earnings, which is relieving the pressure on people who think the economy is throwing down. and the senate passing what soon passed nafta. not everybody is thinking that deal is everything it's cut out to be. i'm going to see you right here at 10:00 p.m. thank you for watching. "deadline white house" begins right now. >> good afternoon, it's 4:00 in new york. i'm peter alexander in for my friend, and president trump grapples for what he never wanted to do. preparing for battle in the senate. opening comments days away. and lev parnas raising his hand as a potential new witness against president trump. the president is confronting the

real paraal as only the third president to be impeached. mr. trump, quote, has become increasingly unnerved as the process of a trial, even when he's widely expected to be acquitted. he capped a meeting with several campaign aids, where he grilled them on how voters were receiving impeachment. mr. trump repeated once again he could not believe he was facing such a predicament as impeachment. that belief spilling out in to public view at the white house. >> a lot of presidents, some good, some not so good. but you got a good one now, even though they're trying to impeach the son of a [ bleep] can you believe it? >> and nbc news learns the white house is assembleing a made-for-tv defense team led by

jay seccialo and include ken starr, independent counsel in the last impeachment of president clinton, as well as alalan dershowitz and he's become a regular on fox news in this era of trump. but the real wild card in the coming weeks is the president himself. the "washington post" reports republican senators are bracing for the unexpected from an unpredictable president. fearing he could take the reigns from his legal team at any time and potentially upend his own defense. nbc news correspondent, carollee, jake german, former u.s. attorney, chuck rosenberg and white house reporter, jonathan lamere. the president said he welcomed the impeachment.

we saw the anxiety. >> it's been on two very separate tracks here. they feel like his numbers have ticked up. there's public polling that shows the majority of americans believe there should be witnesses and a thorough and fair trial. though the president thinks this could help him in 2020, he's personally outraged and he's not making any secret of it. and the champion lsu team. he knows this is a personal stain on his legacy. this is the first line of his obituary. grants said it might be the first president impeached to be reelected. he knows this is going to stay with himt him and something clearly bothering him, particularly as we tick towards the trial starting. >> and they shouldn't be

surprised to see the line up of litigators. a lot of them auditioned publicly on fox news. the full-throated defense the president wants on his behalf. >> you have a number of people who have been fierce defenders of the president. then you have white house counsel and then you have jay seculo, who the president is particular with, he helped get him through the mueller investigation. so there's a lot of trust there. and then you have a number of people who are familiar with generally with impeachment and how this works. the work they did in the clinton impeachment and just pitbulls, basically. people who have really gone and defended the president on this. people that have won him over, by going on fox news and elsewhere. notably missing from the crowd is any house republicans. there was some talk in the white house of the president possibly

having some of his most vicious defenders in the house republican caucus join this team and somehow -- in some form and help mount his defense in the senate. that didn't happen. >> and missing rudy giuliani, that some thought may have a shot. the president hasn't praised these individuals at all time take a look at what he had to say about ken starr during the clinton impeachment era. >> i think ken starr is a lunetic. i think ken starr is a disaster. i hated the way the president handled it. it was a long and terrible process. >> what's striking -- there's the president criticizing ken starr. alan dershowitz has defended alleged sexual defenders. pam baunondy has been involved the trump university scandal.

>> the senate is expected, the president's allies are expected to acquit to participate in the acquittal of donald trump in this trial in the senate, which we anticipate will last anywhere from two to four weeks. we should not underestimate the importance of how they present their case. because republican whose are on the fence about witnesses, are going to make a judgment after two weeks of hearing testimony and being able to question the members of the house impeachment team and the president's defense team. and if they don't like the presentation f the president's team is really bombastic and takes it in all sorts of directions, who knows how they'll react and i keep hearing it from senior republican leadership, which is we need to pay attention to how this trial goes because that's going to determine whether there are witnesses. he's made his bed. this is the team he's going with

and we'll see if they're able to put together an arg ymgt. donald trump has made it clear he wants a show here. he has said that. he wants to subpoena hunter biden. he waujnts to be acquitted in fantastic fashion. mitch mcconnell wants a short, easy trial. it will be interesting to see how the defense team does that. >> while mcconnell wants to protect some of the vulnerable republicans like susan collins and others. the right-hand man of rudy giuliani, lev parnas, told rachel maddow, as it relates to one of the leaders of the team. >> did you have ever any communication with counsel for the president, jay secula? >> one in particular -- i think

it was victor's veezau or something at the time. he was aware of everything, that he brought him up to speed to call him. >> by that, did he mean m mr. sekulow was aware of this effort to get investigations? >> absolutely. >> is it a problem if one of the attorneys could be a material witness? >> theoretically, right? attorneys can't be witnesses in their own case. that's a conflilct of interest. but let's assume parnas is right. that's a bit of a leap. for purposes of answering your question, let's assume it's true. if he were to be called as a witness, he would have a conflict in this matter. the strict rules where we

prosecute criminal cases all the time, don't really apply at the senate. sekulow could stay on as the president's lawyer and be a witness. there aren't those hard and fast rules in our federal courts to help guide us. but attorney should be very careful. if mr. parnas is right, then it might be appropriate for mr. sekulow to step aside. >> let's put on screen some of the unanswered questions on the impeachment trial expected to begin in earnest on wednesday. will the chief justice break tie votes and deliberations occur out in the open? can you walk us through what we should look for as we come back from the holiday weekend? >> i would try to commit those to memory quickly before you took them away. what's going to happen is after both sides present their case, on the witness question, they're going to have the opportunity to

vote whether there are witnesses or new evidence allowed to be introduced. so, we're talking again about a two or three week period from now, depending on how much time is taken. 51 votes. and if there are witnesses that are going to be allowed, there needs to be either some sort of brokered agreement between mitch mcconnell and chuck schumer or each individual witness goes to a vote on the senate floor. that could be the wild, wild west where some fail and some pass. mcconnell has said he's going to stay close to the clinton rules, in which deliberations are not public. those are the two big things to me. the witness question -- whether they do this in public. the big question is how long does the president's team take? how long does mitch mcconnell afford them in the clinton

impeachment, the majority afforded both sides 24 hours. how much time do they afford them this time around? and what do they talk about? do they tryef they throw up a bunch of disstractions as houses republicans admitted they did during the house phase of the investigation. >> they say it's up to the house to find the evidence. it's just our job to hear what they've gathered. the constitution is vague on this. how do they resolve this question whether or not new information should be allowed. >> the constitution is not just vague, it's silent. the answer is the senate can hear whatever they want to hear. they've been characterize said as jurors, but they're also the judge in this case. i think there's an important eye, i don't want to be lost when we talk about this.

one of the reasons the factual record wasn't fully developed in the house is because the president locked a number of witnesses from ever testifying. you can't complain now the houses failed to fully create a record when it was the bhiwhite house and the president who prevented them from doing so. i think it's somewhat disturbing. if the senate wants to hear from more witnesses, i think they should, then they have the authority and the power to do so. >> susan collins, the republican from maine. while i need to hear the case argus and the questions answered, having more nqation is helpful. it's likely i would support a motion to call witnesses at that point in the trial just like i did in 1999. here's what i heard from some republican senators. >> we're not going to try the president of the united states

based on hearsay. >> they were able to put forward a flimsey cases based on hearsay and assumptions. >> so let john bolton testify. he's hyperaware of the drug deal, as he's described. >> and we're seeing this divide. rarely do we see -- and especially in the senate, stand up. susan collins has perhaps daylight. there are other vulnerable republicans. we know the names. moderate republican whose might be willing to do the same. will there be enough to provoke the call of witnesses? and we'll see. lindsey graham and other republicans are just saying, look, this is over. the process is over. they're not going to do their duties to deliver impartial justice, which is the oath chief justi

justice roberts delivered yesterday. they want to move forward. >> there is no prohibition on new evidence in the trial. if something is in the public record, there's technical ability to reintroduce new evidence. number one, that's not right. i would guess on susan collins. she's saying she would support a motion. she's not saying she would support, who she would support. she would support a motion to consider witnesses. that's not saying much. it's up to the senate to decide. kr i'm not saying what she will or won't say. but factualy is i will support a motion to allow the senate to consider other witnesses. she's not saying she wants other

witnesses. i'll vote yes for the motion only. >> i want to bring you back to the conversation. it's possible a lot of this trial play out in a secret session. remember, in the sessions we would see, law makers cannot talk to one another. they have to submit their questions in writing. if they want to discuss things among themselves. >> law makers could pull the c-span plug and go into debate at critical moments of the trial and the fate of the president. that is a potentially risky move for the president's side. americans would view this as the republican-controlled senate from trying to protect the president from embarrassing disclosures. >> and especially after house republicans made such a big deal on the quote on quote dungeon hearings or depositions that house democrats had with a number of witnesses dur -- that

were done privately at a secure location that could disclose classified information. that wouldn't necessarily be the look for them. and i think there are two things that could potentially shape the questions we've been discussing, which is witnesses and other issues. that is what else comes out. you heard lev parnas say he has text messages between him and jay sekulow? and what else does he have? we saw in the muller investigation that every time he inserted himself, he created heads aches for republicans who are being chased down on the hills. having the answer to the late these are hanging over them as this unfolds, that could define how some of the open questions get answered.

>> and implicated one of the president's defense attorneys. jake, we appreciate your expertise on this topic. when we come back, the president's multiple attempts to fire the ousted ambassador marie yovanovitch. the state department will look into it, with mike pompeo already predicting the outcome. and today's excuse is because the democrats want to hurt bernie sanders's presidential campaign. plus more of the new book written by my colleagues at the "washington post." the public dwreressing down of military leaders was worse than we knew about. we kw neabout. things you can d: you can earn more when you invest your cash. ♪ you can get a satisfaction guarantee.

♪ you can also wonder why our competitors don't offer that. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management. 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 yeah. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. con liberty mutual solo pagas lo que necesitas. only pay for what you need... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

go where the new year takes you with t-mobile. get free smartphones when you add new lines. so you can stream like this... ...because we give you that and we also give you that.so you can stargaze like this... game like this adjust this. re-adjust this. and you can do all this, because of that. so do this, on that, with us. hurry in to get free smartphones now. and with the sxfinity stream app, screen is your big screen. which is free with your service, you can take a spin through on demand shows, or stream live tv. download your dvr'd shows and movies on the fly. even record from right where you are. whether you're travelling around the country

or around the house, keep what you watch with you. download the xfinity stream app and watch all the shows you love.

i have at least on four other occasions that rudy giuliani went to the white house, have conversations with him and came back and informed me, victoria and joe about what transpired. he fired her when he gave an order to mike pompeo once. secretary pompeo didn't fire her. then rudy came back and said go speak to pompeo. then they got into it. they had another meeting at the white house where he told boltn to fire her. at that point it was more affirmation to me there were people against the o the united states if they're not listening to his orders. it was a boost to help him if

the mhing there and he would tweet and fire her. >> indicted rudy giuliani associate lev parnas, providing more information and how it's been on her mind for months. parnas's comments coming after his released text messages that put into question whether or not the ambassador was under her full surveillance. they prompted the ukrainian government to open a criminal investigation. but our government, until today, remained silent. the associated press described like this. on friday, pompeo broke nearly 72-hours of silence of alleged threats and violence to the ambassador to ukraine. he said he believed they would be proved wrong but he had an

obligation to investigate the matter. former head of cou counterintelliance at the firb. why so long to open on a investigation? and mike pompeo preempted the investigat wn byng. >> he should never prejudge the investigation. that's a mistake. even if it turns out he's right, that's a mistake to prejudge the investigation. good investigators know that you look for facts. you don't try to fit facts into predetermined theories. what deeply dispoints me. what i would love to hear from secretary pompeo is defense for the men and women at the state department. it's abject cowards. it's amazing to me he has not stood up for these people. a west point grad and an army officer.

the first thing is taking charge of those in your command. he's not doing that. >> here's what he said this morning. >> do you know lev parnas? >> never met him. >> all right. until this story broke, were you aware that ambassador marie yovanovitch was being surveilled while serving as ambassador? >> yeah, i never heard about this at all. until the story broke, that's my recollection, i'd never heard of this at all. >> we know, according to the house report on impeachment, there are house reports that show pompeo spoke to giuliani before you yovanovitch was removed. >> my antenna go up whenever i here someone say to the best of

my recollection. you either knew or you didn't. you met him or you haven't. you communicated with parnas or you haven't. ument rr going to take a step further. on this credibility issue, the secretary of state needs to recuse himself from this investigation around the ambassador yovanovitch. he has been placed in the middle of this by parnas. he's come out, as you pointed out, after 72 hours, and said investigate. you hear an implied indifference about the ambassador's security. he won't mention the ambassador. we have general security concerns. how is that investigation going to look? especially agents from the state department diplomatic security service, they're going to go knock on the door. the door is going to belong to robert hyde and they're going to say did you really mean this? who's in the middle of this?

if he puts pompeii ein this picture, there's a big problem. he could say i'm recusing myself from this investigation. >> and to be clear nobody is closer to the president than mike pompeo these days. they are eye to eye with relates to iran. >> they've emerged as equals in the president's cabinet and someone the president has grown to really trust. he was a driving force behind the decision to kill the iranian general, soleimani a few weeks ago. and certainly he has played a role in this matter as well. it does put him in an uncomfortable spotlight. i think it can't be nunderscore enough. it took the united states, the state department or department of justice hasn't said a word about this. she's fearful for her safety.

and we don't totally know everything lev parnas has said. but certainly she felt that way. she was summoned home by a phone call in the middle of the night to get out of ukraine. >> she said why did you need to smear me? you can fire whoever you want. >> and the secretary of state, her boss, never came to her dfsz. he cast doubt on the allegations and only then, only after three days of pressure, ukraine announced its investigation, did the united states do the same. >> and we hear mike pompeo distancing himself from parnas. how often we hear from this administration saying they don't know someone. that's about as repeated a

refrain as any that's existed over the last three plus years. >> he said do you know lev parnas and he said i've never met him, which is not actually answering the question whether he knows him. when this whole issue started unfold publicly, mike pompeo gave an interview in which he acted like he had no knowledge of president zelensky of ukraine and turned out he had been on the kul and listened in on it. he had to walk that back and eventually admit he had been on the call. we've seen this before with him. he was under so much pressure that he had to do something here. at the same time he can't look to the presidency, the quote on quote deep state, which is why we saw him prejudge the investigation. we know this whole ukraine controversy has caused a lot of tension between the president

and pompeo, particularly when state department officials were testifying for the house. >> here he is yesterday. >> well, i don't know him. i don't know lev parnas, other than i guess i had pictures taken, which i do with thousands of people. don't know what he's about, where he comes from. i can tell you this -- i don't know him. i don't believe i've ever spoken to him. i don't believe i've evrl spoken to him. >> frank, what's your take on that? >> well, i'm up to, i think eight photographs of -- seeing eight photographs of parnas and the president, at least one video of parnas and the president. but what has my attention, peter, is this is a variance from the president's usual approach of i did it. so what?

russia f you have the emails or china should investigate the bidens as well. or it was a perfect call. here's the summary. now we're seeing the exact opposite. now it's i don't know the guy. when someone varies from their usual m.o., you should pay attention and i think parnas has him very nervous. my theory is because parnas is the guy who can actually say none of this ukraine stuff was ever about corruption. and by the way, i'm one step away from the president because i'm working for rudy giuliani. and the problem is he prereally needs to be careful because he doesn't know what parnas has up his sleeve. does he have voice mails and videotapes? or recordings he's saving for later? maybe for sdny? and the president is taking a big gamble. veering from his usual strategy and he's denying.

i think it's going to cost him eventually. >> as parnas told rachel, this was always about joe and hunter biden. thank you always for spending time with us. here after this break, a rare instance. bernie sanders and donald trump kind of urgreeing on something. kind of urgreeing on something r. pain happens. aleve it. aleve is proven stronger and longer on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. when you look at the world, ♪ what do you see? ♪

where others see chaos, we see patterns. ♪ connections. relationships. ♪ when you use location technology, you can see where things happen, before they happen. ♪ with esri location technology, you can see what others can't. ♪

i would rather be in iowa today. there's a caucus in there two weeks. i'd rather be in new hampshire and nevada and so forth. but i swore a constitutional oath with the united states senate to do my job and i'm here to do my job. and i think the people of the united states understand that. >> that was senator bernie sanders pointing out the dilemma that faces the four senators running for president but will also need to serve as jurors in the impeachment trial with only 17 days until the first votes of the first presidential contest,

the 2020 election begins in iowa. it's important to be there as much as possible. and unlike voters in big states, texas or california, where advertising is king, iowans expect to see their kand dtds in their living rooms and at the very least in a banquet hall. somewhere. this is not the time any candidate wants to be locked in a room with 99 other senators forbidn to speak or look at a phone and no one knows exactly how long the trial will last. joining the table, democratic strategist, joe pain and reverend al sharpton. so, let's take a look at the latest numbers out of iowa. remarkably about 2/3 haven't even maids up their mind. joe biden, the latest polling up at 24%.

elizabeth warren right behind it. so, how big of an impact could this have on those top two, bernie sanders and elizabeth warren warren if they're absent? >> you'd rather be in des moines or ceder rapids or waterloo, as opposed to capitol hill. some advantage is he has an infrastructure on the ground that's about five or six years old of people, activists who know him and know his name. he's also got surrogates that can step frin him. and an interesting subplot. it's a battle over the surrogates. the state senators, name your state senators from different parts of iwi. they can step in and really do a lot of the heavy lifting for candidates.

>> he's cast herself as more of the moderate in the race but as a midwestern woman, this is a state she's counting on. >> and two side effects. she has a pretty good organization and certainly her t will hurt her to be absent. if it does, let's say she drop as few points. who does that leave? biden and about jeej. so f she's going to lose support, where does it go? probably not warren or sanders. perhaps providing a margin of victory that a somebody could get a bump from would-be klobuchar voters and potentially a lot of momentum in the new hampshire. >> doesn't it? >> i think it does. i know when i ran in 2004, it is the kinds of place you have to

go door to door and stand in people's living room. i was there this fwreekweekend e debate. what is surprising is how this latest poll showed biden going that far up because just last week he was not that far ahead. and i think the fact that they have him now 24 and bernie, liz warren and buttigieg together, if that was right, i'd be concerned if i was liz warren and bernie. though bernie has a base and infrastructure, i don't think warren has and buttigieg. if biden goes all around the state saying they're doing god's work in washington but i can beat them and they can't succeed, that could be very effective. >> and bernie sanders and elizabeth sande

weeks. the president weighed in on this earlier today on twitter. the president just amplified his conspiracy theory today. he says they are rigging the election again against bernie sanders just like last time. the argument being that nancy pelosi, by delaying the trial, was basically had it in for bernie sanders and elizabeth warren, the progressives here. this is the president spreading disinformation again, isn't it? >> and if the president is backing bernie sanders, in that sort of way, that should automatically have everyone's antenna up. he finds a way to insert himself in the primary in ways that aren't necessarily meant to elevate who he's focussed on. clearly -- they still think joe

biden is the most formidable opponent president trump could have. not necessarily bernie sanders. and if you talk about, as you were, what iowa is about. potentially benefit from opponents being sidelined but retail politicking is his game. he is a well known among democrats to be very good at handling, whether it's a union hall or diner or whatever it may be. he's very good at that and he spends time doing that. that's another way in which he may have an advantage. >> what strikes you? >> he's extendsiing olive branc. if those supporters are alienated and they feel like the game is rigged -- >> the language echoed four years ago. >> maybe they stay home in november, or there is a slim

overlap of people who might support bernie sanders and donald trump. and i think he feels in an election that's going to be decid decided in the midwest, every little bit helps. and any time he can sew chaos in the democratic field, he's going to do that. >> i would be very careful if i was bernie because you don't want the perception among voters in iowa and elsewhere that trump prepares running against you because he feels he can beat you. of course trump was doing it for trump reasons. but if i was bernie, i'd be firing back. because the last thing you want is people to feel that's his preference. it makes him say he wants to run against him. >> you got to stay with us. after this break, brand new insight into what has to be one of the consequential meetings. next. next

♪ the amount of student loan debt i have i'm embarrassed to even say i felt like i was going to spend my whole adult life paying this off thanks to sofi, i can see the light at the end of the tunnel as of 12pm today, i am debt free ♪ we have no debt, we don't owe anybody anything, and it's fantastic ♪

we're back right now. alarming new details about a pivotal meeting early on in the trump presidency. and their new book a must read, "very stable genius. six months into the administration, rex mattis, cone, sought to educate the president at the pentagon in what was essentially an information intervention and teach about alliances, trade deals and how they work together to prop up world order. they used visual aids with dollar signs to get his attention. trump was apparently allergic, as they describe it too, the schoolhouse vibe. he went into a rage afterhering trigger words like base and nato. he criticized the war in afghanistan, calling it a loser war in front of several men and

women in uniform. they report this, i wouldn't go to war with you people, addressing the room, the commander and chief barked, you're a bunch of dopes and babies. this is in front of his military team. carol, i want to get to you on this. because you were on the team that reported that rex tillerson, after that meeting, described the president as a expletive moron at the time. so how does this all fit together as you remember? >> carol and phil's excellent reporting sheds new light on what exactly transpired before and prompted rex tillerson to say that. we knew it was a very tense meeting. we reported the president was walked through the u.s. nuclear capabilities and said some things that alarmed officials. we knew there was a meeting on afghanistan where he threatened

to fire the top u.s. commander in afghanistan and offended a lot of the military official whose were in that meeting. and then after this meeting at the pentagon, tillerson, we know we had why he was so frustrated and what people who told us at the time they thought was very -- shocking because there were so many people around. we know why he said the president was moron. and it shows the -- also that rex tillerson was one of the only people who really stood up for everyone essentially. he stood up with carol and phil's reporting and backed the military officials in the room and was so disgusted by this and that explains a lot about how heigate got on the wrong foot with the president. this is fascinating and really tells you a broader story about the initial national security officials who were around the

president. >> and this gets to the issue of guardrails around this president. these were supposed to stand up for the president. mike pence sat there like a wax museum guy. >> congrats to phil and carol. there was a first generation of his national security team, who many at the time, like why are you there? and i think the answer is they were trying to keep them in place. it would have been worse were they not there. that was the argument they made when they defended mathis or john kelly. but they were largely over m they were able to stall him on certain things. and when there came a time to stand up to him and mattis, so ad heernt to the chain of command, he wasn't going it

stand up to the commander and chief, so rex tillerson did. there are largely enablers. who feel like their mission is to deliver what the president wants, rather than to push back. >> it raises this idea, fact that the president was almost militantly antiinformation. he doesn't want to be told anything. he just wants to believe what he believed. >> i think you've got to always go back to who donald trump was as a person. he always wanted to be in the circles of influence and was always rejected and seems as this guy whose daddy had money. they were not considered respectable. i think a lot of the bombast recruiting is that he rejects getting into those kind of conversations because he really does not understand the policy or the stalking about it.

so rather than sit there and try and learn, he overrules and wi anger so he doesn't have to engage in the conversation so you know that he's really not a moron which tillerson found out in and assessed and said. >> stay with us. right now, after the break, more from the book and steve bannon's surprising policy. icy. while i'm eating my breakfast... on the edges of cliffs... on a ski lift... everywhere. for a limited time, go to audible.com to save $50 on your first year of membership. things you can do with schwab: you can earn more when you invest your cash. ♪ you can get a satisfaction guarantee. ♪

you can also wonder why our competitors don't offer that. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management. ♪ ♪ everything your trip needs, for everyone you love. expedia.

another revelation from phillip rucker and carol lennox new book. after nancy pelosi refutded a false claim that trump made on the first reception on the monday of his term that he won the popular vote, bannon whispered, quote, she is going to get us. total assassin. from the start the people around the president knew that nancy pelosi now we have seen the clap, we have seen the point, that took place in the roosevelt room or the cabinet room at the white house. this woman had the president's number from the beginning. >> nancy pelosi, there's a policy as the san francisco liberal. she is the daughter of a baltimore machine politician. >> yes. >> she is going up against guys like donald trump her entire life. she knows how to deal with them. she knows how to manipulate them and played this president better than anybody in american politics. they will write books, teach classes based on how nancy pelosi managed donald trump. >> there's a respect for nancy

pelosi begrudgingly. the president that couldn't come up with a nickname call her crazy nancy. folks acknowledge what she does to this president. >> she's a knife fighter that he knows that she's a thorn in the side and there have been many democrats where he's been able to trample over, confident to do so with whoever the democratic nominee is and he thought he could well with her and pushed for her a little bit. i'm sure that's a stance he regrets right now. yes he's certainly publicly gone after her. did get a nickname but behind the scenes he knows that she knows what she is doing. >> how will she remembered? >> i think she will be remembered as one of the best speakers of history of the country and i think that you must remember, i agree with him. she's dealt with people like donald trump all his life. he's not dealt with nancy

pelosis. he's lived a secluded, i'm in charge. he can't figure out because he never had to figure out somebody like nancy but he's a bully and respects somebody to break through and get a punch in. >> only a year ago democrats were still trying to decide if nancy pelosi should be the next speaker of the house. we'll be right back for one final thought. do you have concerns about mild memory loss related to aging? prevagen is the number one pharmacist-recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere.

prevagen. healthier brain. better life. 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! 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. aveeno® with prebiotic striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ a clear plan for retirement to help cover the essentials, as well as all the things you want to do. because when you have a retirement partner who gives you clarity at every step,

there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. my thanks to carol, joe, al and thanks to be in person with you. the special coverage of impeachment trial starts all the latest reporting and analysis

this tuesday morning after the holiday. 9:00 a.m. eastern. i'm peteral xanlder in again for nicole wallace and will be back next week. "mpt daily" with chuck todd starts right now. ♪ welcome to friday. it is "meet the press daily." i'm chuck todd here in wa wra whe washington where the impeachment trial will begin and start in earnest on tuesday and yet so much about it remains a mystery, even what we see on t story is clearly incomplete. just the last 24 hours we have seen new e andal lagss of lev parnas about the pressure