>> the assassination and the alibis. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. we have a big show tonight with some big stories. on iran, president trump has yet another explanation for taking the u.s. to the brink of war. on impeachment, speaker pelosi made a major decision about exactly when she's going to send the two articles over to the senate. and in the presidential race, we've got brand-new polling tonight from iowa, with the first in the country caucuses now just 24 days away.

and the story that's dominating all the tabloids this week, the shake up in the royal family. why prince harry and meghan are charting a new course for themselves. but first, president trump's latest rationale for last week's assassination of a top iranian general. saying soleimani was targeting multiple u.s. embassies. multiple embassies. as the administration struggles to get its story straight. at a rally last night in ohio, trump expanded on a claim he had made earlier in the day, that the general was targeting a single u.s. embassy. >> soleimani was actively planning new attacks and he was looking very seriously at our embassies and not just the embassy in baghdad, but we stopped him and we stopped him quickly and we stopped him cold. >> well, secretary of state mike pompeo has repeatedly asserted that the u.s. acted on a, quote, imminent threat.

in an interview with fox news last night, pompeo couldn't give a clear answer, however. but this morning, he backed up the president's newest account. >> there is no doubt that there were a series of imminent attacks that were being plotted by qassem soleimani, and we don't know precisely when, and we don't know precisely where, but it was real. we had specific information on an imminent threat and those threats included attacks on u.s. embassies, period, full stop. we don't know exactly which day it would have been executed, but it was very clear. >> well, members of congress have argued that the administration officials gave no evidence of embassies being targeted, even in that classified setting in a scif in the basement of the capitol. but in an interview with fox news, president trump has even more specific information. >> don't the american people have a right to know what specifically was targeted without revealing methods and sources? >> well, i don't think so, but we will tell you that probably it was going to be the embassy in baghdad. >> did they have large-scale

attacks planned for other embassies? and if those were planned, why can't we reveal that to the american people? wouldn't that help your case? >> well, i can reveal that i believe it would have been four embassies. >> we're joined right now, in a moment by susan rice, national security adviser to president obama. let me start with jonathan lamir, white house correspondent for the associated press. jonathan, this has become a desperate struggle to find a reason for something that was done. why was -- do we know why soleimani was killed? executed, assassinated, whatever the term? >> it's been a -- >> because he was getting off a commercial plane at baghdad airport. he was commuting into baghdad legally in a country he's allowed to enter, a country where we have diplomatic relations and we used that as a shooting opportunity, when we could have done this anytime before we wanted to do it, we did it now. and now they're coming with all

these explanations why they assassinated the guy. >> yeah, it's been a series of shifting explanations. and you make a good point there. both of president trump's immediate predecessors had the ability and the opportunity to take out soleimani, bush and obama, and neither did, for fear of disruption that it caused to the reason. >> why do we say "take out" now instead of "kill"? >> they mean one in the same in this case. >> but why do we say "take out"? i'm serious. it's fallen into our vocabulary. why don't we say, we killed the guy. >> i'm comfortable with that. to kill him. somebody was killed. i was on air force one, with the president last week in florida as he wrapped up his winter vacation. i was on air force one on the flight back and called the press pool to the front of the plane and explained this is someone he had kept his on for a long time. he felt it had loomed as a threat against the united states for months and years, but they needed to have some sort of

immediate explanation as to the immediacy of why this was called in now and they don't seem to have a clear answer. secretary of state pompeo has changed his story a few times, the president now has gone from one embassy to multiple embassies, now saying that four embassies were in danger, but only named one, the one in baghdad, the site of those protests the last week or so. and members of congress we've spoken to in the last few days as well as their aides who have received a series of briefings about this strike say that while, yes, there was incredible credible intelligence that soleimani was up to no good, that there was perhaps danger down the road, there was no sense that anything was right around the corner. >> what's with the new iraqi travel ban? >> well, so, thank you for bringing that up, chris. my colleagues and i at the associated press broke that story today, that the white house is considering expanding the original travel ban, which initially it was deemed a muslim ban. there are seven countries on it. they are being considered to be added to this. the first one had certainly some

issues in the courts, the supreme court ruled that it had to be far more narrow. it was allowed to stand in a limited fashion. according to our reporting, a draft report has gone to the white house. the names of the nations have been blacked out, but according to our sources, some of those that are being considered are those that fell off the ban last time, which includes chad, sudan, and yes, iraq. let's pause on that for a moment. this is a moment where our relationship with iraq is very tenuous. the parliament took a vote in the last few days to expel the u.s. forces from the country. granted, that doesn't have a lot of authority behind it yet, its fate still remains up for grabs. just today, the united states state department said it wanted to keep its personnel, and troops in iraq, but this would add a lot of tension to that relationship if indeed this goes into law and therefore risking those countries being expelled and therefore increase iran's influence in the region. >> it's so ironic, we went to war with iraq, we went in there to liberate it and now we're being liberated. we're told to leave.

great reporting, as always. the ironies are all over the place. jonathan lamir of the associated press. i want to turn now to susan rice, former u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and former national security adviser to president obama. she's the author of "tough love: my story of the things worth fighting for." thank you so much, ambassador. where are we on this? and you know, i grew up learning that we had been involved with patrice lamund to some extent, we supported the coup in vietnam that ended up killing ziem, our partner. assassination has been a dirty, awful business historically. we've been too close to too much involved in it over the years. i thought after the church commission back in the '70s, we said, enough of that! we're not going to assassinate anymore. >> well, as you know, soleimani was not a head of state and the church committee really mainly applied to head of states. but the important thing here, chris, is the wisdom of this choice. and also the crazy shifting explanations, imminent, not

imminent, four embassies, one embassy, no embassies, it truly strains credulity. and whatever the intelligence indicates, i think we know from members of congress who have received the briefings that they really had no case for imminence. they may have had a collection of noise, chatter, intelligence reports. i think those of us who have been following iran for a long time would assume that the quds force and therefore soleimani are constantly surveilling our embassies, surveilling our personnel and having plots in their back pocket. bringing them to fruition, though, is quite a different thing. but to me what i'm most worried about is the wisdom of this killing. the fact is that if you look at where we are since this happened, it's been setback after setback to our strategic interest. the iraqis want us out. they're now pushing to make that happen. the campaign against isis, the reason why we're in iraq in the first place, has been suspended.

and the nuclear program, which had been incrementally restarting after we pulled out of the nuclear deal unilaterally is now full steam ahead. so all of these very important concerns to our interests have been set back in a fundamental way. so this was not a smart move. it was bad for our security, bad for our standing in the region, and yes, i mean, many people, myself included, are glad to see a world without soleimani. but i don't think the benefits nearly outweighed the costs. >> well, is that why? because it's ended up with all of these bad chain reactions going on. now it's going to be, who lost iraq now? we've got the people on the streets of tehran, all crying and miserable, because a hero of theirs has been killed by us, assassinated by us. where's this going to take us? >> it's going to take us to a continuing -- >> are we ever going to be not at this sort of cold war with iran? >> well, not for a while.

and what happened as a result of the retaliation, the iranians, you know, retaliated in quite a calibrated way. clearly designed -- >> sure, nobody got killed. >> -- to minimize or eliminate the risk of casualties. but they're not done. anybody who knows iran and knows the importance of soleimani to iran, as i do, as many do, would assume that the iranians' next steps will unfold over time, in places we don't expect, but they will involve proxy attacks on our personnel. perhaps our diplomatic facilities, as well as our military personnel, it's going to involve cyber, and it could well involve terrorist attacks, as we've seen in the past. and not necessarily isolated to the middle east. >> well, that's scary. where could they hit us? >> they can -- the iranians have capacity globally. we've seen them hit in latin america. we know they tried to plot here in the united states, a failed

plot that was foiled against the saudi ambassador. we know they have capacities in asia, through hezbollah and others. so the iranians have reach. >> that's always amazed me, because you've got hezbollah all over the world, latin america everywhere, people in africa, they're all over there. and we have missionaries all around the world. we have businesspeople all around the world, we have tourists all around the world. what stops them from an all-out war? just say, we're going to hit you everywhere -- everywhere you are in the world, we're going to hit you tonight? >> well, obviously, to the extent that we can attribute the attacks to iran, and that's the challenge, and they seem to be proceeding in a concerning way, they know that we have the capacity as well to strike back. and that's when you get into this, again, as we were earlier in the week, an escalatory cycle that could well result in war. and, chris, with the nuclear program now off -- the brakes all off of that, and they are in

charge, the iranians of how fast or slow they go, that too could be a very imminent flash point for conflict. >> well, former democratic senator from virginia and navy secretary jim webb questioned the use of assassination as a tactic in an op-ed today in today's "washington post." he warned, the assassination of the most well-known military commander of a country of which we are not formally at war during his visit to a third country that had opposed -- that had not opposed his presence invites a lax moral justification for a plethora of retaliatory measures. and not only from iran". >> well, chris, i mean, i think there's some truth to that. you open a pandora's box. there's a reason why we've made a distinction historically between non-state actors, terrorist groups, individual terrorists like osama bin laden or baghdadi, and individuals who are part of a nation state government. >> let's talk about -- let's talk about motive here. because this is a strange speech the president gave the other

day. i know you're an expert and you can probably see all this strange language. some of it seems to be written by what we call neocons or hawks. the words "regime." some of the language says, okay, this is probably mike pence talking. some of it seems like pompeo, who talks and thinks the same way. do you think there are people around the president, especially those two gentlemen, pushing for war? or pushing close to war? something you might call brinkmanship? they want a really hot front against iran going through this election? >> i'm not sure, chris. i'm not close enough to it to make that kind of judgment. i do think that, you know, the president reached a fork in the road when the iranians retaliated. he had a choice. he could have escalated. he could have hit back, yet again. he chose not to. i think that was a wise choice. however, had there been people pushing him to do that, and i think in the past, there may have been those among him, around him that were, you know,

i hope they've learned from this experience that it comes at great risk and great cost. this is -- war with iran is no joke. and for those -- >> explain that, because i think people think, well, we beat afghanistan, thanks to the northern alliance and the cia and everybody rather quickly. >> but we're still involved in that. >> i know we are. >> that war is not over. >> and we marched into the -- we marched into iraq. war with iran, what would it be like? >> iran's capabilities far exceed that of saddam hussein, for example, at his height. iran's capabilities are multi-faceted. they are experts in asymmetric attacks, they've recently demonstrated through their attacks on the saudi oil facilities a very sophisticated ballistic missile capability, with real precision. so they can do real damage and when you look at how our personnel enforces a raid in the

immediate region of iran, should iran decide to react, retaliate, attack, they have multiple vulnerable targets. >> and one of your successors, john bolton, wants to go to war. >> i won't speak for john bolton. >> i think he wants to go to war. it's a privilege to have you here, ambassador susan rice. thank you for coming on. >> thank you. coming up, speaker pelosi tells house democrats to prepare to send the two articles of impeachment against president trump to the senate next week, so this thing's ending. it's beginning, actually, too. the trial is coming. but that big question remains, will we hear from witnesses, especially, well, john bolton says he's willing to testify. but today trump says he might invoke -- you hear it now, as you've heard it before -- executive privilege to block bolton from even talking. here goes. >> you can't be in the white house as president future -- i'm talking about future, many future presidents, and have a security adviser, anyone having to do with security and legal and other things -- >> you're going to invoke executive privilege? >> well, i think you have to for the sake of the office. plus, the royal exit.

harry and meghan are getting out of the royal family business, at least most of the time. if you've watched "the crown," you know the importance of royal duty over individual desires. but the prince and duchess say they want a progressive new role for themselves. more on that tonight. we'll get to that tonight. stick with us. to that tonight. stick with us. great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

before discovering nexium 24hr to treat her frequent heartburn, marie could only imagine enjoying freshly squeezed orange juice. now no fruit is forbidden. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? for all-day, you wanna see something thatamazing?ing. go to hilton instead of a travel site and you'll experience a whole new range of emotions like... the relaxing feeling of knowing you're getting the best price. these'll work. the utter delight of free wi-fi... . oh man this is the best part. isn't that you? yeah. and the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone.

i can read minds too. really? book at hilton.com. if you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25% off that stay. expect better. expect hilton. struggling to clean toughm mr. clean. bathroom messes with sprays? then you gotta try mr. clean magic erasers. just wet.. squeeze.. and erase tough messes around your bathtub and shower. mr. clean magic erasers. there's no clean like mr. clean here, it all starts withello! hi!... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! wifi up there? uhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your local xfinity store today.

welcome back to "hardball." speaker nancy pelosi's preparing to deliver those articles of impeachment to the senate, allowing the president's trial to move forward. in a letter to her democratic colleagues today, pelosi said, "i have asked judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler to be prepared to bring to the floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the senate." pelosi will consult with her caucus on tuesday, coming up, which means to "the new york times", that the senate's

proceedings could begin as soon as wednesday. amid all of this, the debate continues over the fairness of the proceedings, namely whether the republican-led senate will even hear from witnesses or move to suppress new evidence or to shut the whole thing down. but in an encouraging sign today, somewhat encouraging, a key republican senator opened the door to allowing witness testimony. senator susan collins of maine told the "bangor daily news" up there that she's working with a, quote, small group of republican senators to ensure that witnesses can be called to trial. i'm joined right now by yamiche alcindor, white house correspondent for the pbs "newshour," noah bookbinder is executive director of citizens for responsibility and ethics, glenn kirschner, of course, former federal prosecutor. let's go to glenn. who blinked? >> who blinked. some might say speaker pelosi blinked, but, chris, let's look at where we are today -- >> well, then again, let me fight with you immediately. she made her point -- >> go ahead, bring it on.

>> -- she never could do more than make her point, she never could do this for months. so it was always going to be a short string of days she had. did she push it to the limit, beyond the limit or what? >> well, where are we today, that's different from where we were the day the house voted on the articles. one, we have bolton saying, you know what, i'll testify. two, we have senator collins saying, i've consulted with a small group of senators and i -- >> four. we need four. >> and i am hopeful that we'll get to a point where -- i'm not saying it's cause and effect, the pelosi delay necessarily led to that, but let's face it, we've been discussing the fairness of the trial. this delay has given us an opportunity to talk about how a trial without witnesses is like democracy without voting. it ain't. so i think we're in a better place now for the pelosi delay. >> yamiche, as he does often, mitch mcconnell tried to do some man 'splaining, and all the time, he didn't say, nagging, he

said haggling. but he was basically saying, okay, lady, you know, get back in your lane. >> what you just said is essentially the democratic point of view, that they held on to these -- >> well, he didn't start with that. he started by saying he blinked. >> that is true, that is true. the latter part of what you said is what the democrats will say, which is that they wanted to have this long conversation. but most republicans and most democrats that i've talked to said nancy pelosi knew who she was dealing with, she knew she was dealing with mitch mcconnell she knew he wasn't going to really give anything big to hold this back. they really just wanted that national conversation. so in some ways, this is still going on largely on the terms that mitch mcconnell wanted, but he did have to now answer to his fellow republican senators who are now saying, wait, what does john bolton have to say? but of course, senator collins, and i would add in there senator romney both say, it would be nice to hear from bolton, but neither one of them are saying, i'm not going to move forward with this trial if we don't have

witnesses, which is what democrats want them to say, and they're not doing that yet. >> i've said recently, not to quote myself, but it was pretty good. i said that mitt romney flirts with greatness. he flirts with it, but he doesn't marry it. to stand up and say, this president -- i want witnesses, d dammit, i'll keep demanding it all two or three weeks of this trial until we get some witnesses. he could do that. he's a senator. >> he could do that. but what we've seen is republican senators really walk up to the line on all sorts of issues, whether it's brett kavanaugh, whether it's the senate trial. you've seen republicans have kind of a sprinkling of standing up to the president, a sprinkling of standing up to mitch mcconnell, but they always stop short. some people say that's politics, they're worried about their base and getting re-elected. some people say that's also mitch mcconnell showing that he has control of his caucus -- >> he cracks the whip. >> yeah, he cracks the whip and they listen. >> democrats are eager to hear from former national security adviser john bolton who's expressed his willingness to testify under subpoena. however, in a fox interview today, president trump signaled

he will try to prevent that from happening. >> why not call bolton? why not allow him to testify? this thing is bogus. why not allow bolton to testify? >> i would have no problem, other than one thing. you can't be in the white house as president future -- i'm talking about future, many future presidents -- and have a security adviser, anybody having to do with security, and legal, and other things -- >> you're going to invoke executive privilege? >> well, i think you have to for the sake of the office. >> it's amazing how he does this -- he acts like he really meant it. like he cares about the future of american governmental institutions. i don't think so. but here's the question, can you have, given the precedence, a trial without witnesses? >> i mean, you really can't. the senate has, 15 times in american history, conducted an impeachment trial to completion and in every one of those cases, witness have testified. in many of them, witnesses who did not testify in front of the house. this would really be breaking new ground in a really unfortunate way. >> well, legally, what happens if the president invokes executive privilege, as lawyers

do, and says, i don't want my national security adviser talking about national security? then it goes to the courts. and they play for time. you can't hold up -- does anybody have any idea what you do? can you hold up the trial until you get a court ruling on john bolton's testimony? >> it sounds like -- the way i feel and the way that my sources tell me, it's really kind of uncharted ground, but for the most part, the white house has had this dance that they think everything is privileged, but you have people like army lieutenant colonel vindman walk in there and say, i don't really care what the white house is saying, i'm going to go forward. so i think john bolton could be in a situation where -- >> since he's not working there anymore. >> exactly. he can say, look, this is what i can tell you without breaking classification or without talking about privilege, i was really concerned about some of the things that i saw. and by the way, a lot of his deputies, a lot of the aides that he sent up to warn the white house lawyers, they've all kind of said, this is what john bolton believes. so in some ways, they can really just ask him, is what fiona hill saying your aide in the national security council, was she correct when she said that you

were really angry at this and that you didn't want to be part of what you were calling a, quote, drug deal. those could be simple yes or no answers and don't have to get into any new ground. >> let's talk about human behavior. could it be -- i don't know bolton personally. i know his politics, his ideology, but could it be that he says, i thought for a while i want to save some of the goodies for my book, because people like to do that, write the big story with the big news. but he said, you know, if history comes down that i sat on this stuff for a year while he had a -- didn't have a real trial, i'm guilty of really withholding my citizenship here? >> exactly. if he had blockbuster evidence, and he doesn't testify, and then he puts in a book information that could have changed the course of a senate impeachment trial, he will go down in history as a traitor and a villain. >> well, in december, you said it well, he didn't like hearing that, either. "the washington post" reports that senate republicans were seeking a short trial, possibly two weeks, before holding a vote

on the president's fate. even if they begin the proceedings, by the way, at the earliest possible date next wednesday, that would leave less than three weeks until the president delivers his state of the union address. yet today, senator mitch mcconnell wouldn't say whether his goal was to get the president acquitted before the state of the union. >> do you think it's important to get it finished before the state of the union and have him acquitted by the time he appears? >> oh, look, we're just getting started. i'm glad we now have the opportunity to do it. and it's been a long wait and i'm glad it's over. >> what do you make of this? because i -- we all know what a state of the union looks like. the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, who's leading the charge on impeachment, has gotten it through the house. the president is under trial in the united states senate, and we're all going to watch the president come in with the usual one-half of the chamber cheering him, the other sitting on their butts, right? it's going to be worse than ever this time. >> it's going to be interesting and i think that the white house really just wants this to be over as soon as possible. all the sources that i talk to, even though they were saying for

months and months and months that president trump was going to welcome being impeached, he hates this part of his legacy, he wants this to be over. he wants to be able to take the victory lap and say, look, they tried to get me out of office and i'm still here. he wants to maybe deliver that line at the state of union. will he be able to do that, who knows? but that's definitely what the presidents want. >> well, the mobsters always come out on the courthouse steps, maybe just won a case on a technicality, they come out, i'm exonerated! i'm innocent! not just, i'm off the hook here, but i am clean! i can hear trump doing that. i can hear that victory lap statement at the state of the union. >> absolutely. and the problem here is that mitch mcconnell has already stated that he's essentially in the bag for the president. and so it's not going to be -- if that's how it goes, it's not going to be an exoneration that carries a lot of weight with the american people. >> but he'll give that speech and the republicans will jump up and down like they just won the super bowl, right? >> yeah. i think you can imagine that the republicans will be cheering

him on, saying, you beat this case. >> you beat the rap. thank you, yamiche. i love it. yamiche alcindor pr, noah bookbinder -- oh, i'm sorry, you're from "newshour." but noah bookbinder and pbs and you actually appear on television. >> yes. >> you're not just on the radio. ben kirchner has his entire family back here tonight, they're so great. thank you, glenn. up next, one democratic presidential candidate is throwing in the towel while another candidate secures a highly coveted spot in the next debate. you might say he paid for it. plus, a new poll out tonight from iowa straight ahead on "hardball." when you shop with wayfair, you spend less and get way more. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one.

for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com i wanted more from my copd medicine that's why i've got the power of 1, 2, 3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved once-daily 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy ♪ the power of 1,2,3 ♪ trelegy ♪ 1,2,3 ♪ trelegy man: with trelegy and the power of 1, 2, 3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works three ways to open airways, keep them open and reduce inflammation, for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough?

maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1, 2, 3. ♪ trelegy, 1,2,3 man: save at trelegy.com. ♪ trelegy, 1,2,3 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. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.

along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix.

welcome back to "hardball." we're just three weeks now out from the first in the nation iowa caucuses, just three weeks. and tonight, we're getting our latest glimpse into the minds of the iowa voters. a in "des moines register"/cnn poll just released tonight has senator bernie sanders leading, bernie sanders, he's hanging in there at 20 points. not far ahead, but ahead. senator elizabeth warren is at 17, pretty close. former mayor pete buttigieg, who was leading in a november poll, has dropped the most, now at 16. a huge drop for him. he took a battering in that last debate and it matters. and former vice president joe biden comes up a close fourth. fourth. he's just at 15%. that is rough news for him.

it's also the final poll that determines who will make tuesday's democratic debate stage next week in des moines. six candidates have qualified. catch this, tom steyer making the cut, thanks to polls released thursday in nevada and south carolina, where he spent tens of thousands on tv ads to get his numbers up. however, steyer's spending has been dwarfed by former new york mayor michael bloomberg, who has already spent more than any of the other candidates combined. he's spent over $160 million already, more than the total of everyone else. bloomberg's also making news today with his commitment to pay 500 professional staffers through the november 2020 election itself to support the eventual nominee, whether it's him or not. in other words, he's paying a real team of independent campaigners to stay on, working full-time, right through november, even if he's out of the game. and that list of potential candidates shrunk, by the way, today with marianne williamson announcing today that she's suspending her campaign.

also running for re-election this year is president trump's biggest booster, and we know who that is, senator lindsey graham of south carolina. a new report paints a picture of a man who will do almost anything to get re-elected. that's lindsey graham's democratic challenger joins us next. good morning, mr. sun. good morning, blair. [ chuckles ] whoo. i'm gonna grow big and strong. yes, you are. i'm gonna get this place all clean. i'll give you a hand. and i'm gonna put lisa on crutches! wait, what? said she's gonna need crutches. she fell pretty hard. you might want to clean that up, girl. excuse us. when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you built with customizable coverage.

-and i'm gonna -- -eh, eh, eh. -donny, no. -oh. 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.

i have complete confidence in president trump and his team to protect your family member and to protect our nation. this is the first president in the last 40 years who really understands the iranians. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was senator lindsey graham this week defending president trump. graham has become one of the president's most vocal champions, but that has always been not always the case. in recent years, graham has flipped on a number of topics, not just on trump.

>> impeachment is not about punishment. impeachment is about cleansing the office. i find the whole process to be a sham and i'm not going to legitimatize it. if jeff sessions is fired, there will be holy hell to pay. every president deserves an attorney general they have confidence in it. and they can work with. i'm not going to try to get into the mind of donald trump. i think he's a kook. i think he's crazy. i think he's unfit for office. what concerns me about the american press is this endless, endless attempt to label the guy as some kind of kook, not fit to be president. >> did you see that? a complete 180. he said he's a kook and not fit, and then he said, he's not a kook and not unfit. a former law partner of graham shared with "rolling stone" what graham told him about life in politics. this is a quote, by the way, to always remember. he said -- this has lindsey graham being quoted. "85% of the people in

washington, elected officials and bureaucrats, would sell their mothers to keep their jobs." he said that was a direct quote from lindsey graham. he added, but lindsey, in my opinion, has sold his mother to keep his job. that's from his law partner. for more, i'm joined by jamie harrison, the person looking to take graham's job. he's the top democratic candidate now for the united states senate in south carolina. mr. harrison, so i'm going to ask you -- >> happy new year, chris. >> happy new year. i just want to have you on now to answer a question. i always ask people, what don't you see on television? what is it about the room, the aroma, the feel of the room. what is it that you can tell us about lindsey graham that we haven't seen in his jumping back and forth on every side of both issues, whatever, the kiss butt performance of him over the last several months with this president. is that as bad as it gets, which is pretty bad? >> chris, i read that "rolling stone" article and i just shook my head. you know, i was one of those people who actually had

tremendous respect for lindsey graham and i thought he was fighting for us. this is when john mccain was alive. but i have quickly come to realize that lindsey graham epitomizes why people hate politics. he will say and do anything. if you had to come up with the theme of that article, it is, you can't trust lindsey graham. he has his own best interests at hand and everybody else be damned. and so, it's just sad. it's very sad. the people of south carolina are hungry for somebody who will fight for them, who will put them up above themselves. and right now, we don't get that in lindsey graham. and that's why i'm going all across this great state, talking to people about the challenges that they are dealing with on a day-to-day basis. because for me, it's about being relevant in south carolina. not being relevant in washington, d.c., but being relevant in the households and in the minds of the people of this great state.

>> you know, i like it, too. i like going down to charleston once in a while, i have some in-laws down there, but i want to ask you, it's a conservative state. and it's not only a conservative state, according to that article we both read in "rolling stone," it's getting older. it's getting more conservative, you might argue. how does a democrat like you win in a conservative state for the united states senate? >> let me give you a perfect example. chris, on wednesday night, i went to lancaster county, south carolina. this is right on the border with north carolina. this county went overwhelming for trump. i walked into the door, chris, there were -- it was a senior community. 200, jam-packed room -- 200 seniors in that room. i walk in the door and they stand up and they give me a standing ovation. they are hungry for change, as well. they are ready for somebody who's going to bring hope back, somebody who understands that they have lived the american dream, but they want the american dream available for their kids and their grandkids, also. that's why we have sparked this movement.

that's why the latest poll had me down by two points. that's why i have just raised more money than anybody in history of south carolina, $3.5 million last quarter. we are building a movement. we are building a movement built on hope. and that's why i tell everybody, go to jamieharrison.com, because we're going to send lindsey graham home. >> jimmy, lindsey graham has basically said that he's going to vote for the president in the impeachment trial. he's already with him. he said he's not going to listen. he doesn't even want to read the transcripts of the witnesses. he doesn't want to hear nothing. he was a juror -- he's going in as a juror who has already decided the case. have you? >> no! >> would you vote for conviction of the president? >> listen, if i was a united states senator about to take the oath that basically said that you were going to be an impartial juror, it's about listening to both sides, letting the president make his case. let's hear from the house managers, as well. let's get witnesses there, so that you can make the case.

now, there are a lot of issues in this. and nobody is above the law. but what lindsey graham has done is basically said that his word is not meant -- and his oath doesn't mean anything. it's about character. it's about integrity. it's about standing up for your word. in my household, my grandfather always taught me that, jamie, your word is your bond. but right now what we see with lindsey graham, his word doesn't mean anything. >> well, sir, you're an impressive candidate. i wish you will. it looks like it is a close race. that's really striking that you're that close already. jamie harrison, likely democratic candidate against lindsey graham. and you never know what you're going to get from lindsey graham. up next, america is captivated right now by t spectacle of the british royal family experiencing a generational fracture. the reactions are all over the map. you're watching "hardball."

with this key to the city. [ applause ] it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. and now we need to get back to work. [ applause and band playing ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ i have moderate to severe pnow, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are getting clearer, yeah i feel free ♪ ♪ to bare my skin ♪ yeah that's all me. ♪ nothing and me go hand in hand ♪ ♪ nothing on my skin ♪ that's my new plan. ♪ nothing is everything. keep your skin clearer with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. of those, nearly 9 out of 10 sustained it through 1 year. and skyrizi is 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪ i see nothing in a different way ♪ ♪ and it's my moment so i just gotta say ♪

♪ nothing is everything skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs, or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. ♪

get a 4-course meal starting at $15.99. treat yourself to the perfect gift today, because the aussie 4-course won't last long! outback steakhouse. {tires screeching} {truck honking} [alarm beeping]

(avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can. (dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent. the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. welcome back to "hardball." harry and his wife, meghan markle, the duke and duchess of sussex, shocked the united kingdom and the world this week with the declaration they will formally step back from their roles as senior members of the royal family. in a statement posted on instagram, the two said they would become financially independent, splitting their time between britain and north america. and last year, prince harry, whose sixth in line to the

british throne, told itv news that protecting his family was his top priority. >> for me, and for my wife, you know, there's -- of course, there's a lot of stuff that hurts, especially when the majority is untrue. i'll not be bullied into playing a game that killed my mom. >> well, the announcement which has been dubbed megxit was a sensation in britain. look at those headlines. here at home, the editorial board of "the new york times" celebrated the move. it was the lead editorial today, taking up most of the page in "the new york times" editorial page. the same can't be said for buckingham palace, where the news received an icy reception from the queen of england. for the latest, i'm joined by keir simmons, nbc news correspondent, who's outside of buckingham palace. >> reporter: hey, chris. well, i don't have a direct line to the queen, but you can imagine, just as well as i, how she must be feeling. she did emerge for the first time today since this crisis broke, looking steely, as well

she might. because one friend of the royals on british television tonight saying that things actually, despite the negotiations, could get worse rather than better, describing the atmosphere as toxic. and perhaps that's not surprising. surprising. we learned today that harry felt forced to make his announcement because of a leak to a tabloid newspaper, the kind of newspaper that he despises. now, harry and meghan know what they want. the question is are they going to get it and, crucially, who's going to pay for it? maybe meghan could go back to her acting. maybe she could play herself in the new season of "the crown," chris. >> thank you, keir simmons. i'm now joined by martin lewis, a columnist for "time" magazine, salon, and "the huffington post." well, here we go. i guess there's a lot of factors. here in the midst of brexit, here we have the royal family in turmoil. how does it all connect? does it? >> well, you know, a lot of

coverage has suggested that this is like another season of "the crown." but you know what? while the british royal family may be dysfunctional and can teach aaron spelling a thing or two about soap operas, this is not really about the royal family. it's about the british family. and in the same way that here in america we have this transition from the optimism of obama to the tea party, birtherism, and the ugly stain of trump, the same thing happened in britain. the british equivalent of archie bunker took us from the optimism of the tony blair era to this brexit, a hard conservative government. brexit is just a form of xenophobia. i don't like them bloody foreigners. and ultimately we now have a british prime minister called boris johnson who describes africans as pickaninnies and black people as having watermelon smiles. just imagine how a proud daughter of an african-american woman should feel about that.

>> well, let's talk turkey here. meghan markle has a biracial background, and there she is a part of the royal family now. has that been too much for the brits to absorb? is that what that's about or this is about? she takes a beating in the tabloid. why does she get a beating all the time? >> well, because underneath -- slithering out of the rock is that bigotry that's always been there. and remember that fairy tale royal wedding where they had that fantastic black choir singing "stand by me," a black preacher from chicago. everybody thought it was wonderful. not in britain. rupert murdoch's tabloid the sun sneefr sneered at it. a bbc host looked at a picture of meghan markle's baby and tweeted that it looked like a monkey. that's the sad truth that britain has that racism still. >> that's pretty bad. i don't understand this. i mean i have to tell you, you

have to translate this for me because, you know, it's a glamorous couple, of course. it's a prince. he served in the military. he's found the woman of his dreams. he married her. that's it. and that's not okay. why isn't it okay? >> well, unfortunately, you know, i come from the '60s era so we have this thing of love and peace and all you need is love. and americans have this lovely image of brits. we think of james corden and john oliver, helen mir ren. but a reality is a lot of the brits, if you remember what ricky gervais was like on the golden globes. >> sure. >> you've got that stream of vituperative reactionary bile, hating on anything progressive, anything kind offer thoughtful or tolerant. and that is a daily diet in britain in the tabloids and in social media. so meghan, i think they were a little bit naive and optimistic the way they went into it. but they're getting that day in

and day out. i think they're fed up with it. >> i was on a bus out at the airport in britain one time many years ago, and the bus driver who was a man of color. i don't know what his background was. he slammed the door because it was time to move, and this older british guy outside the bus started yelling, this is why i left the uk 30 years ago. i think we found your guy. thank you. >> thank you indeed, chris. >> thank you for coming on the program. up next, trump may not like the word "assassination" used in connection with soleimani, but it's what he approved. you're watching "hardball."

[♪] are you currently using a whitening toothpaste, but not seeing results? try crest 3d whitestrips. its enamel-safe formula lifts and removes stains to provide 100% noticeably whiter teeth or your money back. try crest 3d whitestrips.

when you take align, you have the support of a probiotic and the gastroenterologists who developed it. align helps to soothe your occasional digestive upsets, 24/7 with a strain of bacteria you can't get anywhere else. you could say align puts the pro in probiotic. so, where you go, the pro goes. go with align, the pros in digestive health. and try align gummies, with prebiotics and probiotics to help support digestive health. whatever happens out there you have the hilton app. will the hilton app help us pick the starters? great question, no. but it can help you pick your room from the floor plan. can the hilton app help us score? you know, it's not that kind of thing, but you can score free wi-fi. can it help us win? hey, hey! we're all winners with the hilton price match guarantee, alright? man, you guys are adorable! alright, let's go lose this soccer game, come on! book with the hilton app. if you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25% off that stay.

expect better. expect hilton. wthat's why xfinity hasu made taking your internetself. and tv with you a breeze. really? yup. you can transfer your service online in about a minute. you can do that? yeah. and with two-hour service appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. so while moving may still come with its share of headaches... no kidding. we're doing all we can to make moving simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started. i don't use some waxy cover up. i use herpecín l, it penetrates deep to treat. it soothes moisturizes and creates a spf 30 barrier to protect against flare ups caused by the sun. herpecín l.

it does more for a cold sore. i don't want this week to end without dealing directly with the u.s.'s assassination of that top iranian general. not liking the history attached to that word assassination, president trump and his leadership circle are out there carving up new descriptions of what we did. but we now have to live with it. and we now have a people, the people of iran, who see americans as assassins. we talked tonight about the british royal family, but the queen of the united kingdom has no power to order the killing of someone. political power was taken away from the british monarchy centuries ago. and that power to kill someone, to execute them, to assassinate them was never given to an american president. again, we're going to have to pay for this assassination. it is not a method for ending belligerence with a foreign power. it's a way to deepen that

belligerence. by ordering the killing of an iranian general, we have unleashed something. it will not end with the iranian firing of those ballistic missiles into the al asad military base this week. the iranian people are going to remember it for years. the hawks on our side, those seeking regime change in iran, will see it as a deliberate leading step toward their goal of toppling the ayatollah, it's a step toward replacing the leaders iran has with the ones we would allow them to have. again, everybody on both sides knows what we did except perhaps the president. i sometimes think when president trump is reading prepared lines, he doesn't quite grasp what those around him like mike pence and mike pompeo have put into his mouth, words like "regime" when referring to the iranian government. this week they put that word in his mouth. last week they put the blood on his hands. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts

right now. tonight on a special edition of "all in" -- >> the president must be held accountable. no one is above the law. >> donald trump gets his trial date. >> she doesn't want to put in the articles. it's so weak. >> new signs there may be impeachment witnesses. >> we need witnesses, ladies and gentlemen. >> tonight what we know about the looming trial of donald trump and new reporting that the president's escalation with iran was connected to his impeachment fears. >> i believe that he will attack iran sometime prior to the election because he thinks that's the only way he can get elected. plus juror/senator cory booker, and what it means for 2020. and why facebook's new decision to allow lies in political ads is putting a thumb on the scale for donald trump. >> i'm a very honest guy. >> live from studio 6a in rockefeller plaza, "all in" starts right now. hello, everybody.