impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of congress. today the house speaker nancy pelosi officially set the table for the president's senate trial after weeks of delay announcing that the start of formal procedures tomorrow to name impeachment managers. the closest thing here to prosecuting attorneys and to hand over the articles of impeachment to the senate. pelosi stressing in a statement, quote, the american people deserve the truth and the constitution demands a trial. adding the president and the senators will with be held accountable. with that in mind mitch mcconnell making it clear republicans will not settle for an outright dismissal of the case against president trump. which the president himself suggested they do as recently as yesterday. here is mcconnell. >> there is little or no sentiment in republican con fence for a motion to dismiss. our members feel that we have an obligation to listen to the arguments, that means listening to the case, not dismissing the

case. >> little to no sentiment you heard there among republicans for a dismissal and overnight new signs that the trial might pose more risk for donald trump than he and his allies may have been expecting from the republican-controlled senate. nbc news has counted at least four republican senators who have signaled an openness to calling witnesses including john bolton, that is enough votes to approve subpoenas if necessary. politico calling the apparent softening of the gop hardline a republican reckoning on impeachment witnesses and that is where we start the day. to help us talk through the table chief spokesperson for the justice department matt miller, reporter for "the daily beast" betsy woodruff and heidi pryzbyla and the bulwark charlie sykes. and jake sherman. jake let's get to you out of the

gates. we heard from mitch mcconnell this afternoon. we could expect them to be off to the races in effect beginning for real next tuesday when this trial gets going. but right now what was most striking owe folks was mcconnell acknowledgeing there was little to no sentiment in favor of an outright dismissal which gets to the point of the republican reconning where mcconnell is up against some members of his own party saying they want fairness here. >> mcconnell has been consistent through this thing on one point and that is the senate has the responsibility to take this to the trial. he believes it is good for the institution according to him and it is good for the president, if the president has done nothing wrong which mcconnell believes is the case and to go through the process. the witness question is the only lingering question here. and you have people ranging from as you had on the graphic, susan collins, lisa murkowski and mitt romney and lamar alexander wanting to listen to the trial and listen to the proceedings

and then make a judgment on whether there should be witnesses, whether they feel there are holes in the case. but remember, peter, we're talking about that vote on witnesses is going to be weeks away. you'll have most likely, if this mirrors this process, if it mirrors the 1999 clinton process you'll have 24 hours for the sides to make the case. we have a period in which the senators can question the two sides. so i mean we're talking about a couple of weeks away. but still this is the critical question. will any witness in this this trial be able to get 51 votes and that is a big lingering question which frankly at this point we cannot answer. we do not know what the mood and mind-share of those senators that we mentioned and many more senators will be after this extended period of trial of the president of the united states. >> we're going to walk through what mcconnell said today about the possibility of witnesses. were there to be witnesses who he would want to call.

but heidi i want to get your reporting which is about those vulnerable republicans who face a dilemma in this moment. do you go all in with the president or if you're vulnerable, do you need to protect against independents who want to see this get a real fair shot. >> i'm not sure the vulnerable republicans are the big group of defectors on witnesses because i've looked at what the vulnerable republicans have said, for instance thom tillis back in october saying he was firmly against this and last week saying he doesn't want witnesses. these guys still can be primaried and going through this trial at a time when the primary is still open so it is no surprise that we look to, with with the exception of susan collins, senators like lamar alexander, senators like mitt romney who is the only one on the record saying he wants bolton and the other three are saying we're not ruling out witnesses so to jake's point we're weeks away from ending of

knowing whether the case made by the house managers whether there is a vote on witnesses and specific witnesses that the house managers want and then part two that the president isn't going to block them. you can be sure that if he's going to try and block john bolton he's going to try and block mick mulvaney and mr. blair as well. so we're a long ways from actually hearing from these witnesses in a senate trial. >> so as we bring up the name john bolton, the former national security adviser who said if subpoenaed he could testify before the senate and came around during the gap of time when nancy pelosi was waiting so democrats pounce on that as a win here. but look at what americans are saying. this is from a quinnipiac poll that shows strong support for bolton testifying. saying that 66% of all voters say they would like to see john bolton testify and remarkably 39%, four in ten republicans, would like to see bolton testify as well. is john bolton the pressure point when it comes to witnesses

here? >> it certainly could be. that quinnipiac poll is pretty decisive given the fact that almost everything else in this country is 50/50 that you would have 60% of americans want to hear him testify. and obviously here is somebody who has firsthand information. here is somebody who can testify about his conversations with the president which, of course, republicans have been complaining hasn't been there. but again i'm something of a bolton skeptic because, number one, we don't know how aggressively as heidi mentions the president is going to exert executive privilege. and secondly it is an open question what he would actually say. it is not necessarily in john bolton's interest to become the john dean of the trump administration if he wants to have a future in politics but this is one of the benefits that i think democrats got out of the delay. the focus on the question of witnesses. and the fact thousand that mitch mcconnell does not get to

totally drive the bus. the fact that there are four senators who are willing to say, okay, we're not going to allow to you make this into a witnessless sham. it is a significant development. because it was not clear before she delayed that that the republicans would simply dismiss this or that mitch mcconnell would, in fact, execute his plan to have no witnesses whatsoever. >> and matt, we heard the president speak to laura ingraham on fox news thinking that john bolton shouldn't testify for his own presidency but for the future of the presidency and if bolton is subpoenaed and wants to do it, is there anything the white house could do to stop him. >> it is good that the president is thinking of the interest of somebody else. it is up to john bolton. if a witness wants to come forward and testify, the white house cannot block them testifying. and you saw that play on the

house already where a number of administration witnesses came forward. the white house tried to block their testimony, urged them not to testify because of certain privileges and they came forward and the white house didn't go to court to try to block them because they knew they could lose. i'm with charlie, i'm skeptical of what john bolton was up to, what kind of game he was playing. it is possible that he could come testify and the white house would claim privileges over certain aspects of his testimony and would defer to the white house which would kick it to the courts. john bolton is only one of four witnesses that schumer wants to, mick mulvaney and two others have shown no indication they're willing to buck the white house. so we may be talking about a conversation of only one witness. even if the senate votes to subpoena other, the white house may be able to drag that out in court. >> some democrats view bringing in bolton very much as a risky move. they haven't had a chance to depose him and democratic staff have not been able to do the formal closed door grillings that they do with the other

witnesses. they don't know what he's going to say or what he knows. and remember, even though bolton in some ways has broken with the administration in public, at his core he's a true believer in executive authority and executive privilege and i think it is unlikely that he would get on the witness stand and talk about conversations he had with with the president that are totally rock solid and protected by an executive privilege claim. and he's not someone who is necessarily interested in playing ball with democrats or helping this party that in his view -- >> he has praise in the white house for his handling of iran just a couple of days ago. >> for them to put eggs in the john bolton basket doesn't come without risk. >> and so speaking to a source in the white house, they say there is not anxiety about any witnesses coming forward and that is what you expect them to say in the situation. they acknowledge there will be some republicans who may want witnesses here. the source saying that they

would desire in-- desire that t dismissal option be available to the the president and it won't happen out right. but mitch mcconnell was addressing if there were to be witnesses who he might want to call to testify. take a listen to mcconnell a few hours ago. >> i think it is certainly appropriate to point out that both sides want to call witnesses they want to hear from so when you get to that issue, i can't imagine that only the witnesses that are our democratic colleagues would want to call would be called. >> among them hunter biden. betsy, so this is what he would want. he would want the show to sort of clear his name and to do some political battering if he had the opportunity. >> that is right. and the possibility that this would turn into a difficult to follow and almost circus-like atmosphere to use a term that democrats in the house used talking about their own hearings prospects. the possibility that though could happen is not necessarily low and another way where this

prospect of the trial and the way that witnesses might impact the impeachment process is not necessarily a lock as a total win for democrats. >> an jake, as you talk to mitch mcconnell and others, who do they say the likelihood that we'll see a parade of witnesses. at the end of the day do you think this is a couple of names that will be focused on. nobody expected hunter biden will show up on capitol hill. >> nobody anticipates that he'll get 51 votes at this moment. we don't know what this process is going to look like. and remember, they could force -- democrats could force and republicans could force votes on anybody they want when it comes to witnesses. and the democratic minority has signaled that they intend to do that to make things uncomfortable for republicans and to bolster the point that the witnesses -- the witness issue is not being handled to their liking. and now it is impossible to say right this second what the tone and tenure of this trial is going to be in two or three weeks. and maybe there is a scenario

and maybe a universe in which a hunter biden gets 51 votes if they drag john bolton here f. it seems obvious to mitch mcconnell that there are witnesses and 51 republicans will vote for witnesses for specific witnesses, he has the opportunity, he has the ability to negotiate some sort of deal for witnesses. which he could do kind of alongside of this process. so it doesn't become a free-for-all on the house floor. and i've heard some misunderstanding about this. these witnesses are most likely going to be testifying in closed depositions on camera in a very controlled environment. this is not like judge judy on the house or senate floor where people are on the stand and the president's lawyers are going to be cross-examining them. that is not the reality. it is like in 1999, it is going to be like the bill clinton impeachment trial where people were deposed on videotape and

transcripts were released later. but to wrap this up i find it difficult to predict at this moment whether there is 51 votes. it is certainly a possibility and you'll hear mcconnell is soft pedaling it a little bit and that is what my colleagues wrote in their story today. he's beginning to talk about witnesses as if it is certainly a possibility, although not a foregone conclusion. >> so you're talking about judge judy, maybe judge jeannine given the political climate that we're in or the chief justice of them all john roberts presiding over the process. a lot of people trying to understand what role he will play and the judge isn't the one who sets the rules for the trial that he'll be proesiding over. and he's traded barbs with the president in the past. so people will eye the way he tries to handle this circumstance. >> and constitutional law experts really are divided about exactly what he's going to do. he could be a wild card. while the good money is on that he'll throw everything to a vote. he has every right to make a ruling on witnesses and then

those 51 senators would be faced with with with overruling a conservative justice of the supreme court and i think that is a very difficult position. to put those senators in. so it is possible that he could just say, look, this is not controversial, folks. trials have witnesses. these witnesses, john bolton, mick mulvaney, are material to the question of why president trump withheld this aid and then the vulnerable republicans are forced with with having to overrule him which is an uncomfortable position to be in. >> and why his position is so unique is because this is a guy who presides over an institution, the supreme court, defined by decor um and who will cross the street and go into one defined by partisan warfare and he put out a statement at the end of the year where he said we should celebrate or strong and independent judiciary and with we should remember that justice is not inevitable.

and he would go on to talk about the responsibility to faithfully discharge our solemn obligation to equal justice under the law. his rulings could be overvalued by majority vote but senators are hesitant to overrule the chief justice. >> and that is one of the many messages that he put out since president trump became president. he criticized the way that the president criticized judges but he worries about the views of americans of the court and wants the court to be seen as apolitical and his tenure presiding over the trial to be seen as apolitical but i don't think republicans will be hesitant to overrule him. if you had to bet with republican ares taking the side of donald trump or john roberts, the last three years have told you they're going to take the side of donald trump. that is the pattern we've seen over and over again. >> americans are going to be introduced to a lineup of names and lawyers in the days ahead as we hear who both sides put up to

sort of take their case before the american voters, the american people and more specifically the jurors here, the senators. among them pat cipollone, expected to lead the way. democrats, we're still waiting to hear whether it is adam schiff perhaps, maybe mr. nadler and we hair from chairman nadler likely one of the names during the clinton impeachment there were 13 house managers who were involved here. and the president really wants to stage manage this thing but there is only so much micromanaging he can do from a distance. >> that is exact right. this will proceed as the senate wants it to proceed. and we were talking to roy blunt a few minutes ago, republican from missouri and he said we're entering a context in which 51 votes controls everything which is a strange dynamic for the senate which operates on much more archaic, 60 votes at a

time. nancy pelosi is keeping it very close to the vest. but we'll find out tomorrow because the house will pass the resolution to transmit the impeachment articles to the senate so the senate could get started. on john roberts, i don't think republicans will have any problem or qualms about overruling him. many of his rules will be completely just kind of mechanical and the senate conducts the trial as the the senate want withes. he's there as a referee. i really think and i could be wrong about this, knowing the tenure of today's politics, that if he said no witnesses and republicans want witnesses, they're going to get their witnesses regardless of what he has to say. >> it is interesting to see the way americans view that decision if republicans choose that tact as well. jake sherman, thank you for your time from capitol hill. when we come back, months before another u.s. presidential election. there is another round of attacks from russia. this time looking for information on the bidensment the same dirt the president was hoping to get from ukraine, experts say this is russian meddling all over again. plus hours before the last

debate before the iowa caucuses, will the two leading liberal candidates bury the hatchet or ramp up the rhetoric. and could joe biden keep the focus on moving the trump out of 1600 pennsylvania avenue. we have all of the stories coming up on "deadline: white house." use. $12.99 all you can eat now with boneless wings. only at applebee's. iand i don't add up the years. but what i do count on is boost high protein. and now, introducing new boost mobility with collagen for joint health. when taken daily, its key nutrients help support joints, muscles, and strong bones. new, boost mobility.

doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. fthe prilosec otc two-weekymore. challenge is helping people love what they love again. just one pill a day. 24 hours. zero heartburn. because life starts when heartburn stops.

take the challenge at prilosecotc dot com.

your campaign this around, if foreigners or russia or china or someone else offers you information on the opponent, should they accept it or call the fbi. >> i think maybe you do both. i think you might want to listen. there is nothing wrong with

listening. if somebody called from a country, norway, we have information on your opponent oh, i think i want to hear it. >> you want that kind of interference in our election. >> it is not interference. it is information. i think i would take it. if i thought there was something wrong i would go to the fbi if i thought there was something wrong. you go and talk honestly to congressman and they always do it and they always have. it is called opo research. >> it is not interference, it is information if they have it i think i'd take it. you heard it. the president openly admitted to welcoming foreign interference in elections and it seems like russia has aiken the hint. first reported by "new york times" a cybersecurity firm said that russian spies have successfully hacked in the ukraine gas company, burisma where hunter biden served on the board. the "times" report it is not clear what the had a hackers found or what they were searching for but the experts say that the timing and scale of the attacks suggest that the

russians could be searching for potentially embarrassing material on the bidens, the same kind of information that mr. trump wanted from ukraine when he pressed for an investigation of the bidens and burisma setting off a chain of events that led to his impeachment. charlie sykes and the table are back. matt, first to you, it looks like the russians are doing the president's bidding all over again. this is a die j-- a de ja vu mol over again. >> not only has he never really rejected what happened in 2016 but actively and openly encouraging open interference not just with george stephanopoulos but on the south lawn where he encourage the chinese. >> and ukraine. both. >> that is right. and the policy dynamic hasn't changed in that the policies are policies that the russian

government welcomed so as long as the dynamic doesn't change the russian government will be a superpac for the president. not like a superpac, but using the powers of a state to hack into emails and it is a warning for every democratic candidate who will have to face not just the trump campaign but a hostile state actor as well. >> it does look like the 2016 playbook all over again. do we wait for the leaks to come out about the bidens courtesy of the russian spies. >> this is a reminder this is an ongoing attack. this is an ongoing effort by the russians to interfere in our elections and also an ongoing pattern of donald trump's willingness to accept and encourage dirt on his opponents from foreign powers. and think about the stakes of the impeachment and the senate trial taking place right now if he is in fact acquitted as we all expect, what will the message be to the president.

will he -- will he feel empowered? will he feel enabled to continue doing this. so absolutely this is going to be a factor this this election and matthew is absolutely right. everybody ought to be on full alert that this is what we know about but you have a president who has made no secret of the fact that he would like other countries to come up with this kind of information and again once he's acquitted, what check will there be on him colluding with foreign countries to interfere in this election. >> and that is the colleague ken delanian spoke with the head of the election security threats within the office of the director of national intelligence and she, shellpy pearson told him the following, the threats as we go into 2020 are more sophisticated. this is not a russia only problem, russia, china, iran, north korea, all have means and potentially motive to come after the u.s. in the 2020 election to accomplish their goals.

are we any better off this time apr than we were in 2016. >> the biggest difference it public knowledge about the ability that hostile foreign actors have to shape american elections. >> but can they discern whether they're getting information that comes from the right channels. >> one of the really important things when we talk about these hacking attempts successful or not is to sort of lift up the hood and look at the work that this cybersecurity firms doing this have put forward and make sure that people who are following this reporting know how reporters have figured out what they figured out and in this case i would encourage everyone to read the report by area one the cybersecurity firm that said that burisma had been hacked. what that report said is limited and it is careful. especially compared to what some of the experts have said about the significance of what they found. what they show they know for sure is that actors who use all of the calling cards of the gru, russian military intelligence,

set up fake hostile phishing websites that appear to be designed to steal information from people working for the biden-linked energy company. that is something that we can pretty safely surmise that it was russian military intelligence that did that and it is important for people following this to know how cybersecurity experts have reached the conclusions that they've reached so people could be educated and also clear-eyed when it comes to understanding how any potential interference effort might be working. >> so among those responding to this, the biden campaign. they put out a statement, heidi. wrote donald trump tried toco ears ukraine into lying about biden in a anti-corruption victory because he recognized that he can't beat the vice president. now we know vladimir putin also sees joe biden as a threat. anybody would condemn this attack on the sovereignty of our elections. this is one of the moments where you would anticipate the white house would have something to say, the administration would

want to say, we'll not allow for anything like this, but for this president it is a safe gamble by former vice president joe biden to just take a crack. >> yeah, well, it is a retread of 2016. delete hillary and put in biden in terms of the russians want to weaponize and provide information that trump could weaponize. burisma is the equivalent of wikileaks and what is different is the awareness is different. hopefully we've moved beyond the 400 pound person and the president is back to trusting his own intelligence agencies. >> how concern that the two gang of eight, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi weren't briefed about any of this. >> right. well the awareness is the key. right because let's be fair about this, in 2016 one of the major dispensaries of that hacked information was the mainstream news media which hung on every release that wikileaks did in a very strategic way.

no matter how vanilla it was, had got headlines in a strategic way that worked through the united states media. we have the awareness now too. we know who hacked it and are where it is coming from and we know that russian is nobody for doctoring documents and also like betsy said, there is much more awareness in the cyber community. twitter is rooting out hopefully a lot of trolls, i'm going to be an optimist for now. >> perhaps not facebook but twitter ruling that out. charlie sykes thank you for spending time with us right here. coming up next, we'll take you live to des moines, iowa ahead of the crucial debate. the final pitch for the qualifying candidates to make their case before voting there begins if they don't eat each other alive first, nest on "headline." all for just $10.99. hurry in! wednesdays are for outback. outback steakhouse. aussie rules.

-well, audrey's expecting... -twins! grandparents! we want to put money aside for them, so...change in plans. alright, let's see what we can adjust. ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. okay. mom, are you painting again? you could sell these. lemme guess, change in plans? at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. hey, our worker's comp insurance is expiring. should i just renew it? yeah, sure. hey there, pie insurance here to stop you from overpaying for worker's comp. try pie and save up to 30%. it's easy. sweet! get a quote in 3 minutes at easyaspie.com.

we're now just hours away from the final democratic debate before the iowa caucuses and we're seeing a race-changing

dynamic play out in realtime right now. that nonaggression pact between the parties two progressives, elizabeth warren and bernie sanders, it appears to be over for now. sanders spent much of yesterday fiercely denying reports that more than a year ago he told warren a woman could not win the presidency but warren contradicted him publicly on those reports saying, quote, bernie and i met for more than two hours in december 2018 to discuss the 2020 election among the topics was what would happen if democrats nominated a female candidate. and i thought i woman could win and he disagreed. i have no interest in discussing this private meeting because we have different ideas on punditry. and the unintended consequence nancy pelosi holding out to deliver the articles of impeachment to the senate, sanders and warren, soon their day jobs will force them off the

trail as they consider impeachment just a couple of weeks before the iowa caucuses. joining the conversation, the chief public affairs officer for mo move.org and john depierre and go cats. john, if i could ask you quickly about this, what do you anticipate between sanders and warren tonight? do they deliberately play nice, is this sort of a pressure point between the two? what are you going to anticipate? >> with well, peter, you made the right point before, for a year these two candidates laid off each other and held each other close and they didn't attack each other and tried to align on policy issues and now here we are in easily the most important debate of the cycle so far, here in iowa. it is the last time that iowas will get a good look at candidates all in the same stage. a lot of pressure. stakes high. and now in the middle of a giant fight which was started over the

weekend when bernie sanders and his campaign -- but his campaign distributed talking points about elizabeth warren and made her campaign upset and the story calm out and now the senators are calling each other liars about this incident. and i think that both of them might prefer as senator warren said to move on from this. but i don't think that is possible given the heat around it. both campaigns are upset and feel as though they are challenging each other in a fundamental way. bernie sanders said that the sources close to warren were lying and now elizabeth warren in his statement said bernie sanders is lying. so this is going to come up at the debate i know. and they may try to tamp this down. but i don't know how effective that will be. one of the things that happens in the debates is your strategy is one thing and then you get hit in the face as mike tyson said and emotions are high on the stage. so they may have a plan for this, but that plan may go haywire pretty quick once they

get into the heat the moment. >> and corin, many progressives are hoping they make -- one of the groups said bernie sanders and elizabeth warren you are both progressives and our movement needs to see you working together to defeat your corporate dem upons. democrats will win in 2020 if we don't let the corporate wing or trump divide us. this is a moment of risk for progressives. >> it is a real moment of risk for all of them. as we've seen over and over dpen, the democratic base doesn't want to see a fight. what they want to see is how you are going to beat donald trump. he is the real target in all of this. and i think that is why if you look at this primary in its totality, you have not seen any ads attacking each other, attacking the other candidates and that is unheard of for a primary and you haven't seen

that again because it hasn't worked. and i think that is the thing that these candidates need to understand. i do believe tonight on the debate stage, while it is hard, they are not going to -- this is bernie sanders and elizabeth warren, i don't think they're going to try to attack each other and it might be high and everything that we've heard the last couple of days which has been very odd because like you said they had in nonaggression pact that people have talked about, but i don't think they're going to do after each other. you have seen bernie sanders telegraphing that he's going on social security with biden and even in the state that you read, peter, elizabeth warren was walking back saying she's not going to attack bernie sanders. but it all remains to be seen. >> she said she won't attack bernie sanders after publicly contradicted what he had said previous to that. this is "the new york times"s said mom and dad are are fighting, defendant wing democrats lament the sanders

warren rift and the combined support has represented a plurality larger than mr. biden's support for months but many on the left worry despite the comedy that characterized interactions with each other in 2019 the zero sum nature would force each camp to undermine at the ballot box and the latest episode has only deepened the concerns. you put the two together and you may have an unbeatable force. >> it is easy of to have nonaggression when there were many people on the stage. they are in the exact same space, not exact same because warren appeals to -- to a lot of the older female voters and that is why it is so dangerous to the gender tension because it drudges up the worst feelings from 2016. i covered hillary clinton's campaign and there was a sense from the older women there volunteering for her in new hampshire that, hey, why do you always talk about the female

gender gap for hillary clinton. bernie had a huge male gap in new hampshire and if you went to his rallies it was filled with young men and at the same time there was a sense that hillary wasn't treated fairly on the debate stage and that time in las vegas when bernie shushed her and that became a huge thing online and there was a sense that bernie could go up on rally and yell and be animated and if hillary did the same thing then she's considered shrill so it does drudge up bad feelings from 2016. >> and some have discussed as we've announced that the trial will begin in earnest likely next tuesday and that means elizabeth warren, bernie sanders and amy klobuchar are commuting before the iowa caucus. how significant is that and does it put them at a real disadvantage? >> well it is definitely

significant, peter. i would add michael bennet to that group, still in the race. all of the sitting senators, none of them want to be in washington, d.c.ment th, they a their responsibility seriously and there for the impeachment trial and there is a lot of attention on the trial obviously but they'll have to sit silently while joe biden and pete buttigieg and tom steyer are meeting voters and they don't want to be there. it is unprecedented. bernie sanders and elizabeth warren in particular have very strong field organizations here in iowa. they're going to be doing and surrogates and tele-town halls and amy klobuchar doing the same thing and i take the campaigns at their word. they understand why nancy pelosi has tried to play the best hand and yet there is thought a single one of them that doesn't wish this trial was in the

rearview mirror to spend time in the iowa caucus. >> it is a first term president impeached. thank you. after the break, many have tried and few have succeeded, are any of the tonight's democrats ready or willing to go in on attacking joe biden? attacking joe biden? it's not so foreign thing that looks like something that we've been fighting in the war on terror. it's actually fundamentally as american as anything. and it is an existential threat to the multi-racial, pluralistic and equal and open democracy that we've been fighting for in this country since people died on the battlefield in a civil war. battlefield in a civil war.

the growing fracture between elizabeth warren and bernie sanders is beneficial for joe biden. the press is on for a strategy he's employed since this primary began framing the race as him versus trump. instead of him versus the field. that is the spirit of biden's new ad out today. >> donald trump has made it clear -- >> joe biden. >> biden -- >> he has joe biden on his mind. because trump knows biden will beat him in pennsylvania, michigan and wisconsin. the state's we need to take back the presidency. joe biden stood on the world

stage, helped make obamacare the law of the land and could step in on day one. it is why trump can't stop talking about -- >> joe biden. >> i'm joe biden and i approve this message. >> corin and hallman are back at the table. and corin, that is all about electability and shows the poll numbers in the crucial argument. >> absolutely. that is his strongest argument. that is how people see him. as someone who was vice president with obama for eight years and obama's number two and someone who brings comfort and can bring them back to normal times. so that is a great argument for biden. it is a smart ad. we have to remember, time after time, when you look at polls, it said people want to know who can beat donald trump. how do we win against donald

trump. and that ad shows exactly that. and what does it do? it shows donald trump just mentioning biden over and over and over again and showing in a is who he is most fearful of. sbaeshlly wh -- especially when you look at why he got impeached, asking the ukrainian to interfere in the 2020 elections. >> and we talked about the fact that several of the top contenders have to head back to washington for the next -- most of the next couple of weeks. you have sanders and warren with one another in this feud. so he seems like he's the beneficiary of all of that? >> yes. peter, you've seen it in a couple of polls, this monmouth poll that had joe biden first in iowa within the margin of error but at the top of the heap. but in the same poll they showed that biden is the recipient of second choice votes here in iowa. so for the moderate candidates like amy klobuchar, the cory booker who just dropped out, if they don't reach the 15%

threshold on caucus night, those people are free agents and a lot of them it seems are attracted to joe biden. so joe biden is there with good polling in new hampshire in the last 24 hours and as you just said unlike warren and sanders, he's going to be here from now, more or less, consistently from now until caucus day. the only problem for him is pete buttigieg who is his main rival in the moderate lane and who has had a lot of energy and enthusiasm and a lot of money and is also going to be free from the impeachment trial and competing with biden head-to-head here in iowa. so we still have four candidates and any could win in iowa but joe biden has to like the situation he finds himself in. especially compared to a few months ago when people were talking about him finishing fourth or fifth in iowa and it is not impossible that he could win here. >> initially the frustration of some in iowa was they weren't seeing enough of joe biden and they may see more of him in the

waning days. and sanders wanted to spend time amplifying the anti-war message to drive up the recent surge in the wake of what happened with the attacks on the iranian general soleimani. politico said the former vice president will be ready to take on sanders and prevail against his attacks on stage just as he did when opponents kamala harris, gillibrand and julian castro and de blasio attacked him as they exited the race as biden pressed ahead. so far it is attack biden at your own peril. >> it has been. but with bernie i do think he'll go for it. and when he does, that will be something that excites his base. but i don't know how many new people it bring over pause the people who are upset at the establishment and upset at biden and hillary and others who votes for the war were already with with bernie. and so what you're seeing right now in the iowa polling is

significant and in that the people that are shifting to joe biden at this point, the shifts that woof seen -- that we've seen are the people who vote. the older voters and concerns about the electability argument and plays the best with the older voters and the african-american voters, like in south carolina. that is where his is. i think bernie will go with it becausee been against war. we're a war we're nation. >> we war talking on the break at the table about this clash among democrats. the republicans beat each other up, think about the "national enquirer" article about ted cruz. why are democrats so averse to witnessing a clash on their side. >> it is really interesting. because even if you compare the most tense moments of the democratic primary so far, it looks like a pillow fight compared to republicans in 2016. i mean, donald trump accused ben

carson of like being a child predator, ruby backing -- >> with a belt and this whole thing. >> and a rubio backing superpack. >> the kennedy assassination. >> so why of the kennedy assassination. >> this is to heidi's point as well. there's this moment that 2020 is an election of existential crisis. there's a gravity that voters are taking. even though they hated hillary, didn't have in 2016. >> very quickly. >> i'm a democratic voter and i look at it differently. i agree with your analysis. i want to know which candidate is tough enough to take a punch. i want to know who's tough enough to take on trump.

>> conversations a lot of democrats are having right now. what the candidate needs to look like going-forward. thank you for spending time with us right here we'll see you at the caucuses coming up. trump counter programming. he's programming this debate this time, we'll tell what you that is as soon as we come back. 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 when youyou spend lessfair, and get way more. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one.

for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com but in my mind i'm still 25. that's why i take osteo bi-flex, to keep me moving the way i was made to. it nourishes and strengthens my joints for the long term. osteo bi-flex - now in triple strength plus magnesium.

iand i don't add up the years. but what i do count on is boost high protein. and now, introducing new boost mobility with collagen for joint health. when taken daily, its key nutrients help support joints, muscles, and strong bones. new, boost mobility. it'scan it helphe january sale keep me asleep?mber 360 smart bed. absolutely, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. and now, save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, now only $1,799. only for a limited time.

donald trump ever present at the debates in more ways than one. this is a banner he's airing as

part of his re-election campaign flying over des moines. ka run and the table are back with us. let me ask you the issue of diversity. we started this campaign season with a coat of many colors, we had all sorts of americans reflecting all types of communities in this country. now as we head to the final debate before the caucuses, you have six white americans. what do you make of this moment? and is this a complicating factor for democrats? >> i think it's a problematic we see tonight. we started as you were saying with the most diverse, the most talented democratic primary we've ever seen. and before we are able -- voters are able to participate in the first contest, we have a good amount of those diverse candidates drop out. that should not be the way that this process goes.

it would have been great to have seen cory booker, kamala harris, julian castro and others make it to iowa and just to see how this process plays out. this is something the democratic party has to think about. how did we get this way in this situation. and what do we do next time. we can't afford this. >> is there a risk because of that? >> i think there is. when you're talking about a democratic party that's incredibly diverse, that's a big tent party. you're talking about bringing in young people of color as well and keeping them engaged. you do not have a diverse group of people for folks to look at, that is problematic. >> we appreciate those comments there. we'll be right back, you're watching deadline white house on msnbc. tech: hi, i'm adrian. >> man: thanks for coming. ...with service i could trust. right, girl?

>> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

it's red lobster's new three-courfor $14.99.east choose soup or salad. one of seven delicious entrées - like new hawaiian-style garlic shrimp. and, get a sweet dessert. three courses. one amazing price. so come in today.

my thanks to heidi, matt and betsy. that will do it for deadline white house. meet the press daily with chuck todd starts right now. well, welcome to tuesday, it is "meet the press daily." good evening, i'm chuck todd here in washington. your news and analysis of the day. we're on the brink of the third impeachment trial in the history of the country. the trial will begin without witnesses, although mcconnell appears to be facing somedd