embassies around the world. >> soleimani was actively planning new attacks and he was looking very seriously at our embassies and not just the embassy in baghdad. >> this was going to happen. and american lives were at risk. and we would have been negligent as the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said, we would be negligent had we not recommended to the president that he take this action against qassem soleimani. he made the right call and america is safer as a result of that. >> and tom steyer's millions in ad buys is paying off as he rises in state polls, qualifying for a spot in next week's last debate in iowa. >> these polls don't surprise me. this is what i thought was going on. people need to know who can beat trump, and i can do it. >> tom steyer joining us live ahead right here on "andrea mitchell reports". and our breaking news now,

nancy pelosi's plans for the articles of impeachment. nbc's garrett haake joins us from capitol hill. you've been tracking the speaker around the hill all morning and she is now made it clear, tuesday is the day. >> that's right, andrea. the speaker has said for a while she's transmit the articles when she feels the time is right. and we know that time will come next week. in a letter to colleagues, sent after the house was done with its business for the week, after members had left the floor and many of them starting to leave d.c. for the weekend, the speaker said that she will call for the judiciary committee to appoint managers and have this vote on the floor that sets up the transmission of the articles next week. she says she'll consult with the caucus on tuesday morning when they're all back. the rules around voting on the impeachment managers is already laid out. it's a short debate and pretty much a straight up or down vote. that could happen as early as tuesday or wednesday of next week. now, also in this letter, pelosi

lays out some of the things that were accomplished by holding the articles. a lot of the reporting that was done over the holiday breaking including that "new york times" report that we've cited several times, freedom of information act requests related to the ukraine scandal and she points out the decision by john bolton to say he would cooperate with a senate trial, all of which she tries to say are evidence of the utility of having held the articles for so long. i can also tell you talking to reporters just now, she was fairly aggressive in pushing back against what she sees as a false narrative, that she was under increasing pressure to do this. earlier in the week we saw a lot of senate democrats saying the time is now. now we learn from pelosi, the time will be next week. that sets wheels in motion in the senate to get ready for the start of a trial. it's tough to see how the trial could start next week. just based on the logistics and what the senate and all the lawyers involved would need to get ready.

but we're moving forward in a process that will lead to an impeachment trial of president trump here in january of 2020. >> okay. thank you so much, garrett haake. thanks for joining us on the run. we'll have a lot more coming up in the program. secretary of state mike pompeo is backing the president's claim at the ohio rally last night that qassem soleimani was plotting to attack the u.s. embassy in baghdad and other embassies as well in the middle east. >> last night the president said it was a threat to embassies including to our baghdad embassy. why can you say that here and the president could say it at a rally but no one said it to lawmakers behind closed doors in a classified setting as multiple senators have said. >> we did. >> you said -- >> we told them about the imminent threat, all of the intelligence we've briefed, that you've heard today, i assured you, we provided in the classified setting as well. >> reporter: you told them that embassies were to be targeted, that was the imminent threat.

>> i'm not going to talk about the details of what we shared. >> but none of the senate democrats, in fact, none of the republicans either, coming out of that briefing said that they were told about that at wednesday's classified briefing. >> i did not, i did not hear what he just said at that press conference. >> the reality is, they provided very little facts and the facts clearly did not establish their claim of an imminent threat. >> we didn't hear anything about blowing up the embassy in baghdad. >> is it true? i don't know. we didn't hear it in the classified intelligence -- >> is it possible that it could be true but -- >> the difficulty that we have, and i don't mean to be rude here, is we have a president who is a pathological liar. could it be true? i guess it could be. is it likely to be true? probably not. >> joining me now, "washington post" white house bureau chief

phil rucker, ben rhodes and peter alexander at the white house. peter, i know you've got to travel. let me ask you first, what is the nature of these briefings? i talked to one republican today who was briefed at the white house and was not told this in the days after soleimani. so whom are we to believe now? >> reporter: someone here is lying. it's the multiple lawmakers who have said that they were not told that this imminent threat pertained to attacks on u.s. embassies or it is the secretary of state and others who there said, yes, that is what they were told. what is striking in this moment, last night mike pompeo did an interview with fox news where he said we didn't know specifically where or when these attacks would take place. we just knew that they were

real. today his language changed in fact to sort of follow the president. he said we had specific information on an imminent threat and those threats included attacks on u.s. embassies, period, full stop. there's been an evolution to what the administration is saying. a lot of it is a function of what president trump has now said publicly. this comes 24 hours after mike pence said publicly that they couldn't talk about what the actual imminent threat was because it would reveal sources and methods. if that were the case, they've certainly done that to this point by acknowledging this fact. but there are a lot of questions for this administration at this point. their fundamental strategy is to say to those people at home, we have a bad guy here and that's what you should be most focused on. when i followed up with the secretary of state, i asked him with soleimani gone, the threat itself were gone, and his words are the threats are never gone. there's always a lot of danger in the world as if to the suggest that the imminent threat

itself may not have been removed by the u.s.'s removal of soleimani himself. >> peter alexander, thank you for following up with us just now. michael leiter, let me go to you. you've been an officer in both democratic and republic administrations. you have a lot of experience. you were the man of all seasons and for all seasons. and i just -- i'm having difficulty sorting this through. >> obviously, so are they. >> because, frankly, i was one of the people who -- not that we went along with it. we reported the wmd claims when he did not know were not accurate. it was based on, quote, intelligence. and we know the results of that. i'm a little gun-shy going into another potential military conflict based on claims of intelligence that have been chaotic and confusing.

>> i think that's appropriate of you and i certainly think it's appropriate of the house and the senate who are also pushing the administration to be much more clear about this. i do have great empathy for the administration on one thing. we often saw what we considered imminent threats without knowing exactly where or when that would happen. that's a common occurrence in count counter terrorism intelligence. the underwear bomber, the christmas day bomber, where we saw a plot going on in yemen but we didn't know where it was going to happen. and we executed on a strike in yemen without knowing exactly what was going to occur. i have some sympathy there. i have zero sympathy for them is the shifting story about what they know and the real opacity with the congress. to me, that's unacceptable. and the tag line now that we did the same thing with osama bin laden is false. we not only gave the full story after bin laden, we gave some of

that story before bin laden to key members of key committees on the hill. i think we have a good tradition of greater transparency with congress and that's critical, as you say, before we move into a potentially second stage and we think strategically about what we can and cannot accomplish with iran. there has to be a degree of confidence in what the administration is saying. i think right now, they're clearly not getting a passing grade. >> and mike pence telling savannah guthrie, this is called sources and methods and we don't share this with congress and the president claiming there are leaks all the time. ben rhodes, you've been on either side of this. you've seen it from both ends as has michael. i've never seen a leak from the gang of eight, from the eight people. nancy pelosi in particular was a ranking member on the house intelligence committee before she became speaker and is a very

experienced intelligence recipient. for them to be saying that they don't have an obligation to brief congress and for them to be saying to mike lee and rand paul, the republicans, even having a war power debate is helping the enemy just seems to not understand the constitution. ben? >> andrea, there's two major problems with this. one, it's been a week since this strike. and while mike is right to point out that the nature of the information that informs an imminent threat can be complicated, that information has to exist if there really was an imminent threat. you must have had some information that indicated that this was going to happen. and if you can't share that in classified setting, either you don't have it or you just have no respect for the role that congress plays in our diplomacy. we would share this kind of information with congress. that's why you have classified briefings. clearly either it's not there or they're not sharing it and

neith either one of those is disturbing. and the reason i believe it's not there is because their stories keep shifting. we've heard all kinds of excuses from them about how they can't provide this information, we hear it's against the embassy, we've heard a different story from this administration about matters that are life and death and war and peace. iran has announced they're getting rid of the limits on their nuclear program because of this decision that was made. it's a very important debate that needs to happen. and instead of having that debate based on facts and information, all we get from this administration is if you question what they're doing, then you're siding from the enemy. and that is a bit of a rerun of what we experienced in 2002 and 2003 in the run-up to the iraq war. >> and philip rucker, we have to evaluate every day whether we are qualifying the president's

claims. last night he expanded the claim to say other embassies as well. he's the commander in chief, he has access to things others don't, or do we let him say it and years from now being blamed by historians. it's a real question for journalists. >> it is, andrea, and that was a remarkable thing that the president did last night. he's at a political rally before thousands of people live in that event but it was also broadcast of course to millions on the internet and on some cable channels and so forth announcing that there were threats against multiple embassies. he didn't detail where other than baghdad. but that is striking if there really were threats on multiple embassies and it's a big if because this is a president who has lied or mislead the public thousands and thousands of times since he's been in office. he himself, by the way, has been very loose with intelligence.

we remember early on when he brought in -- or when he shared rather intelligence with the russian ambassador and the russian foreign minister in the oval office which was not an appropriate or proper thing to do according to most national security officials. so you sort of have to take what he's saying in these rally settings with a grain of salt. and like i said, it's a big if. >> and brett who helped run the war against isis in the previous and current administrations, he said in the last hour with my colleague on msnbc that we are less safe now because nato is standing down. the president made a big deal about relying on nato more and so did secretary pompeo. meeting with nato deputies or assistants over at the state department today. but nato is actually standing down. canada has withdrawn some of their troops and they're withdrawing in iraq because --

from the anti-isis training mission. michael leiter, the war on terrorism is not being fought as vigorously because we did not give them any warning of this soleimani takedown. >> we face strategic challenges in the middle east. basic stability, diplomacy in iraq, counter isis, continuing to fight iranian nuclear weapons. and i think this struggle over what the intelligence was really simply undermine having a serious debate about how we're going to achieve that. the administration has been pretty clear. it's just going to be maximum pressure. what that means is not clear. what that is actually led to is even less clear and i think trying to cut out the congress from really understanding the facts is deeply problematic. it's also deeply problematic for the intelligence community because inevitably they will get caught in the middle. when the president, the administration decide that they've got their line, the

intelligence community is going to have to back that up. we need them to feel like their work is being represented fairly, accurately and shared with congress. otherwise, again, they simply become the tennis ball in the fights between the parties. in the region, we have huge challenges and here at home this conversation has not helped the challenges that we're going to meet going forward. >> and iraq today demanding that the u.s. come up with a plan for withdrawal of its troops. michael leiter, thank you so much. and ben rhodes, thanks to you. and of course, philip rucker. meanwhile on the extraordinary story, treasury secretary steve mnuchin saying he will allow waivers as the nation's officials continue to dismisses reports that the regime is responsible for the ukrainian airlines crash killing 176 people whether or not it was accidentally. there are new questions today on which countries or corporations will be allowed into iran to

view the wreckage and what will be left at the scene even when they arrive. tom costello is joining me. what's the latest on boeing the manufacturer, an american manufacturer, and whether it will go to iran and be part of the investigation? >> so both boeing and the ntsb under international regulations have been invited by iran to join in the investigation. we believe in an observatory fashion. they have to get the waiver from the trump administration. the secretary suggested that the trump administration will issue the waiver. but i think more concerning for veteran investigators is what we're hearing from the scene and that is that the iranians have moved a large portion of the wreckage on the scene. that it does not look like those pictures right there. much of the debris has already been removed. the concern is that changes the ability or alters the ability of investigators to piece through

the wreckage looking for clues, specifically looking for any clues of a possible missile strike. as you know, u.s. and canadian intelligence say that satellite -- spy satellites picked up the tail tail telltale signs of missiles being shot at that plane. the resumption is this was a terrible accident. seconds ago, i received a list of flights that had taken off that morning from tehran airport. and surprisingly, flight 752 was not the first. it was the tenth flight of the morning to leave tehran. there were already flights departing that morning for frankfurt, moscow, qatar, hong kong and finally ukraine. so that begs the question again, how did this happen? first of all i think a lot of people wonder why were flights being allowed to go in and out of tehran after this missile

strike that iran had launched against u.s. bases in iraq. but why then, if this was the tenth flight of the morning, how is it possible that missiles took out this plane presumably in a tragic accident? >> tom costello, thank you so much for all of your reporting on this. what a story. what a tragedy. the transfer, nancy pelosi announcing she will transmit the articles of impeachment next week. more on that breaking news with a leading member of the democratic caucus coming here next. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. blaf blaf blach blaf blaf bl ac for brokerage accounts, plus zero minimums to open an account. and only fidelity offers four zero expense ratio index funds directly to investors. with all of those zeros, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelity.

♪ so maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero ♪ so maybe i'll win cologuard: colon cancer and older at average risk. i've heard a lot of excuses to avoid screening for colon cancer. i'm not worried. it doesn't run in my family. i can do it next year. no rush. cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab. there's no excuse for waiting. get screened. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere.

prevagen. healthier brain. better life. it'scan it helphe january sale keep me asleep?mber 360 smart bed. absolutely, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. and now, save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, now only $1,799. only for a limited time. yeah. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. con liberty mutual solo pagas lo que necesitas. only pay for what you need... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ which is why xfinity mobile data,is a different kindent. of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data, or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to top wireless carriers. save up to $400 a year when you switch. plus, save even more with $150 off galaxy a70.

click, call or visit a store today.

. what feedback have you gotten from your colleagues? >> absolutely, total cooperation. it cracks me up to see on tv, oh, the pressure on that. i have news for them, you don't have a story. >> a lot of sensitivity. >> i wish there were iphones when i was covering capitol hill. those are places that cameras cannot go, but iphones can. that was nancy pelosi who just moments ago, as she was sending that letter, that she plans to transmit the articles of impeachment to the senate next

week. joining me now pramila jayapal anda member of the judiciary committee. thanks for being with us. next week, tuesday, there will be a meeting with the caucus and by wednesday, do you think you'll have a vote or does it have to be done that quickly? >> i don't know exactly what the speaker is thinking. but i know that she has had a really good strategy of holding these articles -- the transmission of these articles because we had no sense of whether mitch mcconnell was going to give us a fair trial or not. now it appears very, very clear that mitch mcconnell is going to go against the will of the american people by having a trial that is a sham trial. but we're going to do our part as the speaker said. we'll transmit the articles. we'll name our impeachment managers but the american people have to ask mitch mcconnell if he's not going to respect the constitution in this manner and have the senate do a fair trial,

when will he respect the constitution. that is the single oath that we take when we come to office. >> at this point he has not conceded at all to the speaker's demands. what has she gained by waiting on transmitting the articles? >> well, i think that it kept -- it allowed us to keep the focus on what the american people want, which is a fair trial. we were able to send that message over and over and over again. so in mitch mcconnell not giving into any of our demands as yet, hopefully something will change with republican senators, he's saying he's not willing to give the american people what the constitution demands and what they want. but in addition to that, andrea, i just saw that he also signed on as a cosponsor of senator holly's resolution to dismiss this whole thing and i find it stunning that that is the person who is putting together the rules for the trial, is making

the decisions, is essentially the chief juror and also from the very beginning saying that he's going to violate any oath of impartiality. he's made it clear that he does not believe in a balance of power in my book. >> maybe while i was sitting here that happened. i had not seen that. you're saying that the majority -- >> he's the 13th cosponsor. he is the 13th cosponsor of the dismissal motion. i saw it as i was walking over here and i was stunned at the idea that he's not even putting up a pretense anymore. i think now it's on the american people to call their senators and to say this is outrageous. it's unconstitutional. it is so disrespectful to the framers, to our constitution. but most of all, to the american people. they expect these senators to do a fair trial with witnesses.

they expect to have impartiality. and mitch mcconnell has over and over again, from the very beginning, saying he was coordinating everything with the white house. and now signing onto a dismissal motion. he's told us exactly where he is. >> do you expect that you might be one of the managers? >> i really -- that's in the speaker's hands and i trust her. it would be an incredible honor if i was asked and i would do that of course. >> and i want to briefly ask you about the status of your constituents in washington state, the iranian americans who were detained for hours and hours coming back saturday night from a concert in canada. these are u.s. citizens or green card holders, permanent residents. have you gotten any clarification from cbp as to whether there's a policy. they're denying there's a new policy. >> that's right. and thanks for bringing this up. this is a tragic situation where we believe up to 200 people,

everyone we have spoken to, a u.s. citizen, some with advanced screening that allows them to get a card to travel easily across the border, legal permanent residents were pulled aside specifically because they were of iranian decent. and we were on it immediately. my office found out about it late saturday night and we immediately started talking to everybody we could and we wrote a letter that went in i think early tuesday morning with the chairs of judiciary oversight and homeland security to cbp. cbp has continue to deny that there was any directive at all. but i can tell you in all of the conversations i have now had with people who were in this situation, detained for up to 12 hours, little kids on the floor, u.s. citizens, car keys taken away, u.s. passport taken away, that there was a directive. the only question is, where did it come from?

so we are demanding answers directly from cbp, but we're also thrilled that two days ago the office of civil rights and civil liberties has announced that they will open an investigation into this matter. sometimes those investigations take a little bit too long and the reality is that we believe that this was a directive to detain anybody regardless of citizenship and focus on iranian-americans even if there was absolutely no reason. and of course u.s. citizens, there shouldn't be a second loyalty test applied. it takes us back to the 1940s and the internment of japanese-americans. we'll continue to follow up with cbp, but we're also very happy that there will be an investigation thanks to people, one of the people who testified at the press conference i did on

monday morning, telling their stories. and i just want to emphasize the human toll of this, andrea, for u.s. citizens. i'm an immigrant myself. to somehow be told that there's a second loyalty test beyond having a u.s. passport and u.s. citizenship, is so unconscionable and people are afraid. we see you. we are fighting for you. and we're going to make sure that america upholds our obligations. last thing i want to say on this, i resbintroduced today my access to legal counsel bill. we introduced it right after the first muslim ban. i reintroduced it today. people who are in this situation should have access to legal counsel. it doesn't mean the government should pay for it. they should be able to consult with lawyers right then and there so they know their rights and they can demand themselves against this intrusive behavior. >> we will follow you and that.

thank you. congresswoman pramila jayapal, thank you so much. >> thank you so much, andrea. coming up next, bernie sanders meets his doppelganger this morning. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. you've tried so many moisturizers...

but one blows them all out of the water. hydro boost with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back... neutrogena® and for body... hydro boost body gel cream. so it bounces back... [ sigh ] [ deep breath ] "1917" is the winner of the golden globe for best director. fall back! and best picture. if you don't get there in time, we will lose 1,600 men. it's "a soaring tribute to heroism." we need to keep moving! you keep hold of me! come on! and audiences give it an "a". [ thrilling music playing ]

i'm here with larry david -- no, wait. oh. larry david. here they are together. if you become president, you've got to be flying back and forth to play him on "snl." >> it's not going to be easy for me. it will be great for the country. terrible for me. >> i'm giving you a good job for four years and you're complaining. >> talk with your hands. senator bernie sanders and larry david, the man who plays him on "snl," together on today this morning and it turns out they're second cousins. sanders is seeing a big surge in the polls following a monster fund-raising effort. it comes as billionaire activist tom steyer becomes the sixth

democratic to qualify for the debate. his numbers are rising. joining me now, david yepsen, host of iowa press. great to see you. susan page, and jonathan capehart, opinion writer and msnbc political analyst. and we have breaking news, david yepsen, susan, jonathan, marianne williamson has dropped out of the race. >> it is one sign that the field is sorting out. and i think after iowa and new hampshire, we will have a much smaller democratic field than we have today. although we could be surprised by who makes the cut. >> and, david, you have your ear to the ground on the iowa poll. the register poll coming out tonight. bernie has been surging and warren falling back.

are there more surprises in iowa? >> well, i think one thing to keep an eye on in iowa is the movement of amy klobuchar. senator sanders has been moving in national polls in iowa. but i think that senator klobuchar has found kind of a sweet spot where she can appeal to progressives without being a socialist, where she can appeal to centrists would be being too establishment and she's a midwesterner. and i expect her to show some movement. >> and, jonathan, we see this new culture at the top, but also tom steyer. the fact that he can get on the stage and, you know, cory booker hasn't, others can't. >> for tom steyer, it's money. but it's also polling. and you could argue because of the money and all the ads that

she's be he's been buy second to mayor bloomberg who won't be on any debate stage at this point, because he's not doing personal fund-raising, it shows the power of money. tom steyer has it. senator booker doesn't. and as a result he's not there in the polls. >> it's an all-white state. >> right. which you know, i know a lot of people are talking about the people that there are no people of color on the stage, those are all relevant questions. but let's not forget, we spend lots of time on these sets and on air talking about the fact that african-americans are the backbone and the foundation of the democratic party and a majority of that vote is going to a white man named joe biden. and so the democratic party right now, at least through polling, is making its preferences known and right now none of those preferences happen to be people of color. >> and susan, for the first time

now, foreign policy crisis, foreign policy experience is a factor in the campaign. >> yeah. >> bigger factor remains to be seen. >> and how it cuts we're not sure. we have joe biden making this a selling point. i have experience on foreign policy. i can envision being commander in chief, but you have bernie sanders attacking him on his judgment particularly in the vote to support the invasion of iraq, a vote that bernie sanders opposed, a point that he makes every day now. does it -- does the current crisis make people want a trusted, familiar face like joe biden or do they want someone who has taken a clear stance against foreign military entanglements like bernie sanders. >> what about joe biden in iowa? he hasn't done well there in the past. >> no, he hasn't. he has spent a lot of time here. and he's campaigning as the grown-up in the room. at a time of turmoil and

confusi confusion in the presidency, americans may be looking for a cool hand on the tiller and i think that's been one of the things that's helped him. he's had a little bit of a dip. he's come back. and i think that's been part of the equation. to the extent foreign policy remains an issue in the campaign in the next 20 days, i think it could continue to help him. >> susan page, jonathan capehart, thanks so much. and coming up, we'll speak with presidential candidate tom steyer live. but first declaration of independence, meghan markle is back in canada with her son after dropping a bombshell. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. let me tell you something,

i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio and so much more. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more. i'm proud to be a part of aag,

i trust em, i think you can too. set yourself free with fleet. gentle constipation relief in minutes.

little fleet. big relief. try it. feel it. feel that fleet feeling. and today's new developments in the bombshell royal split, meghan markle has left the uk for canada after she and prince harry announced they would step back from royal family duties. the couple's son is with his mother now, according to multiple reports while prince harry remains in the uk. keir simmons is in london. i know you've covered nuclear issues in north korea and wars and middle east conflict, but you have the big story today.

>> reporter: yeah. look, it is. and i guess viewers of the crown will be soaking it up because it's like the crown in real life. obviously the crown is based on real life too. but the latest developments, the queen has knocked heads together it seems and has got her son prince charles and prince william talking to prince harry's team and trying to come up with a solution, a deal may emerge within days which belies the idea that the royal family was so shocked that all of this was announced. i think what they were shocked is how it was quickly announced and the reason why that happened was because there was a leak in a newspaper. there's nothing that infeuriate prince harry more that something he's planning ending up in a newspaper before he can announce it. but now it looks like the royals have decided to stop fighting with each other and start fighting to try and come up with

a solution. >> and nobody -- nobody wins in this situation. for them, you're talking about prince harry being one of the most popular royals, if not the most popular, and this young couple supposedly reviving the monarchy. thank you so much. i know you're going to stay on top of this on two continents now. >> of course. >> thank you. keir simmons in london. party of six. tom steyer joining us next after appearing to qualify for the next debate just before the iowa caucuses. more drama there. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc.

to some, a surprising late edition to next week's democratic debate, to the debate stage, overnight, tom steyer surging in two new polls out of nevada and south carolina qualifying steyer to appear in the last debate before the iowa caucuses. this graphic shows you dramatically how having a billion dollars can help. look at how much steyer has spent. more than $20 million in those two states alone, in nevada and south carolina, bringing steyer's total ad spending to roughly $67 million. second among democrats behind mike bloomberg. joining me now is tom steyer. it's good to see you, mr. steyer.

obviously the question is, what about the advantage that a billion dollars brings you to be able to spend millions in these states, get qualified and this is a debate that's excluding senator booker and others and a much less diverse panel of debaters than some would want. >> let me say a couple things. to me the question for everybody running for president including me is message. i have a very simple message which is that we have a broken government that's been bought by corporations. and before we get any of the progressive policies that i believe americans across the board want and need, we're going to have to get back government of, by, and for the people, and as an outsider, i've been fighting and beating the corporations for a decade, and i'm talking about structural change in washington like term limits. and if you look at what i've done over the last ten years,

when there's -- what i perceive as a huge problem in america like that, i've spent all of my, put my heart and soul and my money into solving it the way i did in the need to impeach campaign. i look at this and say this is exactly what i've been doing the last ten years. and if that's the worst thing i ever do, i can accept it. but what is true that you said is that we've ended up with a field of candidates that's not nearly as diverse as i would like it to be or as you're saying you would like it to be, andrea, and let me say that the day after senator kamala harris dropped from the race, i sent an open letter to the democratic national committee saying that they should change the criteria for the debate to make it possible for a more diverse set of candidates to appear on the debate stage that i think that's appropriate. i said it the day after kamala dropped because i agree with you

that we should have a more diverse group of people on this stage. we have a very diverse party. that's one of our greatest strengths and we should have people that reflect that. >> let me just say, i take your points except you say that it's all about message, but you have the money to get your message out. they don't. and so your opponents say you're buying the election. how is that small "d" democratic? >> i think a couple of things about that. i am not a famous person. if you look at what's happened over the last -- since i got into this race, and i got in months after everybody else. when people hear my mesmessage, whether they see me face to face in an early primary state, i'm saying something different from anybody else, and i am different from everybody else. i'm not a career politician. i'm saying this government is broken and if we're going to get it back from the corporation, we have to take it back. is an outsider different from somebody inside washington in

doing that job? >> you're an outsider, and you're running and we're now in the middle of a national security crisis. so is this the time when foreign policy is playing a role, how are you more qualified an a former vice president or senator sanders or others who have dealt with the conflicts and how the challenge the administration on the contentions in the middle east? >> well, let me say this. i have done business and worked internationally for decades. i have worked with governments around the world. i have worked with big businesses around the world and had to make decisions about how to proceed. so i don't have military experience, and i give people credit for that, but this is a question to me of having judgment, of having clear strategy and then consultanting the experts in making your decisions. but if you look, andrea, and

excuse me for saying this, at the experience over the last 20 years of the american government and how we've proceeded in the middle east, in the iraq war, and the afghanistan war, that implies that experience alone isn't nearly enough. that, in fact, we've had a series of mistakes, and that the person in my mind who did the best job in thinking about the middle east was a state senator from illinois named barack obama who had no international experience when he said he was against the iraq war. so, in fact, this idea that somehow experience equals judgment, i don't think is true, and i have extensive decades of experience in understanding how the united states operates internationally and what makes for success. >> and finally, finally, michael bloomberg's plan to keep his staff, his campaign staff in all the key states to run against donald trump even if he loses and is not the nominee. will you do the same and commit

your billions of dollars, your millions in this campaign, even if you're not the nominee to help the party win? >> andrea, as i'm sure you know, i started one of the largest grass roots organizations in the united states. it's called next gen america. it did the largest youth mobilization vote movement. over the last two cycles we've knocked on 25 million doors. all the organizations and operations are continuing and being funded by me as i run for president. the question about whether i will continue to support progressive causes, progressive candidates and the democratic party is something i've always said i would do, and, in fact, i am literally doing as we speak. >> tom steyer, thank you very much. con dwrachlations on making the debate stage. we'll all be watching. thanks. >> thanks, andrea. zblrch a stay with us for special

breaking news from the home front right here. you're watching "andrea mitchel reports on msnbc". tchel reports on msnbc". thousands of women with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread . to.ther .body, are living in the moment and taking ibrance." on m. ibrance with an aromat" on mr is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer, as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole, and shrank tumors in over half of patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs that can lead to death. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including trouble breathing, shortness of breath, cough, or chest pain. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea,

sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance. but one blows them all out of the water. hydro boost with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back... neutrogena® and for body... hydro boost body gel cream.

so it bounces back... or here on a wifi hotspot. lte xfinity mobile has more coverage to keep you connected to what matters most. that's because it's the only wireless network that automatically connects you to millions of secure wifi hotspots and the best lte everywhere else. save up to $400 a year when you switch. plus, save even more with $100 off galaxy a50. click, call or visit a store today.

and finally, this important programming note. must see tv tomorrow morning when our friend and colleague kristen welker makes her debut as co-anchor of weekend today. a dogged white house reporter. the nicest question we know. she got her start as a "today

show" intern at harvard. she often shares her reporting with us on our show is often on the phone with me on the hours off camera sharing notes late at night. she has a huge heart. she's not only a dear colleague. she's an even more treasured prend. congratulations to kristen and the welker family. that does it for us. i'll be watching and you will be as well. here are ali velshi and stephanie rule. >> the first time i was on andrea mitchel's show, kristen was the host of it. that was my first experience with msnbc. >> we were road warriors together through 2015 and 2016. there's a bond. >> have a great afternoon. >> sadly for ali, he met me and it went down from there.