welcome to kasie d.c." . new intelligence around the killing of general soleimani. plus republican congressman dan crenshaw, who says you don't have to choose between isolationism and full-scale war, when it comes to iran. speaker pelosi gets ready to send them to the senate.

chrissy hul han joins me live onset. and the truce appears to be fraying. but first we're watching difficult stories around the world. australia is on fire, puerto rico is in a state of emergency again and going through waves of after shocks. articals of impeachment are finally going to cross the hallway to the senate. and axios is giving another shot at diplomacy. they've approached kim jong-un about a conversation. and in iran protesters took the streets in a remarkable show of defiance. they're angry after the government lied for three straight days about what really brought down a passenger jet. they accidently shot it down, they're saying, killing 176

people. but what iran says is an error has led to crack downs in the streets. and what led the military to kill general soleimani. and this weekend, none of it has got any clearer. >> don't the american people have a right to know specifically what was targeted without revealing methods and sources? >> probably 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? >> i can reveal i believe it would have been four embassies. >> what four embassies? >> we were very concerned about the situation. we had exquisite intelligence. it showed multiple sites.

>> there was intelligence there was an attempt to target the u.s. embassy in baghdad. what the president said with regard to the four embassies is what i believe as well. he said he believed they could have been targeting the embassies in the region. the president never said there was specific intelligence. >> you said he believed it. >> he probably he believed. >> are you saying there wasn't one? >> i didn't see one but i share the president's view that my expectation was they were going after our embassies. >> i would like the welcome in my panel to explain what we just saw. "washington post" white house reporter, politics reporter for "the daily beast." # nbc news correspondent. and democratic congressman anthony brown of maryland.

the vice chairman of the armed services committee and one of the members in congress we'll hear from tonight. i want you to try and clarify what that was about. from the white house's perspective and this cascade officials r they trying to clean up what the president said? >> this is a white house, that as you can see has a messaging problem and has always had a messaging problem for the better part of three years. i think it's frustrating for a number of people. the consensus is the actual substance of what happened went well. they felt the president made a decisive decision to take out a terrorist. and they managed to avoid a ramping up of the war with iran. this is the opening pages of a new chapter.

they have messaged this incredibly poorly. not just what you showed, but last week there was a debate over the definition over the word imminent. you see senior officials going to congress and saying we can't possibly share this. and i was at the presidential rally in toledo where he shared it with the entire arena. and that's frugserating. >> one of the issues is he's making assertions there was a planned attack on four embassies without backing it up at all. did you hear any of this the president is talking about when you were briefed as a member of congress? >> no. and let's back up from there. the first formal notification was in pursuant to the war powers resolution, 1973, we get a written document. the slimmest notification i've ever seen from the white house. as i sit here today i can tell you i can't share anything tin,

but the point is there was nothing in it. and there was no mention of embassies. a few days later, when we have the formal classified briefing. >> and this is the house version -- mike lee got the senate version. he said it was the worst briefing he's had. >> that's correct. well attended, democrats, republicans. specific questions about the imminent threat. any time, places, the nature of the threat, the methods, the manner? nothing. we did get a time window. i won't share that with you a window in which could happen. and even what secretary esper seemed to be trying to say but was unclear what he was saying. he was trying to perhaps not distance himself too much from the president. secretary esper knows he did not say four embassies to congress. >> it sounds like the president

is saying there were four embassies under attack and his national security staff is trying hard not to say the same thing. >> they don't want to distance themselves from the boss. >> seems to me they're in an impossible place. >> the administration believes there is an imminent threat based on credible intelligence. their responsibility is to come to congress to get the support and share, in as fulsome a way as possible the information they have. it appears maybe the gang of eight got some information. the rest of the members didn't. but add no point did the administration let us know who's goating what information. they need to do that so congress can support or not. >> you have information about how the administration got to the point to do this. >> i think one of the problems is they've over sold this whole idea of an imminent threat. they didn't need an imminent

threat to make qassem soleimani a lawful target. it's pretty clear the president didn't have a fulsome intelligence assessment. the ci arka drelkter briefed hi. to your point about our reporting on how this happened. the thing according to the pentagon correspondent took away after talking to people who watched the strike on video is how unremarkable. it wasn't even technically that great a thing. they have informants where qassem soleimani was flying on a syrian jet. they have informants at the baghdad arnt. they watched him get in the sedan, tracked him down the airport road and incinerated the cars. this is a thing that hapans lot,

generally to al qaeda figures and terrorists. never before to a state actor like this. just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. they don't shed a tear for qassem soleimani but they fear for the implications and retaliation down the road. >> the question, specifically about the implications and what this means going forward has come up with several classified briefings. and briefers, have been in the room for the briefings. have raised concerns, not pointing necessarily to specific pieces of intelligence. now that soleimani is gone, some of the shiite militias that are closely alive could be more likely to target american soldiers and diplomats in iraq. in part, that's because the understanding of the intelligence community has been that he was perhaps the only iranian figure who had the

ability to corral all these militias and influence the way we think about strategy. in the days and hours after the killing of soleimani there, was both within the intelligence community and national security space, obviously happiness about the success of at the operation. >> amid these escalating tensions with iran, we have seen the president and some of his republican allies make this baseless accusation of nancy pelosi and democrats more broadly. >> you know what baulgters me? when i see nancy pelosi trying to defend this monster from iran. >> democrats fall right in line. one, they're in love with terrorists. >> the only ones that are mourning the loss of soleimani are our democrat leadership. >> the speaker of the house of representatives would actually be defending soleimani.

>> they sound like they're defending soleimani and attacking this president and that's on them. >> i would like to point out one of the people you just saw did something we rarely see these days. he apologized. tweeted, quote, let me be clear i do not believe democrats are in love with terrorists and i apologize for what i said earlier this week. none of what you just heard from any of the republicans has any basis in fact. here's what nancy pelosi told me this week. >> we have no illusions about iran. no illusions about soleimani. was a terrible person. did bad things. but it's not about how bad they are. it's about how good we are. >> and republican senator, marco rubio, was willing to concede no one in american politics, including pelosi, has tried to defend soleimani. do you believe nancy pelosi is a

defender of sul many? >> i haven't seen any defenders of soleimani in american politics and i wouldn't include the speaker in at the regard. i think the iran claiming it wasn't necessary, they're wrong. >> i feel like we have gotten to a place in our national conversation where we almost take what happens here for granted. when it used to be something that -- it's a point that we never used to get to in terms of this. as much as there's been partisan ranker and fighting, the fact one side would say the other side was in love with terrorists is a line we're crossing in this way we'd hardly noticed it's happened because of the way things go in the trump administration. but i feel like we should stop and point out how something is. >> there's not a single member of congress who would defend the

actions of general soleimani. the fact he's now dead, off the battle field, that's a good thing. the concern is just like under the bush administration, they had the concern, obama administration had the concer concern when you assassinate someone like soleimani, what are the repercussions? and that's why this was a strategic blunder to actually assassinate him because we're now no longer fighting isis because we're focusing on force protection. our relationship with iraq, which wassal already tenuous is worse today. and we didn't consult with them before we did this. whether or not there was an aulgts areeration on a legal base to take out soleimani is why you have to focus on imminent threat. why would you strategically take

that move? because there's an imminent threat. without an imminent threat, then why now? >> then on the politics of this, republicans are essentially betting is all american will hear is democrats are wrong terrorists or something. this sort of blunt force of their messaging is the only thing that's going to cut through the noise. >> it may work in the short term because it looks to the public like the only thing bad that happened was a few missiles lobbed at empty base said in iraq. nobody thinks that's the end of iran's action to this. they will do something in secret without attaching their name to it. it will be an assassination, terrorist attack. so, if americans are killed and intelligence points back to this attack, that could change the political calculus. >> and what's very much a huge question is we don't know how

the next couple of months are going to go. in the 28 and 48 hours after any monumental event, like the killing of soleimani, there's always speculation as to what this could mean. the iranians could potentially escalate,all no we had a moment where things seemed to stabilize. but stability is easy come, easy go when it comes to iran and the persian gulf . and interrupting the broader conversation of 2020 politics is almost guaranteed. >> thank you guys both very much. the washington media tries to decide whether pelosi and mcconnell are playing 3d chess or maybe chutes and ladders.

crissy houlehan as the president toys with expanding nato. great riches will find you expao 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. ♪ amanda's mom's appointment hello mom. just got rescheduled - for today. amanda needs right at home. our customized care plans provide as much - or as little help - as her mom requires. whether it's a ride to the doctor or help around the house. oh, of course!

tom, i am really sorry. i've gotta go. look, call right at home. get the right care. right at home. looking to simplify your skin care routine without sacrificing results? try olay total effects. one dose provides more vitamin b3 than 50 cups of kale and improves 7 key areas of visibly healthy skin. try olay total effects.

hey. ♪hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today.

tarticles of impeachment ar expected to make their way to the senate after a heated stand off over the terms of a senate trial. speaker pelosi says she does not

regret holding on to the articles and added, no matter what happens, impeachment will be a permanent mark on trump's legacy. >> we have confidence in our case that this president is impeachable. and this president is impeached for life regardless of any gamesmanship on the part of mitch mcconnell. let's be clear of any future that will not have donald j. trump in the white house. one way or not. again, he will be impeached forever. >> not long after pelosi's interview, the president complained in a tweet. he said, quote, why should i have the stigma of impeachment attached to my name when i did nothing wrong. and a former u.s. navy s.e.a.l. and a member of the homeland security. let me start where the president left off. do you believe he did nothing

wrong? >> well, let's back up. when you back up out of all the process and tit for tat between the senate and the house and the process the republicans complain about and the judiciary committee. you back out of all that . can the president ask about an inherently corrupt, on its face, conflict of interest between biden and burisma? i would say yes, why isn't it okay? >> let me take you at face value there. let's say we accept your argument. the issue is millions in aid the u.s. congress has said needs go gets held up in a quid pro quo >> and that's also the heart of the issue. >> so you're not convinced the president did anything improper? >> how can i be convinced when i haven't seen any evidence? there was a lot of issues at play.

and a lot nof the people who cad testify say we presumed. but nobody actually provided any evidence. so, how are you going to impeach upon that thin case? >> so, you don't believe anything you heard from these witnesses, career civil servants who came and said -- >> wouldn't you think the implementers of foreign policy -- these are the civil servants supposed to implement the policy. wouldn't you think they'd have an actual statement that says if they don't do this, we're going to give them this? >> perhaps but that's often not how -- >> you work for federal government for ten years in the military, that's exactly how it works. so to not be able to provide hard evidence is concerning. when you're looking at how this has played out, pelosi says she

wants more witnesses and documents for the senate's trial, so the implication is she didn't have enough in the first place. she wants to make the case stronger. >> let's take john bolton for example, who refused to testify has said if the senate subpoenas him, he'll tell what he knows and they've insin whatted he has something to add. do you want to hear what he has to say? >> i'm not afraid of him. i'm not afraid of what he has to say. but it begs the question why didn't we subpoena him in the house? there was no deadline for impeachment. we could have gone through this. had him testify at the house. >> so, you're saying they should have waited for the courts to rule on bolton? however, ticket nhat's not how played out.

>> i'm not afraid of what he has to say. >> so why is the white house afraid of it? >> they're talking about executive privilege and things like that. even with mcconnell, the senate can still vote and have people come and testify. there's some implication that's not what's 457enning. >> there were postings on your facebook page that suggested you had a lot of questions about president trump. frankly, you weren't alone. there were questions about this president. having come to washington now, do you feel that this president is more in the right that knn y were running before? do you feel the partisan pressure is as much you have to defend him? >> you've seen me not defend him

when i feel what he's doing is wrong. we've had our disagreements. so, no, i don't feel that pressure. but i feel an obligation to stand up for what is right when he's correct. i'm free to not be captive to my emotions. i have no obligation to hate him, so i disagree when i disagree. i have multiple times, not just before office, but during my time in office. but when he's right, he's right. let's just be honest about that. >> let's talk about one specific instance. this is the president talking about troops in saudi arabia. >> we're sending more to saudi arabia and saudi arabia is paying us for it. i toads saudi arabia we have a very good relationship. listen, you're a very rich country. you want more troops, we'll send

them to you and you've got to pay us. we are going to help them but these rich countries have to pay for it. >> do you agree with the president on that? >> sounds like a similar deal we've always had with south korea. south korea has long paid for a portion of our presence there. the real question is what is the point of having troops in saudi arabia at all? i've criticized the president for pulling out troochs. the point is deterrent. when we struck soleimani, what we did is reestablish a red line. if you attack our embassies, we're going to respond. and you have to know we're going to respond and hit you hard. that's really important and something we've lost for years. as far as more troop levels in saudi arabia to protect that

sense of deterrent, i don't have a problem with it. >> in terms of iran, what is the next turn of the screw there? what's your view for troops on the ground? is there a sense of predictability of what the mission is? >> yeah. with respect to iran or -- >> i mean it clearly has turned into a proxy war with iran. >> a proxy war's been going on a very long time. i've been part of it. i was the guy collecting that intel. i know exactly what we're talking about. that's been going on a very long time. if you're going to have a strategy, you have to establish red lines. establish that sense of deterrent. it's worked pretty well. we had a practically staged attack by the iranians right afterwards. they let the iraqis know about it after hour beforehand. now we've solidified the iranian people behind the regime.

that turned to be false. we're seeing the regime weaker than ever. the more we can come together as a congress and just put #free iran, you have no idea the impact on what that gives for the people. they're looking for the freedom-loving america that supports them morally? the strategy is not going to war. these rallies by members of congress, no war with iran. that's fine but that's not plan and it's disingenuous to claim it has been. we're less likely to go to war now because it showed a severe escalation by soleimani. >> great to have you on the show as always. coming up my interview with senator jeff merkley.

♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ and i like to question your i'm yoevery move.n law. like this left turn. it's the next one. you always drive this slow? how did you make someone i love? that must be why you're always so late. i do not speed. and that's saving me cash with drivewise. my son, he did say that you were the safe option. and that's the nicest thing you ever said to me.

so get allstate. stop bossing. where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. this is my son's favorite color, you should try it. [mayhem] you always drive like an old lady? [tina] you're an old lady. ♪ i wanted my hepatitis c gone. i put off treating mine. epclusa treats all main types of chronic hep c. whatever your type, epclusa could be your kind of cure. i just found out about mine. i knew for years

epclusa has a 98% overall cure rate. i had no symptoms of hepatitis c mine caused liver damage. epclusa is only one pill, once a day, taken with or without food for 12 weeks. before starting epclusa, your doctor will test if you have had hepatitis b, which may flare up, and could cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you have had hepatitis b, other liver or... ...kidney problems, hiv, or other medical conditions... ...and all medicines you take, including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with epclusa may cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects include headache and tiredness. ask your doctor today, if epclusa is your kind of cure.

a media blitz following the claim the killing of general soleimani was prompted by a

possible iran attack on four u.s. embassies. we even saw secretary mark esper splitting hairs on what they expected verses what they saw. >> he didn't say a specific piece of evidence. he believed. i didn't see one with regard to four embassies. what i said is i share the president's view is my expectations was they're going after our embassies. >> this kind of messaging likely to further confound some law makers about a lack of information provided to them durtling the classified briefing. and joining me a member of the foreign relations committee. someone who has raised concerns about that briefing. let's start where we left off with secretary esper, who seemed to struggle to speak about the president's claim there were potentially four embassies

involved in a potential attack parted of the justification for this killing. did you hear any of that during the senate briefing you received? >> no. the senate briefing was very clear there were no details for any specific planned attack. no identifiable targets, people, place, time, no details. what we're seeing is the administration, i think, reached a conclusion this was a legitimate targed because he is involved in planning actions that have killed americans in the past and may well kill them in the future. but the whole imminent argument is basically made up and they're trying to back fill and give that some substance. it wasn't in the briefing, wasn't detailed. this is secretary esper trying to square the circle and having a hard time doing it. >> so, administration defenders are, at this point, having watched the iranian response this week, are saying we've

taken a step back, deescalated and they're saying they restored deterrents. brought that strategy of trying to deter iran from strategies like this. do you buy that? >> no, i don't. i do think there is some element, for example, in the previous attack where we attacked the militias conducting attacks inside iraq. they're going to be more hesitant. but in the case of the assassination, this has producesed a lot of emotion and passion among various iranians ca capable of providing counterattacks and could incentivize strikes on american sites in the future. >> senator, let's turn to impeachment. i want to show you something one of your colleagues, susan collins of maine, said over the weekend.

let's watch. >> i do believe that we should be completely open to calling witnesses. unfortunately, the house did a very rush job in its impeachment inquiry and the president's counsel chose not to put on a case and republican witnesses were blocked by the committee chairman in the house. >> so, she seems to suggest she would be open to witnesses. we've also been reporting there are conversations about her trying to get together some sort of group of republicans that might turn one of those votes on the floor. do you think this is a realistic possibility democrats might win some motions on the floor during the course of the trial; that we could see witnesses here? >> it is possible. we would need four republicans to join all the democrats in

voting for witnesses and documents. there's a very strong case for witnesses and documents. we have an obligation to provide a full and fair trial in the senate. any american believes, understands, full and fair means you have to have access to witnesses and documents. not just for those making the case, the prosecution, but for the team defending that person being prosecuted, the president. so both sides should have that. unfortunately u we've never envisioned a situation where the majority leader of the senate would in advance, even though he has to taken a oath to do impartial justice, has said he's not going to be impartial and do everything he can to work closely with the president and short circuit a full and fair trial. if that happens, the senate fails the test of its responsibility under the constitution. >> do you think the two senate

leaders, schumer and mcconnell, should be working more closely together than it seems they are? >> in an ideal world they would work together with that vision of justice and with that vision of responsibility of the senate. but in this case mitch mcconnell has said he's not going to honor that vision and chuck schumer has said that puts him in a difficult spot. if you've simply say let's have a compromise and that's not a full and fair trial. both sides, the defense and the prosecution, need to be able to lay out their entire case they consider relevant. i know a lot of my republican colleagues are struggling with this. they have taken an oath to the prosecution. they will taken a oath to do impartial justice. which means country above party. and yet they're being strong armed to say, no, this is a republican president. let's get him off the hook.

and that's just wrong. >> thank you very much for your time tonight, sir. and i'll see youen the hill, i'm sure, coming up soon. when we return bernie sanders tries on a new look. but elizabeth warren fire as warning shot. e as warning shot alka-seltzer plus. now with 25% more concentrated power. nothing works faster for powerful cold relief. oh, what a relief it is! so fast! itso 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. chantix reduces the urge 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. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix. but he wanted snow for thelace holidays.. so we built a snow globe. i'll get that later. dylan! but the one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with homeowners insurance. what? switching and saving was really easy! i love you! what? sweetie! hands off the glass. ugh!! call geico and see how easy saving on homeowners

and condo insurance can be. i love her! 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.

welcome back. nigh poll from the des moines

register shows bernie sanders leading in iowa for the first time and a nearly double digit e erosion for pete buttigieg. sanders' rise is not lost on president trump, who tweeted, he's looking very good. the senator responding, quote, it means you're going to lose. oh, boy. >> the sooner we can coalesce, the sooner we eliminate the traditional circular pattern in the democratic party. that hurt hillary. having bernie go on and on and on. we got to end this thing. >> that clip is so rich. there was a truce between the warren and sanders' campaigns. reports sanders was give an script criticizing warren supporters as highly educated and affluent.

>> senator warren, there's reporting this morning about the bernie sanders campaign and the way they are talking about you at the doors here in iwi, basically saying your voters will vote democrat any way. why is he wrong? >> i was disappointed to hear that bernie is sending his volunteers aught to trash me. bernie knows me and has known me for a long time. he knows who i am, where i come from, what i have worked on and fought for and the coalition and grass roots movement we're trying to build. democrats want to win in 2020. we all saw the impact of the factionalism in 2016 and we can't have a repeat of that. we cannot nominate someone who

takes big chunks of the democratic coalition for granted. we need someone who will bring our party together. someone every democrat can believe in. i hope bernie reconsiders and turns his campaign in a different direction. >> wow. nbc's ron hillyard joins me live from des moines. it's great to see you, my friend. y you've been working so hard these last few months and it's been fun to watch you. this is quite a shift from warren. s there seems to be a lot of steel behind those remarks aimed at bernie sanders. >> over the last year, kasie, these two candidates have essentially had a truce between their campaigns.

they've been trying to persuade, their big, boulder, policy agenda items were not only feasible but workable. we caught up with sandars little bit ago in iowa city responding to the condemnation from warren. >> i think it's a little bit of a media blow up. elizabeth warren is a very good friend of mine. we have worked together in the senate for years. elizabeth warren and i will continue to work together, we will debate the issues. nobody is going to trash elizabeth. we have hundreds of employees. elizabeth warren has hundreds of employees and sometimes people say things they shouldn't have. have i ever said one negative word about elizabeth warren? no, of course i didn't. >> reporter: we should note advisors for bernie sanders, in the last 24 hours v gone after

joe biden. an advisor wrote an op-ed this morning, pushing back on joe biden's record that has impacted black america and another advisor released a statement knocking joe biden's iraq war vote from the early 2000s. >> so, why now? why is this happening now? i remember when i covered the campaign in 2016, bernie sanders dispensed with the hillary clinton attack in the bed bait. i'm interested why are they on the attack now when they haven't been before? >> look, this goes to the heart of electability question. pete buttigieg and joe biden have essentially tried to make the argument they're the most electable candidates. and polling has shown consistently democratic voters in the top of their priority is picking a nominee best equipped to beat donald trump in november.

what you've seen is buttigieg and biden make that the pillars of their campaign. and bernie sanders saying they don't understand the breadth of importance. they make the case they've shown the ability to do this in the past. four years ago, 2016 iowa caucus, exit polling between bernie sanders and hillary clinton. the caucus goers at that time, 20% of them identified themselves as independents and 69% of those went with bernie sanders and just 26% for hillary clinton. essentially this is bernie sanders making the case he is the most electable. he has a proven record of being able to bring in new independents and voters. he's willing to make that case now, kasie. >> thank you so much for your reporting.

stay safe on the trail, my friend. there is also a new national "washington post" poll of black voters that shows biden far in the lead, followed by bernie sanders. mayor peat buttigieg sits at just 2%. and black voters under 35, buttigieg jumps in the lead. and the first black member of congress to endorse pete buttigieg. why pete buttigieg? >> let me start with the why? i thought there was a lot of national security issues and i think pete is certainly the candidate and will be the next commander and chief who understands what our nation needs to do to reestablish itself as a global leader, useing all the sources, not just the military but diplomacy d investment.

his experience in afghanistan, i think, is very important to understanding what it means. when you send men and women in the harm's means when you send and women into harm's way. that's what i focus on first and that's what drew me to pete. i'm very excited. i serve as lieutenant governor of maryland. i serve d with the mayor. pete had a successful eight years as mayor. not perfect, no mayor can have a perfect record, but he made a lot of progress. >> do you feel as though his respect for the african-american community as mayor was good enough? >> i think he had a lot of respect. you can measure that in a few ways. one is he brought people together. so to have respect for the community you also have to be in a relationship with the community. and the way the manner in which he brought together a coalition of south bend to address difficult issues like housing. they didn't get it right

initially, but working together, did a lot improve redeveloped housing in south bend. if you look at some things like black unemployment in south bend. it went down 70%. black wealth or poverty in south bend went down 40%. on the community policing, he reestablished the public safety board. what i notice when you govern is for every progress point that you make, you wish you could make two more. sometimes for every two steps forward, there's one step back. so i think he's made a lot of progress. he's done it because he listens and does it in partnership with the people he's working for and with. >> fair enough. ashley, from the white house perspective, who do they want to run against? >> it honestly depends on who you talk to and what day. there was a the lot of concern very early on about joe biden, as he's gone forward in the race

and been more stomach bliss than even democrats would like to see, they feel more confident against him. there's a sense that bernie sanders or elizabeth warren would be easy to paint them all with a broad brush stroke as radical leftist socialist, but there's a sense the president first of all is legitimately worried about the free give aways that that wing of the party is providing voters. he understands money and feels that's difficult to compete w h with. and both of them are tapping into, especially elizabeth warren, but a populism and on paper they are easerier to beat, but in real life, that's how this election is fought, there's a chance there will be a sark and they will catch fire and be far more formidable than it would seem in head to head polls. >> it seems like joe biden would be the same as hillary clinton from the trump perspective. >> you hear them say that publicly, privately. if you look at the playbook they are playing, they are doing just that. when they bring up joe biden and his son hunter, there's a tax

attacks that did you want b necessarily matter. they have been able to eject that into the same way they were with hillary clinton's e-mails. once that's out there, you can't take it back. >> i think it's not twitter or the actual world. somewhere in between. congressman, thank you so much. ashley parker, thank you. we're back right after this. pau we're back right after this. 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. ♪ quitting smoking is freaking hard.st, like quitting every monday hard. quitting feels so big. so, try making it smaller.

and you'll be surprised at how easily starting small... ...can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette 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.

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. and there's a big difference between ordinary... and the best. which egg tastes more farm-fresh and delicious?

only eggland's best. which egg has 6 times more vitamin d, 10 times more vitamin e, and 25% less saturated fat? only eggland's best. which egg is so special, i'd never serve my family anything else? for me, it's only eggland's best. better taste, better nutrition, better eggs. and unmatched overall value. together with a dedicated advisor, you'll make a plan that can adjust as your life changes, with access to tax-smart investing strategies that help you keep more of what you earn. and with a new brokerage account, your cash is automatically invested at a great rate that's at least 21 times more than other advisory firms. personalized advice. unmatched value. at fidelity, you can have both. ♪ more than this

hour hof "kasie d.c.," nancy pelosi signals she's ready to stop playing chicken with mitch mcconnell but throws a few jabs his way. we're taking bets. plus christy hooul hasn't joins us to talk about president trump and nato. and our team of producers watches the sunday shows so you don't have to. don't have to. 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™". (honk!) i hear you sister. that's why i'm partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual check-up, and be open with your doctor about anything you feel - physically and emotionally. but now cigna has a plan that can help everyone see stress differently. just find a period of time to unwind. a location to de-stress. an activity to enjoy. or the name of someone to talk to.

to create a plan that works for you, visit cigna.com/mystressplan. cigna. together, all the way. i think the house is changing him... -[ gasps ] -up and at 'em! ...into his father. [ eerie music plays ] is it scary? -[ gasps ] -it's in eco mode. so don't touch it. mm-hmm. i can't stop this from swinging. must be a draft in here. but he did save a bunch of money bundling our home and auto with progressive. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents, but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us. -hello? -sorry, honey. [ telephone beeps ] butt dial.

welcome back to the second hour of "kasie d.c." in just a little bit, i'll talk to congresswoman chris sit houlahan about trying to reign in presidential power. she's an air force veterans and joins me live. and we'll talk about a piece that flew under the radar. it reads, no longer can massive tech companies like google be permitted to operate relatively free from government oversight. by itself, it's not a shocking statement except that it came from google's former head of international relations. he says the motto used to be don't be evil. things have changed.

i'll talk to him. but first as debates over iran and impeachment rage on, the influence that nancy pelosi and president trump have on members of their respective parties is on full display. after a number of democrats made comments earlier in the week, pushing pelosi to second articles of impeachment to the senate, many of later clarified and stepped back into line. take the chairman of the armed services committee adam smith. >> i think it is. i understand what the speaker is trying to do. basically, trying to use the leverage of that to work with democratic and republican senators to try to get a reasonable trial. i think it was perfectly advisable for the speaker to try to leverage that, to get a better deal. at this point, it doesn't look like that's going to happen. i think it's time to send the impeachment to the senate and let mitch mcconnell be responsible for the pafairness the trial. he ultimately is.

>> really? less than three hours later, he put out this tweet. i misspoke this morning. if the speaker believes that holding on to the articles for a longer time will force a fair trial, i wholeheartedly support that decision. is and mike lee served a case study on the republican side. let's take a listen to his comments about the administration's iran brief iin on wednesday compared to what he said a day later. >> i had hope d and expected to receive more information outlining the legal, factual and moral justification for the attack. >> rand paul challenges the attack on general soleimani. i don't. >> they had to leave after 75 minutes while in the os of telling us that we need to be good little boys and girls and run along and not debate this in public. i find that absolutely insane. >> i applaud this president. i support this president. this president has been fantastic. the briefers yesterday didn't exhibit the same level of

respect and deference and restraint that president trump has shown. >> what a difference a day makes. alongside the president and temperatures np, there's the third power looming large in the capital. that's mitch mcconnell, whose chamber is set to take over the impeachment process this week. joining me is senior writer for politico jake sherman. "new york times" correspondent sheryl toll isberg. and alexi mccammond. i want to walk through the rich reporting on chuck schumer that just dropped in "the new york times." but antonio, take us behind the scenes here of what mitch mcconnell's mind set is as he prepares to take these articles from the house speaker. she clearly thought or at least

she wanted to try to poke him in public. i think she knows him well enough to know this was never going to make a real difference in how he handled it, but she did it any way. i'm convinced she had a reason for it. what do you think that is? >> dwin intervention, i wish could tell me what it is. if you know she didn't have leverage, she's the speaker of the house. he's the majority leader of the senate. she didn't have leverage here. she always needed to find a wit to get out of it. if it was so urgent, let's get on with it. now she's found a rational to get out of it. they have their talking points. i have heard them. they are not particularly convincing to me. but the senate will get those articles and they will start a trial. and just say everyone understands, just because there's an organizing resolution, they will get on. this is the in clinton model. there's a lot more that lun fold moving forward. it's a ambassador who controls what he can control.

he has a caucus. he has to keep everyone informed. it's really the power of persuasion he has to use to try to keep his members in line. we'll see how they go. >> democrats will argue that there have been material movements in the impeachment saga since she's held on to the articles. if they started the trial on december 19th, we wouldn't know about e-mails that came out, we wouldn't know john bolton was willing to testify, among other things. what did pelosi actually accomplish here, if anything, and does she still have cards to play? >> no, she doesn't have any cards to play. i think you'd probably all would agree. it's tough to say that those developments were because she was holding the articles. imagine in another set ncenario had sent the articles over to the senate and john bolton came out while the senate trial was going on. that would appear to be a lot more of a game changer

development while the trial was going on than while she was holding the articles. so you can make an equally convincing argument it was a detracti detraction, a negative development that bolton came out while holding the articles. i don't know what more cards she could play. i don't mean to say this in a glib way, but mitch mcconnell is right when he says the house process is done. they have impeached him. they held lengthy and successful hearings. now the the senate has a role to play as well. so you can quibble with how the senate is going to conduct itself and say they should guarantee witnesses. i will accept that. but mitch mcconnell has his votes together. so he doesn't need anything from democrats. i just don't get what else is going to happen here. >> so sheryl, you have schumer eyeing the senate's top job. navigates tricky impeachment terra rain.

but chuck schumer is in a unique position here. he has a lot of power over his caugcus, but perhaps not a lot f power at the end of the day over the impeachment process itself because he needs those for republicans. what can he do to try and adjust this? the quote that stuck out to me was the one from susan collins, who said very sharply to reporters, i don't think chuck schumer is very interested in my opinion. but trying to defeat me by teling lies to the people of maine and you can quote me on that. >> this is chuck schumer's dilemma pet. needs four votes. he has 45 democrats and 2 independents. that's four short of the 51 that he would need to force witnesses, to force the senate to subpoena witnesses and introduce new evidence. he has to find four votes from somewhere. he's looking at vulnerable

republicans like susan collins. but he's going to court those republicans at the same time as he's trying to knock them off so he can get elthe majority leades job. so this is a very difficult and tricky task. and schumer has a weak hand to play as we have already seen senator mcconnell has the votes to go ahead without democrats. he will go ahead without them. which schumer is going to introduce resolution after resolution after resolution trying to get republicans to get on board with his move for witnesses and documents. he's trying to put them in a box. make life uncomfortable for them. >> who are these people? let's start with susan collins. she says she's meeting with a fairly small group, so the question is whether it's four or not, who share the goal of

witnesses can be called in the impeachment trial. here's what she had to say about john bolton specifically. >> are you amenable to hearing from stage three? >> there are a number of witnesses that will be proip appropriate for the stage three of which he would certainly be one. >> here's what mitt romney told me on the same topic. >> i'd like to hear from john bolton and other witnesses with direct information. but that process will accommodate that. >> you do think the process is going to accommodate that? >> the clinton process allows for a vote on witnesses to occur after the opening argument arguments. >> do you think it's realistic that four republicans would vote to call john bolton? >> i can't begin to predict. i will want to hear from witnesses. >> but now president trump is signaling he may try to block bolton from testifying at all.

>> why not call bolton and allow him to testify? this thing is bogus. >> i don't have a problem other than one thing. you can't be in the white house as president -- i'm talking about future presidents, and have a security adviser, anybody having to do with security, and legal and other things, i think you have to for the sake of the office. >> so we heard from the experts around the table. if you're the trump white house, this is still that -- the idea that this president loves television fight. and so i think for republicans, even if it's all nailed down and they have the votes, the president is a big question mark hanging out there. >> but as you heard, he loves using executive power to get his way in various situations. and this is a little bit different because if he allows folks to testify and sort of says go ahead and do it, he's legitimizing the process that

he's worked hard with allies and team to delegitimize the entire time. he's in sort of a weird place. he's a television president who loves lawyers and attorneys and folks around a him, who perform well on tv. but this is one situation in which it seems he's doing everything possible to kill the conversation completely and not have this turn into a performance of sorts by allowing people to testify on tv. >> how much pressure are these republicans really under? >> i would also just note democrats have to be a lift careful because you open that p up, say we do bolton and that's what the senate considers. there could be a motion to have hunter biden. when we're talking about witnesses, we're talking about what's fair is fair. a fair process. it's not just going to be what some people want with ambassador bolton. how are going to feel if if hunter biden gets called?

>> do you think there's votes? >> you have to be clear here. you're opening a pandora's box, that's my only point, on the witnesses. that would be a hard vote for some folks on the other side. just making that point. >> i'm not passing judgment on whether there's going to be witnesses. i have no idea. but just consider the road that we need to travel on to get witnesses. we need four republicans. we can think of three. i don't know how they will vote, but those are the easy ones to consider. i don't know who that fourth is. >> if he ticks off donald trump, he's toast in colorado. >> then if the president block it is and it goes to court potentially, this is a really high hurdle. you might disagree. i'm hearing a lot in the last 24

hours that maybe witnesses are a thing. i don't know where that's coming from. >> it's a process that will unfold. i just think that we need to just watch it unfold a little bit because there's going to be a lot of dynamics. that's what happened in the clinton impeachment and the only point is what mcconnell tried to say. it's going to allow to be an interesting process. and don't underestimate susan collins. >> we had conflicting signals from the president himself. the president said in the beginning he wants witnesses to testify. he wants nancy pelosi and adam schiff, but he wants a full trial, as you said. he wants a show. by the same token, he tweeted that the senate should dismiss the trial shs it's a big hoax. so president trump is all over the map on this. we know senator mcconnell is taking his cues from the president. those cues, no, he's not? yes, he is. >> i was just going to make the the observation. i would just say -- >> but you will. >> there's been a lot of times

president trump has said, you know, the senate is going to handle this it. he's showing a deference on how this would go. i know there's some of the the tweets out there. i understand that. but i think relatively speaking, the president has been pretty sort of differential to how the leader will handle it. then his prosecution team will present. >> i would just say my sense is that mcconnell is not interested in the same kind of cable news show as this president often seems to be. thank you very much for your reporting as always. coming up, friendly rivalry between bernie sanders and elizabeth warren. now getting a little less friendly. my krgs with congresswoman houlahan about the mixed messages out of the white house. "kasie d.c.," back after this. ".

for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com ♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ 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. oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows. they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks.

download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. i'll pass. nato, and then you have middle

east. natome. i'm good at names. nobody could remember. think of the song ymca. now everybody says it. >> that was part of the president's response when he was asked about his request for nato to do more in the middle east. meanwhile, a new abc news poll asked americans whether they approve or disapprove of the way president trump is handling the current situation with iran. 43% say they approve. 56% say they disapprove. 25 aft 25% says it's made the united states more safe. joining me is veteran and congresswoman chrissy houlahan. it's great to see you. >> thank you so much for having me. >> this is a very serious topic, but it's natome. what's your reaction?

>> it strikes me as i'm heartened to hear that the president is starting to talk more about including nato in the decision making process in anything we're doing on a global scale. it's a long time coming and something he's been walking away from. so i'm excited to hear him talk actively about that. but we're not just creating a brand. we're not creating nato and me. what we're trying to do is bring people along in the conversation. and nato and all of the forces associated with them are not our military. so we need to make sure we're treating them as sovereign nations as they are to make sure we're bringing them along in the intelligence and what it is we're doing and why we're doing it. in the same way we ought to be bringing the congress along as well. >> let me pick up where that poll left off. it's clear that more americans think we're not less safe now. there seems to be a fear that this is going to broaden into an actual hot war. do you think that the strike on

soleimani made us more safe or less safe? >> i definitely think at this point in time we are in a more destanl stabilized time than a week ago. i do worry we're not at the end of this, but rather the beginning of the reaction of the iranians to what has happened. so i'm not confident as the vast majority of the public aren't as well that we're in a safer place. i personally would like to understand more about the decision making process, understand why our president made the decision he did. the information that he had. i'm a veteran myself. i serve on the armed services committee and foreign affairs committee. i believe it's important and imperative the congress has information so they can exercise their constitutional duty of oversight and authorization of military conflict. >> so this debate over iran has touched off a debate on the campaign trail among democrats who are vying for the nomination.

between joe biden and bernie sanders, joe biden having been supportive of invading iraq and bernie sanders criticizing him for that. in light of what we have seen with iran, whose vision do you think americans should trust with our national security? joe biden with his years of experience as vice president or bernie sanders, somebody who said from the beginning we shouldn't go into iraq? >> full disclosure, i endorsed joe biden so i believe in his vision and experience. i believe a at this time we need somebody who has that experience internationally. and dealing with the worrisome times we're heading into. i believe the vice president biden would be a better choice for those reasons. >> do you question bernie sanders' judgment? >> no, i don't. i absolutely don't. i just feel as though right now vice president biden, as an example and hopefully respect e representatives like me, represent an option about bringing the country together, healing the nation, healing the

world from a very divisive time. i think that's the option that i would prefer to see in our presidential candidate. >> so let's switch gears to talk a little bit about impeachment, which obviously the house just went through. frankly, that happened in large part because of more moderate democrats were willing to get on board. it's time to do this. do you have any regrets looking back about that? >> i don't have any regrets. it was one of the hardest things i have ever had to do, but also one of the reasons i'm grateful to be here and serving at this time. being able to make really hard decisions on behalf of my community and my commonwealth and country are a really important. although i recognize this was a decision that not everybody came along with me on, i believe it was the right decision to make. >> what would you say to senators who now have to consider this? there's a debate going on about whether they should hear from john bolton.

did the house rush to do this and leave bolton's testimony on the sidelines? should the senate hear it now? >> what i would say it was my responsibility and the responsibility of 434 co-workers to do their job as members of the house. the best analogy given to me is we were sort of the grand jury and it was our job to sees if there was enough of a case to push forward to the jury. and now it's the senate's job to do their job. the job is to be impartial jurors ask make sure they see the evidence at hand. i believe it's their responsibility now to call those witnesses. >> you want to hear from john bolton? >> i do. i absolutely do. >> chrissy houlahan, thank you for being here. i appreciate it. later tonight the team of producers watches the sunday show so you don't have to. first, signs of unrest in the democratic left flank. elizabeth warren tells the bernie sanders campaign to knock it off. that's next. it off that's next. ♪ limu emu & doug

hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ which is the only egg good eonly eggland's best. with more farm-fresh taste, more vitamins, and 25% less saturated fat? only eggland's best. better taste, better nutrition, better eggs. did you know that every single flush fling odors onto your soft surfaces? then they get released back into the air so you smell them later.

ew. right? that's why febreze created small spaces. press firmly and watch it get to work... unlike the leading cone, small spaces continuously eliminates odors in the air and on surfaces so they don't come back for 45 days. now that's one flushin' fresh bathroom. skip to the good part with alka-seltzer plus. now with 25% more concentrated power. nothing works faster for powerful cold relief. oh, what a relief it is! so fast!

but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.

sglmpbltsz with just over three weeks to the iowa caucuses, new battle lines are being drawn in the the democratic field. there was back and forth between bernie sanders and elizabeth

warren after talking points obtained by politico revealed that sanders volunteers had been instruct ed to paint warren as the candidate of the elite when talking about her with caucus goers. allie joins me live from des moines. you talked to senator wash today and asked her about that reporting. which has advanced the story. what did you learn? >> reporter: 22 days out from the caugcus and it's really col here, but things are really heating up between elizabeth warren and bernie sanders. you know this from covering them on the hill. on policy they tend to be in lock step. on the campaign trail, they talk about each other and call each other friends. they act like it for the most part. they don't really back talk each other out here on the campaign trail pap that's why today's exchange was a turning point for those out here with them every day. because when i asked elizabeth

warren a question about bernie sanders, he actually answered it pretty directly. there was so much back and forth. i'm going to let the candidates tell you about it themselves. >> senator warren, there's reporting out from my colleague at politico about the bernie sanders campaign and the way they are talking about you at the doors here in iowa. basically saying your voters are peel people who will vote democrat and you don't bring new bases into the tent. why is he wrong? >> i was disappointed to hear that bernie is sending volunteers out to trash me. bernie knows me. there's he's known me for a lon. he knows who i am, where i come from, what i have worked on and fought for. and the coalition and grass roots movement we're trying to build. democrats want to win in 2020. we all saw the impact of the

factionalism in 2016. we can't have a repeat of that. >> we have over 500 people on our campaign. people do certain things. i'm sure the warren campaign people do surgecertain things. i have never heard a thing about elizabeth warren. she is a friend of mine. but no one is going to be attacking elizabeth. >> we'll see when bernie sanders says nobody is going to be attacking elizabeth. we have a debate on tuesday night. six candidates have qualified for it. if you look at how the past few stages have gone down, they aren't mincing words. and i think everybody on stage is aware of that. so it's kind of hard to believe that everyone is going to get on stage here with less than 20 days at that point to go until the caucus and just play nice across the board. >> i don't think it's going to be on the menu.

ali in des moines, stay warm, my friend. be safe on the trail. the panel is back with me. i actually want to talk for a second about the impeachment trial and how it's layered on top of the iowa caucuses. it's kind of amazing to me that we're not more focused on iowa than we currently are. normally 22 days out, we would all be there freezing like ali is freezing. but instead we're focused here in washington. how is that calculous -- elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, cory booker, they are all stuck on the senate floor and not in iowa. >> that's one of the reasons i don't understand what the speaker did because she delayed this time line, which it allowed this to fall right at this point in time. so there was -- i didn't float this, but some people have argued that maybe pelosi was doing this to boost joe biden.

i have no idea. but it really just goes again to the why did the speaker delay this because now this does cause a real problem for a lot of democrats in the senate and will be sort of tied to the senate chamber. >> is that the strategy? help joe biden? >> that's what kevin mccarthy said on fox news. pelosi was doing this from preventing bernie sanders from becoming the nominee. i don't think she's thinking in that way. she can correct us. but they are focused on different things. washington is consumed by impeachment, but the senators who are running for president for the democratic nomination are spending lots of time in iowa. the debate this tuesday is in iowa. the focus might be shifted, but there's still a noex. the interesting thing will be whether or not senator klobuchar are spending the day in washington and taking an evening flight to iowa to get last-minute time with folks who will be deciding their fate in just a few weeks. >> bernie sanders has a lot of

money. so he could afford to charter a plane to go back and forth. i do think you're going to see that. you're going to see him go for events in the morning and then -- the senate impeachment trial is not going to start until the afternoon. so i think they have those mornings if they so choose. >> so how seriously do you take people who clinton campaign they are thinking about scheduling of the impeachment trial would keeping the campaign in mind? >> i do take it seriously. i don't think mitch mcconnell or anybody cares. pit think kevin mccarthy is dreaming. i don't think nancy pelosi was trying to help joe biden. i don't think this has anything to do with the campaign. i think mitch mcconnell wants to work six days a week to get this done as soon as possible. it's unfortunate for those people who are running for president that they have to deal with this while the caucus is going on. >> you think that's the deal? >> i don't think the senate has a choice. it's my understanding once they turn to the trial, they are on it. so there could be some business in the morng, but they are on it

until they are tone. with the only six days a week sunday being off. that's it. they get the articles from the house. they have to go. there's no -- this isn't something that the leader has just decided to do. it's how the process works. >> the interesting thing we should watch for is when all this starts, whether and how the senate trial affects the senators campaign stump speeches. whether they are talking more about impeachment and the rule of law and national security concerns regarding president trump or if they say something to the effect of i have been dealing with impeachment all day. here's the issues here in iowa. health care, the economy, climate change, immigration, et set ra. we don't have to talk about trump. i have been doing that all day. >> the other question i have, too, does the focus on this create a problem for joe biden? that it's under the surface here. we're focused potentially on things that the trump administration wants you to think are shady.

>> the biden campaign, their line has been joe biden did nothing wrong. we have nothing to worry about. i think that's what you're asking. i don't understand that line of thinking. he might have done nothing wrong. there's no evidence that he personally was involved in any way. but just the focus that his son was getting paid a bunch of money to work on this corrupt ukrainian oil company, if that's not the way he wants to be in the news. for many weeks he didn't forcefully push back on any of the attacks and there's nothing more that donald trump wants to do than focus on joe biden's son being on this board of this oil company. by the way, i want to add one more thing about the scheduling of this all. the senators are going to be in their seats for weeks a the a time, six days a week. do we think after two or three weeks, they are going to say, we want a bunch of more witnesses. we want to be here for many more weeks and not campaigning.

i don't think we can i guegnore dynamic. they are human beings and they have emotions and feelings. >> often times, we lose sight of that human element. i have one more major news item to get to. i'm excited about this. the tiny town of dixville notch will be one of the first. they thought they were short on officials. they didn't have enough people in the town. but a real estate developer offered to move from maine to dixville notch to keep them as one of the the most closely watched votes of the primary. it's a tradition that dates back 60 years. but they were going to lose it because they needed to have five people living there. take a look. >> we'll go back to new york now for the news first. good morning. >> good morning, barbara. good morning, everyone. new hampshire voters are casting

their ballots today in the first presidential primary. >> with the nation's media watching, the gop cast 11 votes for gerald ford and 4 for ronald reagan. the democrats split, 6 for jimmy carter and one each for four others. vice presidential candidate who received one write-in vote for president. the town moderator who just happens to own the hotel where most of the voters work says the tally isn't necessarily a preview of the new hampshire outcome. >> we've usually been wrong. >> i personally am thrilled that dixville notch is back. when we come back, facebook gives a status update on how to handle political ads. ads i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road,

and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby!

thouwhich is breast cancer metastthat has spreadcer, to other parts of the body, are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer, as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole,

and shrank tumors in over half of patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs that can lead to death. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including trouble breathing, shortness of breath, cough, or chest pain. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance.

despite a steady ground swell of criticism, facebook say it is will continue its policy of not fact checking political ads. reaction has been mixed. a spokes mantles "the new york times," our ads are always accurate so it's good that facebook won't limit political messages. elizabeth warren, a long time critic of the social media platform, facebook is paying for its fake news coverage. so it's not surprising they are standing their ground on letting political figures lie to you.

well, then on wednesday teen vogue set is off a controversy, but mostly generated confusion after they published a story praising facebook's 2020 election work. the piece did not have a bilines and was later labeled as sponsored content. that disappeared a i long with the article. someone tweeted, literally idk in response to a question about the story before that tweet was deleted as well. after initially denying that the story was anything but editorial, facebook confirmed it was, in fact, a paid partnership. the own er of teen vogue apologized for all that confusion. facebook isn't the only tech giant making news these days thanks to a medium article written by a former google executive who says the company's motto of don't be evil no longer

reflects google's values. he's also running for a senate seat in maine. he joins me live, after a quick break. quick break. your best comfort and protection guaranteed. because, perfect or not, life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®. of course i'd love to take an informal poll. i used to be a little cranky. dealing with our finances really haunted me. thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeeper's helping customize it for our business. (live bookkeeper) you're all set up! (janine) great! hey! you got the burnt marshmallow out! (delivery man) he slimed me. (janine) tissue? (vo) get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. the easy way to a happier business. remember, you have out the hilton app. can the hilton app 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 find your coach, come on! book with the hilton app. expect better. expect hilton.

welcome back.

join iing me now is google's former head of international relation ps. he's now a democratic candidate for the u.s. senate in maine. ross, thank you for being here. i appreciate it. >> thank you for having me. welcome back to you and congrats on the addition to your family. >> thank you so much. i really appreciate it. let's start with your experience at goog le. you left because you said you were unhappy about the direction the company was going in. you wrote a post about this. what are the the implications for all of us when that once great american company controls so much data about billions of users. no longer can massive tech companies be permitted to operate relatively free from government oversight. what made you decide to write this article? >> i think the important thing to keep in mind about this story is that it's actually a bigger story than just my own experience. it's bigger even than google. this is fundamentally a story about corruption and greed and abuse of power that's infected a

lot of american companies. it's the same thing, the same abuse of power and greed that's infected washington too. including susan collins. which is why i'm running against her. when you come right down to it, susan collins, her loyalty to maine and this country stops at the door to mitch mcconnell's office. >> you don't think she's loyal to the united states of america? >> i don't think she's doing the job that she's supposed to be doing for this country and especially not for the people of maine, no. >> so you first have to get through a primary if you're going to run against susan collins. it seems as though official washington has come down on the side of one of your democratic opponents. why do you think that is? how are you going to stand up against that? >> i think the important thing to remember is that we live in a democracy. and whatever the powers are out there that are trying to influence elections, ultimately, maine voters will decide who represents them in the senate.

and i'm confident i'm the person that will be representing them next year. and i'm going to win this election the way that everyone wins an election. do the talking to them about my own story. >> and how are you going to answer questions if voters ask you, hey, you haven't been here in maine. you have been in california for a long time. >> i talk to them about the way i grew up in maine. you know, there are really two maines. there is the maine that many people see when they're on vacation, you know. you might see it on a postcard. and then there is the maine that i grew up in. mill towns that are struggling to get back on their feet decades after the jobs went away. and i grew up in a family where my dad was a truckdriver and a proud teamster and my mom baby-sat kids to make ends meet. we almost lost our home at one point, and i remember the bank assessors coming to figure out if they were going to fore close on the mortgage.

and my mom started cleaning the homes of wealthy families in nearby court. the story is important because i turned 50 last month, and things haven't gotten better for working families in maine. they're worse. we're 49th in the country in terms of economic growth. we still don't have high speed internet throughout the state or even mobile phone reception. >> yes. >> people are hurting. and when i talk to them and share my story, they not only know that i care about them and i will represent them in the senate, they know that i have experienced the same struggles they're going through right now. >> let's talk more about what you have -- your experience, what you learned at google and how it applies to this race. what do you think that you could bring to the senate in terms of trying to pass regulation to get this kind of thing under control. >> yeah. >> i mean, it hasn't happened

yet. to a certain extent some people say there isn't enough understanding in washington of some of these problems. how do you propose to make a difference on that front? >> well, i think i'm the only candidate running that has over a tech said of experience in technology policy. you're right, kasie. there is a real lack of understanding of the platforms or even technology in general. and i know i can bring that. i'm going to be releasing a ten point plan to regulate technology companies in about a week. >> do you think google considers itself an american company first? are they concerned about the state of our democracy or not? >> they're concerned about their bottom line, their stock price and i'm not sure what else they care about. but i think they stopped caring about not doing evil and they stopped caring about their original mission a couple of years ago. >> thank you so much for your time, sir. it is great to have you on the

program. we will be keeping an eye on your race. we also invited senator susan collins to come on this show tonight. we declined. we would love to have you, senator. the kasie dvr and what to watch for in the week ahead. charmin ultra soft! it's softer than ever. charmin ultra soft is softer than ever, so it's harder to resist. okay, this is getting a little weird! enjoy the go with charmin.

remember, you have out the hilton app. can the hilton app 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 find your coach, come on! book with the hilton app. expect better. expect hilton.

the fall-out from president trump's showdown with iran. >> let me start with the threat. >> do you believe it was imminent. >> in my definition, yes. >> we felt the evidence was far

short of imminent. >> i have not been able to ascertain details. >> the iranians were plotting to target four u.s. embassies. >> he said he believed they could have been targeting the embassies in the region. i believe that as well. >> what he said is he probably, he believed. >> are you saying there wasn't one? >> i didn't see one with regard to four embassies. >> many members of congress from both parties have said none of the briefings mentioned threats to four u.s. embassies. >> that was shared with the gang of eight. >> there was no discussion in the gang of eight briefings that these are the four embassies that are being targeted. >> how worried are you about the integrity of the information we're being told? >> well, i'm worried. >> house speaker nancy pelosi moved finally to send over articles of impeachment? >> will it happen this week? >> we'll determine in our meeting. >> mitch mcconnell, is he prioritized protecting trump? >> mitch mcconnell has signed on to a resolution to dismiss the case. >> trials have witnesses,

cover-ups don't. >> dismissing is a cover-up. >> do you expect to get john bolton to testify. >> i don't expect anything, but i don't think it's impossible. >> we have confidence in our case, that it is impeachable and this president is impeached for life. welcome back. before we go, we will talk about what everybody is watching in the week ahead. jake? >> impeachment managers. we will find out this week who is going to be prosecuting the case against the president. don't want to take anything for granted, but we assume so. it will be interesting to see who the speaker chooses to present this case to the american people to the senate. >> what are you watching? >> i knew you were going to ask me that and i don't have a great answer. >> mitch mcconnell is a great answer. >> yes, my former boss and how he works through and handles his conference when it gets to the point in terms of dealing with witnesses. >> about that next democratic debate in iowa. it is the first time it is all

white candidates, so i'm curious how whether and how questions of race come up as they have in the past. but the warren/bernie feud coming up. >> very interesting for sure. i'm with you, jake, i'm looking to see the next twists in the impeachment case and whether or not we have anymore cracks in that republican conference. i also want to say thank you to boukus the dog. i'm thrilled. this is actually a hunts family dog. their family is down there with my folks, so thank you, guys. thank you so much. that's going to do it for us tonight here on kasie d.c. we will be back with you next week. coming up next, my colleagues break down the long history of u.s. foreign policy in iran from the 1953 iranian coux to where

we have today. for now, good night from washington. to where we have today. for now, good night from washington. p to where we have today. for now, good night from washington. r now, good night frm washington good evening, everyone. tonight the iran rcrisis. the new year kicking off with a new threat from a familiar foe. >> this hour we're going to take you through some of the complex history of the u.s. relationship with iran and the impact trump's presidency has meant for stability across the region. before we get into the last couple of weeks and possible next steps, let's walk-through some of the key inflection points in the relationship between the united states and iran. president obama announced