the show this morning. >> so, senator, do you agree, is it time for nancy pelosi to send the articles of impeachment to the senate?

>> well, i can shethink she's i standoff with mitch mcconnell. i think it's going to happen in the next couple of days. i think we're ready to get started over here and we're going to -- this is sort of internal argument that will be forgotten in a few days. i think the important thing is, what's this trial going to look like? and the important issue there is whether there's going the be evidence and that's where mitch has been very squishy about whether there will be a vote, when there's going to be a vote. john bolton is like the guy in the front row with his hand up saying call on me. and with the republicans and mitch mcconnell saying we don't want to hear that evidence, they won't wash with the american people, i don't believe. >> have you spoken to any of your republican colleagues in the senate who want to hear from john bolton? >> well, i've gotten some sort

of vague feelings that they do, but i think i don't want to overstate that. i think right now what it looks like, joe, is that they're going to line up with mitch on the first vote. they're going to say, you know, we're going to go ahead with the trial, we're going to start the trial, but at some point pros d procedurally there has to away vote. they've been saying it's all hearsay, it's all hearsay, but here we have an opportunity to hear from people with direct knowledge about what the president did and why he did it. it's hard for me though think they're going to go home and say i'm not going to do this. it's like hear no evil, see no evil and take no evidence. i frankly think there will be enough republican votes at some point in the trial to bring forward the evidence not only the witnesses, but also the documents and the history we've already seen during this lull during the holidays of documents

coming out that certainly don't bolster the president's case. >> so, senator, when you say there might be enough votes to compel testimony, but that mitch mcconnell is being swishy about whether or not certain testimony can come forward and information can come forward, you know, in this presidency, this white house has been known to completely stonewall and prevent information from coming forward. i just wonder what choice does nancy pelosi have but to wait until she has a fair process that will clearly get information to the american people? >> well, the question is whether waiting will put any pressure on mitch mcconnell and that's really what we're seeing play out here. but i think you put your finger on a very important point. the second articles of impeachment are about obstruction of congress and if we establish a precedent, and there have only been three impeachment trials or two and maybe a third one coming up in american history, but if you

establish a precedent that the president himself or herself is able to suppress the evidence in an impeachment trial about themselves, then the impeachment clause is essentially written out of the constitution. it doesn't mean anything because you're allowing the person, the accused to control who testifies and what evidence is presented. that, to me, is a very serious issue and, of course, the administration can clear up that entirely by being more forth coming, both with witnesses and with documents. >> senator king, it's willie geist. we talked to your colleague, senator murphy, a few minutes ago and he expressed some optimism that there would be some semblance of a fair trial. but i don't see how that is possible when mitch mcconnell, the man who controls the majority in the senate who has said, quote, there is no chance the president will be removed from office. in fact, he said we're coordinating strategy with the white house. he doesn't want to see these new witnesses. how can there be a fair trial

when the senate majority leader has said all these things entering the trial. >> well, it's very troubling because he's going to have to swear an oath along with all the rest of us. there's a second oath that we take in order to serve in a trial situation in an impeachment and the oath says we are to do -- we swear that we will do impartial justice. frankly, 80s hard for me to understand how mitch mcconnell is going to square that oath with what he has already said. but to answer your question directly, once it starts, there could be changes -- there can be motions to, for example, hear witnesses that only require a bear majority. in fact, 50/50 would probably do it. the chief justice would have the deciding vote or it would go back to the senate. but it's not as if -- it's only if mitch mcconnell can hold every single one of his senators that he will have total control once the trial starts.

procedurally, it's only a simple majority and all it would take would three or four republican senators to say no, we want to hear the evidence. and frankly, i think there will be more than that. i don't think it's tenable to go home to your voters and say we had available people who could have resolved this issue definitively one way or another and we voted not to hear from them. i can't understand anyone being able to go home and say that. >> senator king, it's always good to see you. did you get a chance to go to the briefing yesterday? >> yes, i was there. >> did you hear any evidence at all that the threat posed to america was imminent? >> there was some evidence along that line, but it was evidence that i had not seen before as a member of the intelligence committee and i've asked for a follow on briefing to chase down what i heard. i'm not going to go into any more detail. i think what bothered people about the briefing and, of

course, you've heard about mike lee was the implication that it wasn't about debating whether or not soleimani should be killed. the question was should we be debating our engagement in iran and if we're going to war, should the congress have a voice in that? when we were told that's really as emboldening the enemy, that's when -- that's what set mike lee off who has a deep and abiding feeling about the constitution. that's totally inconsistent with the constitution which says that congress has the power to declare war and that's when people were getting uncomfortable, not so much about soleimani, but what comes next, what are the next steps in iran? what if, for example, the president declared they will never have a nuclear weapon? how is that going to happen? there are only two ways, negotiation or some kind of military conflict. and if we're moving in that direction, what's congress' role? and both historically and in the

terms of the constitution, it's our job to make that decision on behalf of the american people, the framers of the constitution did not want to put that unilateral power in the executive. august 17, 1787, they argued this very point and they said this is one of the reasons we broke away from the king of england. we don't want the king or in this case the executive, the president, to be able to union lat rayly take the country into war. >> well, and that topic that you just raised, what comes next, iran has a vote in that ask and the ayatollah yesterday indicated that the missile shots into iraqi and into our bases in iraq were not going to be the end of it. how concerned are you about things like power grids, our atm systems in america, our water systems and cyber attacks? >> i'm very concerned. the ayatollah said this concludes our response. the ayatollah, who is the boss, said it doesn't conclude our response. and i think we should view the

position we're in right now as a pause and an opportunity for both sides to back off and try to find some kind of diplomatic solution. the president yesterday, his speech was sort of -- it was two speeches. it was very belicose and they're not going to have a nuclear weapon and all the rhetoric. and then at the end he talks about but we want peace and iran can be a great country. so the question is where do we go from here? iran has some serious cyber tools that haven't been used in this conflict that are less easy to attribute, but could be very, very damaging to our country. so i worry. the other thing, mike, that i worry about, really, is an accident. this is how world war i started. ironically, it started with arch duke ferdinand being shot, but then you have a series of misunderstandings. what if a shia militia in iraq

that's aligned with iran but doesn't get orders from iran, a couple of guys decide to take out a group of americans on the street or at a base. then all of a sudden we've crossed president trump's red line. americans have been killed and we're into a cascading escalation into war. that's the concern. now hopefully the taking out of soleimani has established with the iranian some deterrents that they know that we're serious and we're going to be responding in a serious way. but, you know, we literally dodged a missile 24 hours ago. and if there had been american casualties, we would be having a very different discussion this morning. and that gets back to, a, what is congress's role and, b, how do we take advantage of this pause to bring peace to the middle east and not to just sort of take two weeks off and then head back on the road to war. >> right. >> so, senator, mike lee and

rand paul, both republicans, called the briefing yesterday one of the worst they've ever heard in their lives. republicans lindsey graham and marco rubio basically said it was the most insightful diplomatic briefing that any americans received since george kennen's long kelly gram from moscow. so you were there. you're independent. these republicans can't agree between each other. which was it? >> i hesitate to say it was the worst briefing. i don't think it was very effective. i didn't expect it to be. it was more here is the administration's positions from the top people. again, i don't want to get into any detail, but it was more -- i wouldn't say political, but it was more policy than intelligence and based upon that kind of information. you know, i didn't -- like i say, i didn't expect it to be.

the president restand a deterrent with iran that i think they have taken seriously. their responsibility indicated that they've taken seriously. but we don't know. it's too early to tell what the long-term ramifications of this are. there are a lot of negative ramifications of killing soleimani. probably the most important is the unification of the iranian people. now they're protesting us. and it's hard to tell how long that will last, but if they are solidified against us and if we get expelled from iraq, that will mean it will have had long-term negative consequences. ironically, our expulsion from iraq is one of the things soleimani wanted to do. >> senator angus king, thank you very much for being on the show. great to see you. >> always a mrpleasure.

thank you. up next, the decline in cancer deaths, plus new reporting on the link between economic distress and opioid addiction. keep it right here on "morning joe." addiction. keep it right here on "morning joe. this is the all-new chevy silverado hd. it's beautiful. you want to take it for a test-drive? definitely. we're gonna go in that. seriously? i thought we were going on a test drive. we are. a heavy-duty test drive. woo-hoo! this is dope. i've never been on a test drive like this before. this silverado offers a 6.6 liter duramax diesel that can tow up to 35,500 pounds. awesome! let's take these logs up that hill. let's do it. wow! this truck's a beast. are you sure there's a trailer back there? this is incredible. best test drive ever. [chuckle]

i need all the breaks, that i can get. best test drive ever. at liberty butchumal- cut. liberty biberty- cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

supreme court jaults ruth bader ginsburg announced this week she is cancer free. she told cnn tuesday treatment

for a malignant tumor on her pancreas had been successful. they discovered the tumor during a routine blood test in july. this is the first time she has undergone cancer treatment. that news comes as the american cancer society reports that cancer deaths in the u.s. fell by the largest single year rate ever recorded, from 2016 to 2017, death rate from cancer dropped to .2% in the u.s., and experts say the deline is due to new advances in treatment. following smoking rates -- falling smoking rates played a big role in lung cancer deaths. lung cancer caused more deaths in 2017 than breast, prostate,

colorectal and brain cancer combined. despite progress, cancer is the second leading cause of death in the united states, after heart disease. joining us now, "morning joe" medical contributor dr. dave campbell with more. >> dr. dave, tell us about causes for the drop in cancer. >> joe, this has been a long time coming, since 1991, first year i started my practice, we have seen a drop in cancer death, cancer mortality. 2016 to 2017 largely reflects the decreasing rates of smoking, therefore the decreasing rates of lung cancer deaths. lung cancer causes far more deaths than the rest of cancers we talk about. this is a huge, important finding. it has to be balanced against the fact that there are plenty of other cancers out there that are still dangerous and

metastatic lung cancer still has only a 5% rate of survival at five years, so you're not out of the woods if you have lung cancer. >> so decreased smoking has certainly made a big impact in decline of numbers for lung cancer. as far as skin cancer goes, mel gno -- mel gnome a, that dropped because of medical research. >> melanoma, the most deadly skin cancer has very effective treatment now it did not have ten years ago. so your chance of surviving a melanoma, even the spread is higher than it was a few years ago. those two things combined, lung cancer and melanoma treatments have been very, very helpful. we have to be very careful now that we see nicotine addiction and vaping in teens going

through the roof that we're not going to have another group of people 10 or 20 years from now smoking at higher rates because there's a link between vaping and teenagers getting addicted to nicotine and smoking cigarettes when they're adults. >> speaking of links, a lot of people have been trying to figure out why the opioid crisis exploded the way it has in certain communities and states. there has been suggestions that perhaps because of economic decline, societal declines, church declines, but you have information on opioid deaths rising when auto plants close in those counties. explain. >> i talked to congressman tim ryan a few minutes ago. in ohio where they have significant drops in manufacturing industry, he sees what the study saw.

the study used auto plant closures as a proxy for the larger question of manufacturing plants closing and industry going away. it is a problem of the diseases of despair, with suicide, alcohol, and drugs. with opioid rates going up, increasing rates of death frof opioid overdose, that's reflective of a declining american dream. people are without the same sense of purpose that they had. jobs have gone away and they're desperate. that's what we're seeing with the increasing rates of overdose in counties. >> if you're listening in the car, we have a graphic out that shows 85% of opioid deaths are higher in counties where auto plants close than in counties

where those auto plants remain open. 85%. remarkable. finally, dr. dave, let's wrap it up with something we talk about this time of year every year with you and that is flu season. and this flu season appears to be on track to be one of the worst in quite some time. tell us why. give us the numbers. >> it is going to be the worst unless people get out right now and take their children and themselves and be immunized. the problem is there are some strains now that are particularly deadly, influenza b is tough on children. we've already seen an increasing number of children die. and the prediction from the federal government is that this season may be worse than the season two years ago, which was the worst season in 40 years. so it is incumbent on everyone to wash their hands and get immunized.

everybody over six months of age, unless there's a medical reason otherwise. >> gracious. >> wash your hands, wash your hands, wash your hands. >> this is a big one. dr. dave campbell, thank you very, very much. >> thanks, dr. dave. as we close out the show, we're going to be assignment editors, give jonathan la mere his assignment for the day. look at this video from the white house. they're removing like so many chairs. so i don't know if there's been a chair meltdown or somebody didn't like their chair, there's like a moving event going on at the white house. >> what's going on there? >> i am going to start working the phones obviously. this will be my most important task of the day. it seems call off the impeachment trial, the president is clearly moving out, that's

it, he's done, mike pence will take over, good night and good luck. >> maybe they'll be gold plated or something. that does it for us. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage now. >> thanks so much, mika and joe. i am stephanie ruhle. it is thursday, january 9th. here is what's happening this morning. things have quieted down for now in the middle east after the president signaled that the united states would not take further military action against iran, saying instead he is ready for peace with all who seek it. but the political tensions are rising after lawmakers are briefed on the intelligence surrounding the killing of the iranian general qassem soleimani, with one republican senator calling that briefing insulting and mean. >> it was probably the worst briefing i've seen on a military issue in the nine years i served in the united states senate. after 75 minutes while they're in the process