all right. that wraps up this hour for me. thank you so much for watching. "deadline white house" with nicole wallace begins right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. all eyes on capitol hill where the two big stories gripping washington are inching towards their crescendos. house speaker nancy pelosi holding out against mounting pressure from republicans in the senate, and even a few democrats, to send over the articles of impeachment so the trial for the senate can begin. there are reports this hour that they're expecting the trial to begin as early as next week. we start with a vote expected this hour to limit donald trump's powers as the country's

kmantder in the chief in the wake of the deadly strike on qassem soleimani. it would require him to seek conggression authorization before any further strikes. it gained unlikely support from two very conservative republican senator whose were irate after a briefing from donald trump's most senior national security advisor. and two, iran is reupping its threats of revenge. and then mike lee on an interview this morning on npr.

what i'm most concerned about is about where that goes from here. what comes next? is there another strike coming against iran? if so, at what point do they need come to us seeking an authorization for the use of military force? the fact they were unable or unwilling to identify any point at which that might be necessary yesterday was deeply distressing to me. >> and what we know today from iran's public statements is their bell costy has not subicided. a day after president trump backed away from further military conflict, the commander of the country's islamic revolutionary guard vowed to take further action. and when we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. nbc news correspondent and eddie

dplied, chairman for the center of african-american studies at princeton university. and former assistant drelkter for counterintelligence at the fbi. and joining us from capitol hill senior writer for "politico" jake sherman. first of all, are you hearing any rumblings about articals being delivered imminently? >> this morning we wrote nancy pelosi was on the brink of sending them. she said this morning she was going to do it soon. now soon, soon is an elastic definition. but if you read between the lines, what nancy pelosi has said is she would like to see rules, rules on how they would conduct their trial. we really do expect it and i hope the people in nangsy pelosi's office are watching. and we expect it, if not tomorrow, monday and tuesday. this is not going to drag on for much longer.

you see people coming out saying it's time to get it done. some of those people have subsequently walked it back. this is the reality. nancy pelosi doesn't have the leverage to change the senate's process in any way shape or form. her aids would argue she has forced a conversation with witnesses. and fair enough. maybe she has, in her estimation shown a light on the senate's process which democrats believe to be unfair and i think she realizes and you saw at the this morning the trial is going to start in the next seven to ten days. and then it will be over to the senate. and the house will be out of this process. listen, the house is out of session beginning tomorrow afternoon. and it's already the end of the day in washington. could it happen tomorrow? yes. but as time goes on, less and less likely.

there needs to be a vote on the house floor to name the impeachment managers. not much time to do at the tomorrow. so could it happen tomorrow? yes but more likely early next week is our guess. >> and i'm guessing her offices might argue on the witness front, something monumental might be underway with john bolton saying take me, take me. while you were talking we had a live picture of nancy pelosi on the floor of the house for that debate right now, which is essentially about what we played mike lee talking about, reasserting for power in terms of authorizing military strikes. i think we sometimes rush to get to the end. but the significance of the debate seems to be the point even republican senators were exasperated about being cult off. what the trump national security team sought to do in the

closed-door briefings was to say even discussing a role for congress is aiding and abetting the enemy. this debate surprised me by going from zero to 100 in about four seconds yesterday. >> what you're seeing is the legislature a co equal branch of government shrieking and saying give us back our power because the administration did not create allies on capitol hill for its missions in this case and many other cases. this is obviously this resolution, which is not going to have any practical effect. donald trump is still going to be able to carry out what he wants to on the way he wants to. but it was the legislature speaking out and saying it's time for us to reassert ourselves. this is an age-old debate going back to paul ryan speakership about putting restrantsz on the

presidency when it comes to military incursions overseas. we're a war-weary country. and i do see at the every day on cap 28 rr hill. republicans and democrats alike who aren't interested in ground combat and missions without having congress involved. there's a lot of harsh and inaccurate words about democrats loving terrorists. obviously not true. and nancy pelosi, the president said apologizing or standing up for soleimani. a lie, not true. she did not stand up for soleimani in any way. but you do see the legislature for one of the first times in many years. the republicans spoke up for the president and did not speak out with such a forceful voice in foreign affairs. and it's symbolic if not have

practical impact of the president's ability. remember, congress controls the purses strings that come up every year. so the president would -- >> and hearing shrieking is a wonderful word for what happened during this hour yesterday too, stick with jake sherman's description, mike lee came out shrieking. to me, it was like there's gambling going on in the casino. oh, my god, the trump administration has cut off all truth, debate and debate of congress? in terms of cutting congress out, making sure there wasn't any sort of legitimate republican participation or white house participation in the impeachment, sort of carrying all the water that republicans have carried for this president. now you've got, in jake's words,

mike lee and rand paul and the other people upset about being cut out of the process, imagine that, shrieking. >> i think it's a mark of how basically impotent congress has been and congressional republicans included throughout the trump presidency. that it is huge news that two republicans, including rand paul, who of course is -- his stock and trade is to be an iconoclast. so you have one constitutionalest republican who is mad as a hornet that he feels the white house is not only you surpg pow from congress, and to your point they've been doing for three years, but not only is he mad about that but he felt the briefer whose came tine talk to congress yesterday with the promise of laying out what the

administration's justification-been for killing qassem soleimani stopped short in giving a rational and refused to tell senators and -- in his case what their red lines are going forward. and lee's point is why did you talk to us at all? why braugter? you saw president trump's reaction. he said he'd never seen mike lee like that before. i like mike lee and the usual things he's said. it appeared to take the president aback. >> because he likes his republicans obedient, compliant and falling in to line. i think the comments this morning where he's not

intimidated by any reaction from the white house or fox news, which usually has the ability of getting the groundhog to go back underground. i think this whole story is stunning from the outside. and mike lee looked around three years in and said you don't want us to do our jobs? congress isn't allowed to see steve mnuchin's secret documents. what was it about yesterday? >> at the same time this is something, when it comes to declaring war and using military force that he has been consistent about. so maybe that's it. but let's not lose sight of the fact there was another very important development in the meeting that explains anger on both sides of the aisle, which is we, the american people,

congress, don't have any idea what the intelligence was behind this imminent threat. mike pompeo was saying one thing and the president was saying another. the president was saying we caught him in the act. there was something very bad about to happen. and mike pompeo basically went out of his way to say there was an imminent threat. there's never one thing. and this was up to the president. so here we are with this cycle of escalation, which is now cycling in full with iran threatening further retaliation. we don't know what form that will be, through proxies, cyber war fare, we can't imagine it. and we don't have a good idea what got us into this. >> all the uterances from nation security team made to us in the wake of the deadly strike that now threatens u.s. troops, and our allies.

watch. >> can you claire the attack soleimani was planning, was at the days or weeks away? >> i think it's more fair to say days frrksz sure. it was clearly on the battle field and planning military operations. he was a legitimate target and his time was due. >> was the just f he's been a destabilizing force for so long or an imminent threat? >> it's never one thing. the american people are smart too. it's a collective, it's a full situational awareness of risk. >> how imminent? days, weeks? >> you're an american in the region days and weeks, this is not something that's relevant. we have to prepare, we have to be ready and we took a bad guy off the battle field. >> in recent days he was planning new attacks on american targets but we stopped him. soleimani's hands were drenched

in both american and iranian blood. he should have been terminated long ago. >> so we have gone -- just in these clips, we've gone from imminent threat to days, weeks and you know what? he was a bad guy and he had it coming. so we can no longer trust this white house even when the consequences are as grave as potential war to tell us anything aprox mating the truth. and what's really offensive to someone like me that's been an intelligence professional is they're trying to put the. >> good face of our intelligence services. no, you didn't. you're lying about it. i used to tell my two boys when they were teenagers. id i'd say where were you?

and if theirs wasn't matching, i'd say give me the keys until we come to an agreement on what you can do and where you can go with the car. but until we come to at the agreement, the car stays in the garage. if you ran out of chips and salsa, it's all good. that's what we're talking about in congress right now with the war powers discussion. this president can't be trusted with the keys to the car. make good decisions. this white house can't make good decisions. the president is hanging out with the wrong people. that's why you hear nancy pelosi talking about war powers authority. >> we're going to do a whole hour dedicated to how you raise kids. i want to use those intel lines on mine.

he's only eight. it would seem to me most nonpolitical senior national security officials welcome the opportunity to go before congress. they make hard decisions. and these briefings usually have the opposite effect of muting some of the criticism on capitol hill because you help them understand why a president makes a decision that may not have been what they did. and i'm speaking from the bush years. these briefings almost universally, help, didn't hurt. it is extraordinary to see a group of national security officia officials basically be called bumbleing idiots. >> this could be at the one time you're briefing the white house, national security counsel, house and senate intelligence community on a kinetic action

and why it had to be taken. if that's being lied about and twisted, we're now using intelligence as a weapon. and no one's getting to the truth here. it's one of the worst things that could happen. they've been waiting for the moment when they can advise the president and help him get it right. and it's falling flatd here today. >> so, two things. one, the inconsistency of their account for the killing of soleimani, it trades on the question of whether or not the act was legal or illegal. that's really important. it's a matter of whether he took someone out or assassinated someone. what it means to engage in legal action by international law. and the millions of people of lives are in jeopardy because of this act. and two things in conversation.

one is the war powers debate that that's happening now and the issues of impeachment. one of the issues has been the executive power. what's the limit of the executive branch. hoy can they execute their powers to be clear? that debate happens almost every generation. these two things are converging in a very interesting way in this moment. i even though he's consistent in his view around the moral powers act and where is your -- what is your position with regards to executive power? because this is exactly the question being asked here. these two conversations are converging in a very interesting way and we need keep track of them. >> and that's why we've got -- and let me come back to you on this question of

interrepublican -- i think it's more than a squirmish. you have lindsey graham saying this about mike lee. i think they're over reacting. i'm going to debate you. i'm going to let you know it's time to play with the war powers act, which i think is unconstitutional. you're empowering the enemy. basically complained about the briefing from defense secretary esper jot out that line. they haven't seen a public feud spill out like this in a long time. >> tatshat's absolutely right. that's part of the reason this is so remarkable. first, lee was willing to be as publicly as he was about this yesterday and today. and now the predictable reaction. lindsey graham is carrying the sword for the white house here.

i guess you would figure that would be the case. what happens next within the republican caucus should be something at the republican senators themselves figure out and certainly lindsey graham is telling mike lee what the white house wants him to tell mike lee. but the white house is really treading on, and you know this well, difficult ground here. if they look like they are dictating every single thing to every single republican, it certainly has been the experience of this white house they can get anything they want from republicans in congress at almost any time. there's been so little descent. where you have seen descent has really only been on foreign policy issues. we saw it surrounding russia, ukraine and, really, now, to see it happen here means at the the

white house is going to have to rely on the likes of lindsey graham to rally and bring people within the circle. >> thank you both for spending some time with us. after the break, more on nancy pelosi, the articles of impeachment and the fight for witnesses and documents in the wake of john bolton offering to testify. and the vote we've been talking about to limit trump's war powers. and pete buttigieg picks oppotentially significant endorsement. oppotentially significant endorsement.

we need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers. is that too much to ask? we're ready. we are proud of our defense of the constitution of the united states. we are concerned that the senators will not be able to live up to the oath they must take to have an impartial trial. i'll send them over when i'm ready and that will probably be soon. i think we should move smartly and strategically. >> wow, cool as a cucumber. nancy pelosi holding firm, for now, waiting to release the articles of impeachment to the senate until she gets some guarantees she's been seeking for a fair trial. and there's more than speed to a predetermined outcome.

it's an effort made all the more important in the wake of john bolton's offer to testify in the trial. pelosi has received pressure from both sides of the aisle to hand over those articles but she insists she's going to do so when she's ready. jake, we'll come [ to you on this. has anything changed from nancy pelosi's plan to hand over when she's ready. i hate to use the word imminent. >> imminence relative but it is imminent. >> she does not appear to be feeling the heat. if anything, she appears to be reaching the end of the line where she appears to change the outcome. >> but she can't change the outcome, that much is clear because mitch mcconnell has the votes to set opprocess he wants to set up.

so at that point, once mitch mcconnell doesn't need democrats, he can do it on his own. he says i have the process i want and i'm going to pass the way i want. it's time to send it to me. if he doesn't get the articals, he's not going to hold a trial and that's that. he said if we don't get it soon, we'll move on to the trade deal and passing usmca next week. there's not been any change in nancy pelosi's plans. but it does appear that -- not appear, she is saying soon. that is significant to me based on what she says the last couple weeks. she wants to see the imp peachment rules. at the is sniff kbt. she's not saying i want to change them.

i still believe at the is unlikely. she's not going to see them before they send it over. it's just a matter of time, i would think. and based on what nancy pelosi says, that checks out. >> what's so interesting is it doesn't appear for public polling that she's paid any price by holding them. i think she's proven herself to be unpredictable and to have a high threshhold. she doesn't have any leverage to change the rules. i mean -- it really is a stand off. >> because her leverage isn't just getting mitch mcconnell to change the rules, it's to raise public awareness about what's fair and not fair, to raise public awareness about the fact the real precedent is in every senate impeachment trial in this country, only two, but still, there have been witnesses whether they're decided now or

later but there are witnesses. and as of the most recent polling on the issue of witnesses 70% of the american public thinks there should be witnesses. >> 71% of the american people don't agree on anything. >> background checks i think. >> all the things we've learned about the extortion campaign since the house intel committee wrapped up their investigation. we learned they discussed a hold on ukraine's aid. we learned that behind the aid freeze from the "new york times" story, that mulvaney had a trove of emails who wrote things like "are you serious" in dot gov emails they knew would be prezvred until the end of time. we learned that trump was briefed on the whistleblower

complaint before the aid was released. so all intimes adam schiff said at the, we learn that was true. he learned he was in trouble before he released the aid. and we now know bolton -- i don't even know who inforeign policy person is. he is what scalia is to judicial thought, bolton is to -- >> to me, that's why nancy pelosi looks very precant and prudent for holding back and believing in some way shape or form we're going to continue to learn more about donald trump, learn more about this episode and maybe that helps fuel the strategy to pick off more senate republicans here or there. i don't actually think they would be able to do that. but i think it feeds into the overall narrative. i do think, stepping away from

that a bit, it's not quite the impasse because i still think nancy pelosi has a very fine line to walk between wanting to do a job and walk articles across the hall but trying to protect her members and the democratic candidates running for president. once this trial starts, you've got members of the senate that can't say a word and cannot be out on the trail. you have to find a way to pivot that to policy issues voters are going to care about for a lot of the members you're trying to protect getting to office in 2018. there's a lot at stake. i don't know what you gain more by waiting longer. >> ditto. >> you've got more than that. look, the fact this is kind of the second story. speaks to he was impeached for

abuse of power and ubstrulobstr congress yesterday. he stormed out of a briefing. complaining about stonewalling and leaving out congress. he was impeached for things he continued to do every day. >> there are two sets of concerns that come into view. one has to do with the politics. this is the corner at the speaker pelosi is in and i think she's walking around in an astute way. and we're in a constitutional crisis. it seems to me it's happening at a time when american institutions are in crisis. what is being revealed is the senate, the wanted deliberative body is broken. and the characters that have made at the possible and so part

of what we have to do is figure out how to keep track of the politics and keep track of what literally is happening before us. the collapse of separation of powers, institutions at the keep our democracy alive are rotting at the core and there's a broader question of what's tlr state of the country and on top of at the, nicole, people are bombing. we're on the precipice of war. my goodness. >> legal oversight. >> it would appear at tthat don trump played fast and loose to congress. when we come back, congressman ted lou to limit donald trump's

war powers and nancy pelosi digging in on documents. i digging in on documents. for $14.99. choose soup or salad. one of seven delicious entrées - like new hawaiian-style garlic shrimp. and, get a sweet dessert. three courses. one amazing price. so come in today.

we are watching on the side of your screen the house debate over the war powers resolution. it would limit president trump's military action. joining us from capitol hill, ted lou a member of the house judiciary and foreign affairs. why was this debate so important today and was it changed? was it aided by support from two republican senators who were irate yesterday? >> thank you, nicole, for your questions. i previously served on active duty. and if we're going to put our troops in harm's way, we need to

have a pallacy. republicans are seeing at the too. it's not just senators rand paul and mike lee. it's republicans in the house of representatives. this is going to be a bipartisan vote in the house. >> i hadn't hurt that. what republicans are going to vote with democrats? >> it is my expectation matt gatsz will vote for this resolution as well. >> and at the would be a big deal. this reassertion over acts of war feels like a significant moment in the trump presidency. am i reading too much into that? >> make sure he delivers. but you have a number of republican whose believe in the principal that it is congress who as the power to declare war.

and that's what this war powers resolution is. reclaiming our war powers back from the executive branch. >> before you retire, senator bob corker sought to limit president trump's nuclear authority. he was very vocal. he said publicly president trump hadn't displayed the confidence. he described the west wing as an adult day care center. rex tillerson was very close to h.r. mcmaster and jim mattis. he seems like a lone voice. is there an uptick since he left congress in terms of republican concern about donald trump's fitness as commander in chief? >> i think with this last strike and going to war with iran was seen more republican concern. i previously introduced legislation with ed marquee of

maof massachusetts. in terms of the whole nuclear issue, we have to ask in terms of iran, what the goal of the government is. we're much further away from that goal. iran is no longer abiding and that's a director result of donald trump's decision making. >> did you have the same reaction as republican senator mike lee did from yesterday's briefings yesterday? >> i learned nothing from that briefing i haven't learned. >> thank you and i'm sorry. >> senator lee. >> let me switch gears to impeachment. any late breaking news as a recording in "politico" they expect to have articles of

impeachment perhaps by the end of the week or beginning of next. >> why did the house impeach in the first place? because donald trump abused his power and solicited a foreign government to help his reelection. no one is illegal, no one is above the law. and americans understand a fair trial includes witnesses and documents. it's our hope mitch mcconnell put out rules to allow for witnesses and documents. >> he -- i think a lot of people are concerned they won't produce either those things, witnesses or documents. what leverage do you have? >> six at least. at least six republican senators. they have a hard reelection. i like to see them vote for a rule that says we're not going to have any documents or witnesses.

at t that would be a sham trial and a farce. >> and would you get the same senators are a target down the road? i'm hearing from witness like john bolton. >> i believe john bolton has made it imperative to have witnesses called. i sure would like to see the six senator whose say they don't want to hear from john bolton. >> i want to come back to the news i heard you make. you're guessing two republicans. one is a close trump ally will vote with republicans today to limit donald trump's war powers. >> yes, that is what we believe will happen. >> thank you. when we come back another example. the white house refusing to cooperate with congress. refusin cooperate with congress.

if your adventure... keeps turning into unexpected bathroom trips.

you may have overactive bladder, or oab. not again! we're seeing a doctor when we get home. myrbetriq treats oab symptoms of urgency, frequency, and leakage. it's the first and only oab treatment in its class. myrbetriq may increase blood pressure. tell your doctor right away if you have trouble emptying your bladder or have a weak urine stream. myrbetriq may cause serious allergic reactions, like swelling of the face, lips, throat or tongue, or trouble breathing. if experienced, stop taking and tell your doctor right away. myrbetriq may interact with other medicines. tell your doctor if you have liver or kidney problems. common side effects include increased blood pressure, common cold or flu symptoms, sinus irritation, dry mouth, urinary tract infection, bladder inflammation, back or joint pain, constipation, dizziness, and headache. looking for a destination that isn't always the bathroom? ask your doctor if myrbetriq is right for you. and visit myrbetriq.com.

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

i wouldn't leave the white house. obama always leaves the white house. you ever see what the cost to travel in this thing? >> those moments not aging well. "washington post" reporting that the trump administration is seeking to delay a democratic effort to require the secret service to disclose how much it spends protecting the president and his family. quote, after the 2020 election, that's when we're going to find out. "washington post" atdss the issue has emerged as a sticking point as treasury secretary mnuchin and key senators have been drafting legislation to move it back to his department. "washington post" joins us. i remember donald trump being all over the air waves and twitter annihilating the obamas

for taking family vacations. and here he is, not only vacationing a whole heck of a lot with a lot of family members butted refusing until after 2020 to disclose costs? >> that's right. he's travelled much more than obama did. and trump has travelled in a way that makes him money. he's going to a for-profit club in new jersey or florida where he makes money off the people who meet him. now he's taken more. and they're basically working to prevent the public from knowing how much that costs until after the election. >> two things to unpack one he's not going to tell anyone how much it costs to protect him. the other thing is the scandal on our low boil right now. that when he goes to bed -- the secret service doesn't stay in a room for free, neelath door the

people that come to visit him, same with mar-a-lago. my understanding is there is a lot of pressure for folks to stay at his hotel in washington when they have official business at the white house. >> this is a really interesting and important question. not only how much does the public spend on donald trump's travel, but how much goes to donald trump himself? how much is to rent space at his room or hotel? we don't know much about that but we can tell that a lot of this money does go to president trump. last year the secret service released saying they spent $250,000 at trump's clubs in the first five months of his presidency. a lot of this money is captured by trump himself. >> and you and i have had

conversations about the badly branded amulluments clause but how does at the not violate? >> one says the u.s. government can't pay the president anything beyond the presidential salary. trump, in this case, is donating his presidential salary. he's not supposed to get anything beyond what he gets in the paycheck. i'm getting paid to rent a room for people to eat meals at my hotel. it doesn't mooter. the constitution says you shouldn't get this money at all. >> steve mnuchin does rnt get as much scrutiny as people like bill barr who are out living bold. loud and proud in all the political efforts to shield the president. mnuchin is doing just as much by refusing to cooperate with inco equal branch of government and

disclose this money until after 2020. is there any sense democrats are losing their patience with secretary mnuchin? >> yes. mnuchin he wants them to pass this law giving him back control of the secret service which had been with treasury for decades and now is with homeland security. he has rejected congressional scrutiny and put off a number of democrats. now hat in hand saying help me. they're using the leverage they have over him now. whether he wants that transfer of secret service bad enough to give in on this demand, i guess we have to wait and see. >> david fahrenthold, thank you for spending time with us. mnuchin, again, because it's all relative, right, you cover politics and compared to attorney general barr and others, but he is the guy who has been a human shield for donald trump's secret and shady business dealings as president. >> and all through the russia investigation as well when we

were trying to get answers about his tax returns which may or may not be quite illuminating. he has fought that. he has total control over that unless we go through a very lengthy court process. let's also highlight some of the amazing numbers david had in there. $1.3 million per visit to mar-a-lago? >> unbelievable. >> we're not mathematicians but this is a lot of money going into trump's pocket from the u.s. government. it's a circular -- and then look at the date. is that an arbitrary date, december 2020, just happens to be four weeks, you know, a month after the next election. so what are we to make of why he would choose that arbitrary date? this is not controversial stuff. they're supposed to report this semiannually to congress, and they have failed to do that. >> and there are no coincidences. i think we're right to assume what we will about the date. coming up, what could be a crucial new endorsement for mayor pete. mayor pete ing 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 and you'll experience a whole new range of emotions like... of a travel site the relaxing feeling of knowing you're getting the best price. and the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone. i can read minds too. really? book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization.

before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. on a flexible wealth plan. and with new brokerage accounts, your cash is automatically invested at a rate that's at least 21 times more than other advisory firms. personalized advice. unmatched value. at fidelity, you can have both. set yourself free with fleet.

gentle constipation relief in minutes. little fleet. big relief. try it. feel it. feel that fleet feeling.

mayor pete buttigieg announcing his first endorsement from a member of the congressional black caucus, former lieutenant of maryland and current congressman anthony brown, throwing his support behind mayor pete today. brown will serve as national campaign co-chairman and it's the campaign's hope that brown can help buttigieg grow his support among african-american voters, a foundational building block of the democratic coalition. the table is still here. >> i don't know if it will help.

good for mayor pete. i think he's doing work on the ground trying to meet with folks on the ground at various places trying to gain some kind of foothold among african-americans. i don't know if this particular endorsement will have any tangible impact in terms of his attractiveness to african-american voters. i just don't see it. >> he has a lot of work to do before south carolina, for example, and does this help him there? maybe a little bit. he can use him as a surrogate. he has a lot more work ahead of him, quite frankly, particularly in the african-american community. >> the congressional black caucus -- we lost jake. heidi, the congressional black caucus -- >> i'm second. >> no, no, first in my heart. the congressional black caucus, a powerful sort of institution within the institution and endorsements to the degree they matter, and i agree they don't know, it's a big deal. >> it's a huge deal. joe biden, this is not just a candidate everybody is recently excited about.

he has long roots and connections in south carolina with a lot of black lawmakers and rainmakers and i don't see that some of the outreach pete buttigieg is doing, even if it moves the needle a little bit is going to make it go crazy. >> all right. we'll keep watching. we have to sneak in our last break. ed with liberty mutual. con liberty mutual solo pagas lo que necesitas. only pay for what you need... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ our retirement plan with voya gives us confidence. they help us with achievable steps along the way... so we can spend a bit today, knowing we're prepared for tomorrow. wow dad, do you think you overdid it maybe? i don't think so... what do you think, peanut? nope! honey, do you think we overdid it? overdid what? see? we don't think so, son. technically, grandparents can't overdo it. it's impossible. well planned, well invested, well protected. voya. be confident to and through retirement.

my thanks to jake, heidi, eddie and you for watching. "mtp daily with chuck todd" starts now. ♪ and welcome to thursday. it is "meet the press daily." i'm chuck todd here in washington on what is a very busy day of just good old-fashioned breaking news. you're looking live at a debate on the house floor where we are likely moments away from a vote on a war powers resolution that to some is symbolic and oer