download the xfi app today. welcome back, everybody. this is msnbc live. i'm yasmin vossoughian. iranians are in the streets protesting the government's roll in the downing of a ukrainian airliner killing all 176

passengers calling for members of their government to step down. however, this is only the latest episode in a very rocky relationship between iran and the united states. tension between the two countries began nearly 70 years ago in 1953 when the united states and british intelligence services orchestrated against a democratically elected leader. reimposing, this was a pivotal moment perhaps setting the stage for the next half a century and beyond. nearly 20 years later in 197, iranians took to the streets demanding democracy, overthrowing the shaw of iran. a group took over the embassy taking 52 hostages and begin the hostage crisis. it took 444 days before all the hostages were released. the hostage crisis marks the end of u.s./iran relations. the 1980s saw the start and the

end of the deadly iran/iraq war. iran was further isolated when the community did little to reprimand iraq for killing 150,000 iranians in a chemical attack. the bloody decade cleared out with the u.s. mistakenly hitting a passenger jet in the strait of hormuz. struck the plane killing all 290 individuals on board and the u.s. refusing to apologize citing the reason, the fog of war. the 1990s ushered in some of the u.s. sanctions on iran and u.s. policy that has on and off continued since then as well as the start of iran's adventurism in the region. but in 2015 the u.s. and iran had a break through signing the iran nuclear deal and in 2018, that break through was nullified when the u.s. walked away from that very deal. joining us now from tel aviv, foreign correspondent matt bradley in kiev and nbc chief news bill neeley and here in new

york and iranian american writer and msnbc contributor. matt, i'll start with you on this one seeing you're in the region there. bring us up to date as to what you have been hearing so far with regards to the latest developments. >> well, the very latest developments is actually coming out of iran today. and that is massive protest. not huge protest compared to what we saw following the death of qassem soleimani. but still thousands of people last night and a few today mostly at universities protesting against what they consider to be the silence of the iranian regime in the face of accusations that they were the ones that failed this iranian plane and they came out and admitting they shot down that flight what they suspected since this flight was shot down.

the iranians basically squandered any good will and had a considerable amount of it after the killing and assassination of qassem soleimani. millions of people in the street protesting against the united states and now all of that seems to have been flipped on its head. the pro test against the iranian regime is renewed and the iranian students and shocking footage of iranian students walking very carefully. most of them around israeli and american flags painted on the floor at the university grounds basically defying what you're supposed to do, which is to tread on these flags with your feet. really extraordinary expression of how sentiment in iran has been changing. now, obviously, there's still quite a few iranians that are very conservative and still consider iran and america to be allies. they still consider america to be the so-called great satan. but we even heard from many hardline, very conservative iranian officials. politicians who support

ayatollah khamenei and they have even been coming out and criticizing the regime and demanding accountability and governments throughout the world are waiting for a full apology. for a full expression of responsibility by the iranian. the last we heard it was from the foreign minister of iran and he had a tweet yesterday where he said that iran was taking full responsibility for shooting down this airline and killing 176 civilians. but they also blamed american adventurism. now, the iranians by shooting down this plane have succeeded in bringing in the ukrainians, canadians and the brit s in a wy it hadn't been before. all of them want to make a full, full expression of apology and responsibility without kind of oblique blaming of the united states or other countries. >> bill, it seems from what i have been hearing, it was ukrainian investigators that

were urging iranians to take responsibility for the shooting and to be honest and up front about the shooting of the plane in iran. what has been ukraine's response so far amidst all of this? >> yeah, anger, frustration and i think you saw that in a very stern statement made by the ukrainian president zelensky last night in which he said just that. he said it was only the fast work of the 45 ukrainian investigators that, in his words meant that iran was not allowed to hide the truth. he posted on his facebook page some of the things those investigators find on the ground, bits of the plane's fuselage by shrapnel from two missiles. they show a canadian passport was singed and a cockpit that was virtually cut in two. so, there's a lot of anger here

that iran took so long knowing on wednesday what it had done because, remember, that iranian revolutionary guard commander said that the authorities had been told immediately that two missiles have been fired and took the iranians so many days to actually admission and in ukraine and canada, they're asking for a full admission of guilt. a legal admission of guilt. they're looking for full compensation here. and, also, of course, resentment on the streets here that what the iranians did immediately was try to blame the pilot. they said that the pilot had made a sharp turn. both the president and the head of the ukraine airline yesterday saying absolutely not. the pilot followed the flight path and the commander in iran

finally admitting that the ukrainian pilot did nothing wrong and it was all down to the actions of one missile battery commander. and, yasmin, just to back up what matt was saying. i cannot stress how amazing these demonstrations are. i was on the streets of tehran a decade ago when it looked like there was going to be a green revolution. i heard the same kind of chants on the streets of tehran just through the television reports. absolutely extraordinary on one of the main iranian daily newspapers. it's a pro-government newspaper. in fact, a couple years ago it was a hard line newspaper as a front page in black that says, unforgivable. what's going on in tehran at the minute really quite extraordinary. >> i think, bill, brings up an astounding point if you covered the region at all, as we all have, it is astounding to see some of the protesters and

iranians in general as a people. what they have been through if you think about it in the last ten days. from the killing of the general to the stampede upwards of 70 or so people being killed there. the downing of the jet with the majority of iranians. it is just astounding. on top of that, domestic protests happening in this country and happened two months ago where we had reports of hundreds of people being killed there, as well. now i'm hearing another protest beginning this evening in just about 20 minutes or so which is freedom square, which is interesting because you think about the funeral procession march for general soleimani that happened just a week or so ago at tehran university and went to freedom square. i want to get your take on what essentially you believe is actually happening. what you're seeing take place in iran as we're seeing these videos emerge of thousands of protesters in the street demanding the supreme leader step down. >> i think there's a tremendous amount of anger right now. i think what it points to is

that the anger has come up mainly because of the cover up. i'll call it a cover up because they knew on wednesday. at least some people in the government knew that they had shot down this ukrainian plane and they came out and vehemently denied that is possible. what that points to, i don't think people are upset that this happened. they shot down a ukrainian jet with iranians on purpose. clearly the fog of war that you were talking about earlier, but they're upset their government is the kind of government that will try to cover up something like this. so, this just indicates the deep, deep corruption and sort of like incompetence that their government has shown. so, while they do blame the united states for many things, including bringing them to the brink of war last week as we know with the killing of qassem soleimani. they are blaming their government.

they were always blaming their government for the economy but now blaming for sheer corruption. and i think that is something that the government is going to have to deal with. when i say the government, the entire islamic system. when they're calling for the removal, you're supposed to be supreme and control this government. even if you don't believe in the supreme leader or that system, you expect, at least, an efficient government and you don't expect a government to try to hide something like this, especially when it is going to come out anyway. you can't hide the fact that you shot down a passenger plane. it's not possible. >> what changes the narrative here, as well, is many of these protesters access to social media. this is no longer a world that we live in in which literally the only news report they're getting is from their television set in their living room or the newspaper that they open up that is being fed to them by their

government. in fact, they have access across twitter and access across every social media platform and putting video on telegram, if you're on telegram. everything you're seeing take place in iran right now is happening realtime because of the access many of these protesters have. also seeing tweets from the president of the united states. a new tweet that we're seeing that he just commented on saying, to the leaders of iran, do not kill your protesters. thousands have already been killed or imprisoned by you and the world is watching. more importantly, the usa is watching. turn your internet back on and let reporters roam free. stop the killing of your great iranian people. i don't want to clarify, i don't think we have any assurance that the internet has been shut down in iran and all that i know. >> a couple hours ago, in tehran -- >> it was not shut down. that is not accurate for him to say. >> he also tweeted. >> we made the joke last hour, who knew the president spoke

farcy. >> give us your take on what you are seeing. >> i think it is significant that even though the iranian regime denied this and very loudly did so that they have been forced to come to terms and to say they were the ones that shot it down. let's think back to the last time a passenger jet was shot down over the uk by russia or by its interests in the region. we have never seen that coming from that government. so, to me that indicates that the pressure inside iran is having an effect. and i don't think that we should underestimate the courage of the people out in the streets now just a couple of days ago we saw what looked like millions going out to support general soleimani's funeral. but they are now coming out in a protest vote against what is a to to talitarian state. >> i feel like the president will take credit for what is happening in iran right now.

whatever does happen in iran and this may very well, nothing may very well happen or this could become something much more, and if any of us can predict what happens, i think we would all be wrong. explain historically as we look at the historically perspective as u.s./iran relations and the lack of trust that exists for quite some time now. how does this play into the narrative that we're seeing in iran? >> it certainly plays into the narrative. the iranian people have never wanted to not have relations with the u.s. they haven't been anti-american. many people commented on how the u.s., sorry, yeah, for the iranian people, they are the most pro-american people of the middle east. ruled by the most anti-american government in the middle east. one thing i should say in terms of these protests and these protests nows the ones that the demonstrations for soleimani. iranians can walk and chew gum at the same time. they can hold two different thoughts. hold the idea that killing of

soleimani was wrong for them because to many of them he was a hero that prevented isis from coming to iran and also extremely angry at their government for this particular betrayal. they consider it a betrayal plus all the other built-up anxiety and discontent that they have because of the economy. no, the iranian view, as you know, and anybody who has been to iran knows is very pro-american people. imperialism that they consider generally speaking. considered to be an imperialism that has been, not to the benefit of the iranian people. they come into a region and they do something and as soon as things are not to their interest, they leave. they came in, they controlled iran, basically. perhaps the most powerful person in iran for a lot of the revolutionaries.

the u.s. ambassador was telling the shah what to do. that is not acceptable for proud people who have 25, they always talk about how they have 2,500 years of history. incredibly proud people of their literature, arts, history to have america 300-year-old country come and tell them what to do is incredibly insulting. when you see the foreign minister and the president always saying in messages treat us with respect. if you treat us with respect, we'll be able to make deals. i think the people of iran are absolutely behind them when it comes to that, which is why i think the people of iran, i think you remember, came out and demonstrated in a positive way when the nuclear deal was signed. everyone was thrilled. and when president trump withdrew, everybody was like, okay, now what? things have been building negatively since then. >> when we see internally with irani iranians, if they want change within their country, they will

affect change in their own timeline, not because of the willing or the doing of any outside forces. matt bradley, bill neely, thank you very much. incredible conversation. up next, is impeachment unconstitutional? the president's personal attorney seems to think so. find out why rudy giuliani says the supreme court should weigh in on the house's case against president trump. we'll be right back. k. ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. wean air force veteran made of doing what's right,. not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right.

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

>> man: what's my my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me. >> tech: hi, i'm adrian. >> man: thanks for coming. ...with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

>> very unusually the leader of

the senate mitch mcconnell has signed on to a resolution to dismiss the case. to dismiss the case. that, in his view, may be -- >> he is committed to having the presentations first now. >> i am telling you he signed on on thursday to a resolution to dismiss the case. the dismissing is a cover up. wow. welcome back. that was just this morning i'm yasmin vossoughian. nancy pelosi addressing the impeachment situation in the senate. she also discusses a timeline when she plans to send the articles to the upper chamber of congress. >> have you settled on house managers for the trial? >> what i did say is i would be consulting with my members this week on tuesday morning at our regular caucus meeting that we would vote to send them over and will determine in our meeting when we send them over. but, we have never -- i have

always said i would send them over. there shouldn't be any mystery to that. what we did want, though, and i think what we accomplished in the past few weeks is that we wanted the public to see the need for witnesses, witnesses with first-hand knowledge of what happened, documentation which the president has prevented from coming to the congress as we review this. >> meanwhile, president trump said on friday he would, quote, in many ways like a trial. his personal attorney and one of the people at the heart of the cr ukraine scandal rudy jeweliany have other ideas of what nancy pelosi was calling a cover up. >> they have rendered the constitution of the united states and its words meaningless. it's as if they took the constitution and struck out the words. the remedy is to go before the supreme court of the united states and have it declared unconstitutional. now, you say, well, there's nothing in the constitution that

allows the supreme court to do it. also nothing in the constitution, as you know, from early days of constitutional law that allows the supreme court to declare a law of congress unconstitutional. becomes the only impeachment that has been dismissed for being unconstitutional if it's nonconstu nonconstitutional. >> rudy giuliani wants the supreme court to throw out the impeachment and have it null and void, he doesn't think that would be good for his client. >> if we do go to trial, and he'll get acquitted and they'll make fools out of themselves. politically it would be better to go to trial. they'll find out about biden and what a big crook biden is. >> that's if actually former vice president biden were to testify. joining us now washington congressional reporter olivia and josh. >> i want to get your reaction from some of the things we were hearing from nancy pelosi this

morning. dismissal is a cover up as she talks about what leader mcconnell signed on to. what do you make of it? >> certainly part of this back and forth that we've seen the speaker mcconnell. as we know mcconnell has already said that he's coordinating with the white house as the senate trial gets under way and pelosi is here saying, hey, watch out. that is not going to be fair. but republicans in the senate had been talking about a motion to dismiss and mcconnell signing on as a former pressure for her to send over the impeachment articles. just goes to show the ambiguity and the constitution and saying, you know, if you're going to do this and i'm going to do that. but the speaker, as she said, didn't give us a clear timeline of when she's going toic ii iac put up a vote. she'll meet with her caucus on tuesday, which means wednesday is the earliest that the vote does come down. but she doesn't say it for sure.

>> josh, before i get to the timeline in all of this in which speaker pelosi does weigh in on as i just played the sound for that. i want to get your take from what i heard to rudy giuliani getting impeachment dismissed, as well. >> let's not make any mistake about it, there is going to be a trial in the senate on the impeachment articles that were passed. this is not just dismissed out of hand as senators on both sides of the aisle have made very clear. what rudy giuliani is doing here is making a political argument that this whole thing is a sham. that it should be invalidated in the minds of, frankr rfrankly, who should be going -- >> i don't mean to cut you off, but is this a political argument or a pr political argument? >> what it is not is a legal argument. and we can tell that this is not the way that the president's legal team is going to proceed because even though rudy giuliani technically is one of the president's personal defense

attorneys, there are no indications that he will be part of the legal team that is actually defending the president before the senate when they become jurors in this trial. in fact, the white house has made it pretty clear that rudy giuliani will not play a role in that process. >> let's talk about the timeline here, olivia, with regards to speaker pelosi saying there that she needs to consult with the members and determine the managers of the senate impeachment trial along with a timeline and when she hands over the articles of impeachment, she says she will hand them over. what are you hearing in regards to the timeline of all of this? >> we have been talking to members. the thing with moving forward is that the speaker has kept a lot of this information close to her chest from even maybe close allies. you know, we believe that she is coordinating with schiff and nadler and their staff. but she's really been kind of keeping her decisions close to her chest, which because we have been very little to no leaks, that has given her a lot of

power to maneuver back and forth. so depending on what happens with what mcconnell does as it relates to the resolution and shaping the guidelines of the senate trial, she might choose to wait a little bit longer and say, hey, i want to know what that looks like before i name my impeachment managers. as some of my sources say she wants to know what the resolution looks like before she names her team. whether it's experienced members of congress or more prosecutorial. that is something she is considering as she waits. we really don't know what is the exact timeline. >> josh, as we have been seeing some of the sound i have been playing throughout the hour, rudy giuliani wants it both ways wants it dismissed but arguing it is good for his client, the president, to have a senate trial. the president also seemingly wanting it both ways.

wanting his witnesses to testify, but not necessarily the democrats want to see testify like john bolton. let's take a listen to what the president was saying. >> people can't go up and say whatever my thoughts are, whatever your thoughts are about us, countries, views. you don't want that to be out. i think you have to for the sake of the office. i would love everybody to testify. i like mick to testify, i'd like mike pompeo to testify, i would like rick perry to testify. i want everybody. but there are things that you can't do from the standpoint of executive privilege. you have to maintain that. >> josh? >> well, one of the things the president and his team made clear is if there are new witnesses allowed in, they want to go on the offensive. they don't want to have witnesses to talk about the things that democrats want to talk about like what happened in ukraine. but they want to call hunter

biden and make political arguments against the president's opponent to bring that into the impeachment trial, as well. olivia? >> just to add to that, what we're seeing is also kind of mixed messaging. when giuliani said he would like to testify and even try the trial, this came after he previously dismissed it saying he is a personal lawyer and that would be a conflict of interest. now you're seeing, also, they're saying we do or do not want to call on witnesses as relates to what we want to talk about. you either get witnesses or you don't. >> olivia, josh, thank you, both. the family feud that has captivated the world. prince harry will meet face to face tomorrow. knowing we're prepared for tomorrow. wow, do you think you overdid it maybe? overdid what?

well planned, well invested, well protected. voya. be confident to and through retirement.

welcome back. the queen has called an emergency family meeting and everything is on the table. palace sources telling nbc news that after days of negotiations, prince harry will meet face to face with his grandmother, queen elizabeth along with prince williams and prince charles to discuss next steps for the s sussex. the one thing the the queen seems to be asking for is time. requesting the issue be resolved, quote, at pace with an

understanding that any decisions about the future of harry and meghan will take time to implement. joining me tim teman. this has been an astounding development as i was reading it take place. for so many reasons. but i first want to get into how this whole thing took life and from my understanding, you have some new reporting on that. >> yeah, absolutely. it's been a tumultuous few days and i think the queen wants this to be resolved quickly. what we had at the end of last year the prince andrew saga stretching out and causing real damage to the family. what the queen means at pace means sooner rather than later. the queen had a rough few months of that year and wants harry and meghan and this issue resolved as quickly as possible. >> some of your reporting indicating that both harry and meghan have felt, quote, totally

unwelcome in the royal family and this is part of for them to make this break. you heard meghan's voice being very forthcoming when we played on this network when that documentary first came out and she at one point asked, this is the first time someone is asking me how i am doing. you could tell how difficult it was. how difficult it was for her to be new to this and be in the spotlight to that magnitude and the responsibility it holds to be a part of the royal family. >> i think quite often and the haasile na i hosti hostile, and the reality of marrying into the royal family is very, very different. her and harry want to forge a new way of doing things and new identities for themselves and they clearly have not felt supported in that by the role of family and the chaos that you saw at the end of last week was

really them saying, we came to you and we said what we need to do and we saw no movement here. what they have done at the end of last week by going public is forcing the queen and the royal family's hand. the fact that by monday we have a face-to-face meeting between all the main players means that in a sense harry and meghan are winning this in some sense. >> i can't imagine the queen is happy that meghan is phoning in from canada. >> they left baby archie in canada when they came over to make the announcement. >> can we talk about the relationship between prince harry and william? >> not good. a friend of prince william telling a friend that all he wants to do is put his arm around prince harry. so, the relationship between those two brothers is not good at the moment by all accounts. one will see if talks can help

repair things to some extent. once very close brothers clearly not very intimate or close at the moment. >> we'll watch how this developments. tim, thank you for being here. appreciate it. defense secretary mark esper weighing in on the tense relationship between united states and iran. we heard from him just moments ago. we'll bring you that sound next. with esri location technology,

you can see relationships. connections. patterns. you can see what others can't. ♪ welcome back. i'm yasmin vossoughian. responding to president trump's claim that he was planning attacks on four embassies that were military bases. watch this. >> i can reveal that i believe it would have been four embassies and i think that probably baghdad already started. >> it's the president's prerogative. what the president said is that he believed. he could have been targeting all those things that i believe, as well, that the national security team believes, as well. >> the president has discussed

publicly that he believed and belief is not the same thing that there was evidence. >> all coming as a senior administration official tells "washington post" they were only aware of vague intelligence about an unfully formed plot against the baghdad embassy and not about multiple embassies. >> joining me former vp of campaigns for centers of american progress and political consent sir michael singleton. emily, let's start with you on this one. the political implications of this can be astounding considering the fact that there are many people coming out of washington, especially those that were in that intelligence briefing that was delivered to them, i believe, on wednesday, that the evidence that was brought out was razor thin with regards to the killing of general soleimani. and it seemed more of an overarching threat that general soleimani posed that we have known for quite some time if you have been following the middle

east in general. how do you think this is going to have, what type of last effect willpresidency? >> it is really scary for a lot of people. the president brought us to the brink of war based on, to your point, razor thin evidence. we still know he's still not sharing everything with congressional oversight. with the committee that they should be shared with. they should have gone to him before. they didn't. they didn't give him notification and even now they're still holding information back. so, we really don't, there is very little insight to what is going on. we only know after the fact and i think it goes to the political implications goes to what a lot of people were nervous about trump in the first place. even people who voted for him were concerned that he had not great judgment and didn't take facts into account. so, i do think it can double down on people's questioning him, even if they're thinking about potentially still supporting him in the re-elect.

this only goes to show how bad his judgment is and how terrible and huge the impacts could be. >> is this a moment that democratic candidates can seize on with the fact that the trump administration has, from what we are hearing this razor thin evidence to support the fact that they ordered the killing of general soleimani. is this something they can seize on and go with as to why they think they would be better at running this country than the president? >> i think it's something that two democrats, he has experience in the region and i also think vice president joe biden who has experience as a former vice president and years of experience as the united states senator. big part of his candidacy has been talking about restoring america's position in the world and being careful and being methodical and objective and how we approach our foreign policy. i agree with emily. i think the administration needs

to be a little more transparent on this. what we learned from some reporting is thin for the most part. i do wonder if there were some concerns if they did not act, something could happen. the only way to know those things is for the administration to be transparent. so i would beg the president to be straight forward with the american people. >> wouldn't you think if the trump administration had evidence to suggest that if they didn't act something would have happened imminently, they would have already presented that evidence? it would have already been out there? why hold on to that if you had it? >> if this was a typical president, i would probably say yes. one thing that i think we all learned about donald trump is that he doesn't do anything in a normal or orthodox way. i cannot answer that, yasmin. >> that would only bolster his case. >> conventional wisdom would tell us many other instances donald trump should have acted in behaver is in the past that would have bolster his case.

i'm not sure why anyone would believe any moment is different than any moment in the past when you look at the history in totality. >> he talks about how former vice president joe biden could find, in regards to the iraq vote which mayor pete buttigieg pointed out with former vice president joe biden and where he stood on that iraq vote. could that turn to hurt him? >> there is potential for that. but voters are not looking concern with that. they want somebody who can take all pieces into account. it's a question that we in the media class keep asking whether it will be impactful, but not looking like voters are hanging on to it. >> why? >> i'm not sure exactly why. i think they feel it is litigated in the 2008 presidential primary debates in the democratic side, but i think, ultimately, people want somebody who will be an and they

just want to turn the page and move forward. the number one thing you hear from every voter in every state, they want a candidate that can beat trump. they are doubling down on that sentiment so much that every piece of information that comes out about how the president acted is only reconfirming for people that we have to turn the page to the new president. >> i asked this question before, shermichael and i think it is an important one. whether national security and foreign policy will be more top of mind for voters going into this national election before we saw it be top of mind in 2004 and not in subsequent elections. >> the polling data hasn't revealed that yet. yasmin, if this is a much more serious one and iran would have killed some troops and the president reacted, then i think you would see some changing and

shifts in people's views and opinions and i'm not certain that a week from now or a month or two from now this will be a top issue. issues such as health care and prescription drugs and economy, et cetera, that is much more important to average voters republicans and democrats alike. >> thank you, guys, both. an estimated 98 million people will see the fight for 2020 up close next month as billionaires battle it out in one of the most expensive ad buys in history. why this year's big game is going to get very political. that's next. that's next. 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 woman: 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 woman: save at trelegy.com. eh, not enough fiber- chocolate would be good- snacking should be sweet and simple. the delicious taste of glucerna gives you the sweetness you crave while helping you manage your blood sugar.

glucerna. everyday progress while helping you manage your blood sugar. >> man: what's my my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me. >> tech: hi, i'm adrian. >> man: thanks for coming. ...with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

welcome back. i'm yasmin vossoughian. this year's big game has gone political as a pair of battling billionaires looking to claim the oval office in 2021 take to the airways in an ad war on super bowl sunday trying to capture the attention of viewers in what's traditionally the most watched television event of the year. in an unprecedented move first reported by "the new york times" and politico, president trump and democratic presidential hopeful michael bloomberg purchased $10 million apiece in ad time.

the adds are going to run during the nfl's championship game on february 2nd. expect it to be seen by upwards of 100 million americans nationwide. it happens just a day before the all important iowa caucuses. bloomberg is paying for the ad bye out of his own pocket. while trump is using his re-election war chose. joining me, guy cecil. appreciate it. major dollars being spent on super bowl sunday for the ad buys. break down the actual impact, guy, of the actual ads? >> i think the short-term impact is relatively minimal. it's important to keep it in context. "the new york times" reported this morning michael bloomberg is willing to spend up to a billion dollars of his own money regardless of whether or not he's the nominee to defeat donald trump. when you put it in that context, $10 million is a relatively

small amount. i think it's a bigger challenge for the trump campaign. the reality is they're relying for a smaller, smaller trump base turning out to vote going into next november. this is another example of them appealing to or trying to appeal to a slightly larger universe of voters. in a long term, we're 11 months from voting. so i think the impact is minimal. >> some are seeing this as a case of basically two guys with a lot of money playing a game of one ups man ship. that's a hard word to say. what do you make of that? >> i'm sure it bothers donald trump that bloomberg can write a personal check for this. he's always bothered by people richer than him. you don't only have michael bloomberg, but tom steyer who spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the last ten years

to elect democrats,ing h puttin own money into this gentleman year's election. >> you sent an ad counter to the president. i want to take a look at part of it and then we'll talk. >> as an american auto worker, to see our president giving tax breaks for these kporpgss for shipping jobs overseas is disgusting to me. >> tell me the strategy behind the ad and does it resonate? >> last year republicans promised their tax bill would have a big impact on middle class and working class americans. what we have found is the large majority of these tax breaks went to the biggest companies in the country, many of whom continue to ship jobs overseas despite the promises of this president in the last election to do something about it. we think it's important in the mix of everything that is happening and the coverage of donald trump's tweets with what's happening around the world, that we continue to focus

on a very simple fact. yes, unemployment is down, yes, the dow jones is doing well, but americans are having to do more with less and less as time goes on. wages still remain relatively stagnant even though the cost of college and the cost of health care continues to rise. at the same time in michigan, wisconsin and philadelphia, we continue to struggle to rebuild a manufacturing base. we're not doing things to keep our jobs here in the country rather than going overseas. we're going to be focused online at voters watching the super bowl. we're going to be doing it in a much more targeted way. in particular focusing on those voters that voted for donald trump in the last election but then voted for a democrat in the 2018 elections. >> guy cecil, thank you for joining us this morning. appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. coming up, the most anti-war member joins "am joy." congresswoman barbara lee will talk about tensions between the united states and iran as well as the impeachment of donald

trump. don't go anywhere. joy reid is next. when you shop for your home at wayfair, you get more than free shipping. you get everything you need for your home at a great price, the way it works best for you, i'll take that. wait honey, no. when you want it. you get a delivery experience you can always count on.

you get your perfect find at a price to match, on your own schedule. you get fast and free shipping on the things that make your home feel like you. that's what you get when you've got wayfair. so shop now! but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr, a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections like tb; don't start xeljanz if you have an infection. taking a higher than recommended dose of xeljanz for ra can increase risk of death. serious, sometimes fatal infections, cancers including lymphoma, and blood clots have happened. as have tears in the stomach or intestines, serious allergic reactions, and changes in lab results. tell your doctor if you've been somewhere fungal infections are common, or if you've had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections.

needles. fine for some. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™". i don't make compromises. i want nutrition made just for me. but i also want great taste. so i drink boost for women. new boost women with key nutrients to help support thyroid, bone, hair and skin health. all with great taste. new boost women.

that is it for me today. thank you for watching. "am joy" with my friend joy reid starts right now. >> our goal is peace and prosperi prosperity, not war and destruction. the kbeft way to achieve those goals is through a disciplined, deliberate and consistent foreign policy. unlike other candidates for the presidency war and aggression will not be my first instinct.

you cannot have a foreign policy without diplomacy. good morning and welcome to "am joy." donald trump was more than happy to perpetuate this idea that he was somehow the anti-war candidate in 2016. he laid on the sales job during the debates including arguing with nbc's own lester holt over his past support for the iraq war, declaring himself absolutely incredulous that anyone would suggest that he ever supported it. >> mr. trump, a lot of these were judgment questions. you supported the war in iraq before the invasion -- >> i did not support the war in iraq. that is a mainstream media nonsense put out by her because she, frankly, i think the best person in her campaign is mainstream media. >> my question is why -- >> would you like to hear? i was against the war in iraq. just so you put it out. >> the record shows otherwise. >> the record does not show otherwise. >>