virus stands in its lifecycle. they've said it's too early to say that it's peeked yoet. i'll see you right back here. thanks for watching. "deadline white house with nicole white house" begins right now. it's 4:00 p.m. eastern in the white house today. a place where former president barack obama announced the person responsible for the attacks of 9/11 had been killed. a treaty to end hostilities was signbed tween presidents reagan and gorbachev. he called the investigations bull shit and pledged revenge against the fbi, sitting senators and the speaker of the house, showcasing the innerworkings of his mind. the wide range of thoughts he's holding in at one time.

fbi and the men and women who work there. his attorney general, william barr in the fronted row and has not yet released any public statements or concerns or expre expressed disagreements with the smears against his work force. >> we've been going through this now for over three years. it was evil, it was corrupt t was dirty cops. it was leakers and liars. in my opinion these are the crookedest, most dis honest, dirtiest people i've ever seen. with all of these horrible dirty cops that took these dossiers and do bad things. thigh knew all about it. the fisa courts should be ashamed of themselves. dirty cops, bad people. if this happened to president obama, a lot of people would have been in jail for a long time already many, many years.

if i didn't fire james comey, we would have never found this guy. because when i fired that sleez bag, all hell broke out. they were ratting on each other, they were running for the hills. let's see what happens. let's see what happens. it's in the hands of very talented people. we're going to have to see what happens. >> the president's inner monologue is where we start with some of our favorite reporters and friends. white house reporter for "the washington post" is back. john is here, former general counsel at the fbi is here. also at the table former chief spokesman for the justice department, matd rr miller and former managing editor. i have to start with you. today -- and if you go on trump's sort of schedules of time, this was the rant about the mueller investigation which ended eight months ago, so i

guess we have to wait eight more months for his thoughts on impeachment, which ended yesterday? >> yeah. we do. i guess have to wait. i feel like we got our fill that will hold us over for quite a long time. as is often the case, our generalized sense of shock and horror and outrage. the question is what's the question. what would you like the start? >> i sensed this is battle lines for the election ahead. i think all we can do is stop and look. i pulled back the curtain inside his mind. that's what it was. i think anyone outraged by the debase in the east room is probably not in trump's camp. i think if you're titillated, you're already in trump's camp. this is about everybody else. and i think if you're part of

the everybody else and pete's coalition, which he came in close second in iowa, that's the political earthquake we should be talking about. but instead, because of donald trump's addiction to shocking and auing all the time, he continues to block out the sun. what do these democrats -- what do they do? >> let's just take a look at this week. the stark contrast of this week has been in purely political terms and i've expressed my outrage so many times i feel like a broken record. so, i'm not even a bother today. i think this week we've seen so far, up until today, donald trump have an incredibly great week. democrats made a spectacle of themselves on wednesday. it's a global embarrassment which took place on monday. you rarely want to give donald trump credit for anything but when he said the cluster that

took place on iowa monday, democratic chairman saying we're going to recanvas the caucus. an election with fewer than 200,000 people take part, we don't know who won. so, that was a good day for donald trump. his state of the union was his opportunity to boast about his approval ratings and his strong economy. he then got acquitted for the second time they've taken a serious run at him. so, he walked away scot free and everyone knows he's guilty as sin. with his approval rating at 49%. so, this is a great week for donald trump. and then he got to be donald trump again. today all of the craziness and the greaveness and hunted housery that lives inside that largely empty, apart from the grievances, head of his, came tumbling out in public. if the guy could just not do the

stuff he did today, it would be very hard to beat him in an election campaign. giveline the strengths of the economy l the other things and the foolishness on the democratic side, you say donald trump is the prohibitive favor toot get elected. and then he reminds you this guy's beatable because he's so profoundly flawed. he has his strengths but they're so great and glaring and unable to control them that he reminds everyone, with regularity like a clock, he reminds everyone of course he's beatable and he must be beaten and he feeds the fire on the democratic side. if there's anything democrats need to get back on track, it's that performance there today a stark reminder of what they must be up to. >> i think john make as very good point about donald trump reminding everyone about his

weaknesses. approval rating is only 49%. in the poll average is -- in some ways at his strongest when he's not in front of the public all the time. because when he is, you see what you saw today, which is the white hot center of donald trump, which is a man consumed by grievances. someone who doesn't understand anything about virtue, about the rule of law, right and wrong. somebody who's with me and against me. and today, he might as well have been out there saying i want mitt romney's head on a pike, lisa page and everyone against me. i want their heads on a pike. the words they pretended to be so offended about when adam schiff used them. he was attacking and making clear the consequences for anyone who crosses him. and this is important. if you'll stand with me, i'll

praise you on national television. he had all these members of congress stand up. you'll be part of the team, rewarded. and if you're not, i will come at you with everything i have. >> it's not a team, it's a mafia family. and donald trump spent a lot of time attacking jim comey today. a lot of time airing his grievances with the mueller investigation, which you were a part of. how did that land inside the fbi workforce, when the attorney general is in the front row. >> i think they keep their head down and a very apolitical let's do the job -- >> that's about corruption, at large. >> people are going to be concerned about whether they're allowed to follow the facts and apply the law. is there interference. and clearly there was an odd moment where he kept looking over in the press conference to the attorney general as if

that's just somebody who carries out what he wants to do, which is traditionally not what the role of the attorney general is. >> traditionally not a role to sit in the crowd. we should be explicit with our viewers. he's talking about getting all the people he attacked in the durham probe. he should be very concerned by what donald trump just promised his base. >> absolutely. if i were the democrats, what i would be doing is making two points to criticize what's going on. one is a complete absence of facts. what you have here is classic demagoguery, which is it's all adjectives. evil, corrupt. in the case of mueller folks t was we were angry. none of that has to do with the facts. so, i think -- there was something interesting when the italians were trying to get rid of bauer skoeny and had a

similar demagogue who also was amoral and one of the ways you do it is you don't just talk about his personal, you go to the facts and talk about why the policies are wrong. all of this is just adjectives. there's complete dirt of the president saying what exactly is wrong with the people. what have they actually said that's incorrect. and the second point is it's noticeable because the president mouths off about this but where was he in the house? where was he in the senate? he never submitted to an interview, never testified under oath. it's true the same happened in the mueller case. >> i think there's a classic reason. there is legal jeopardy that attaches if you sit for an interview or if you say something under oath to federal prosecutors, to the house,to the senate. so f you note this is president is happy to talk today about

this is evil and these people are corrupt, but when it came time to put up or shut up, which is are you willing to actually say this under oath? or in an interview he's silent. one classic way of dealing with this is to say a lot of your people testified and they were willing to come in and say something under oath, under the penalty of perjury. where were you? >> he was getting ready for this. i'm sure you share my despair at seeing the room like this. this was a room, nat when ythat you have the privilege of working in the white house, it's the grandest room. war is declared, peace is announced. medals of freedom is handed out, with the exception of rush limbaugh's. and it's a grand room used to say the sorts of things for a political rally.

>> i heard john say he's not going to observation press how appalled he was. but i'm going to express how appalled i was. and i couldn't help but think -- by the way voters should be listened to lishen for an entire press conference because then i think it's impossible to vote for him. they have to think what a poor excuse for a president, what a poor excuse for a man, what a poor excuse for a human being and i voted to acquit him. we've been talking about what the democrats have to do. continuing to have 60% of americans and traditionally an incumbent president gets a majority of voters. he gets about 55% of the people who think we have a good economy. barack obama got nine out of ten of the people in 2012. and the more people see this appalling vision of donald trump, the more they may

discount that for the good economy. why we use the word acquit? why don't we use the -- why don't we use the phrase not guilty about this? because he's not acquitted. he's simply not proven. there was no evidence offered. this you bick wuty of the word acquit and holding up that thing beats truman is kind of a problem. >> technically it is correct to say not guilty or acquit. you may it has never the attributes of a real trial but it's a real trial. republicans would say we did have the record before the house in front of us. it is the case there was some evidence for them, that democrats would say not a complete record and there was more to get. but there was some evidence. if you're a democrat you say what were you afraid of?

there were clear witnesses, including ones not others with available. >> the constitution says the senate has to try him and is responsible for trying him. it doesn't say if the senate doesn't convict, he's acquitted. >> whether it's approved or not guilty, it's all the same. >> i'll film it for you if you want. you have this great sort of term of saying the quiet part out loud. i want to show you this moment where donald trump went back to where it all began with hunter biden and seemed to suggest and normalize the idea on enriching themselves in the presidency. >> they don't think it's corrupt when a son who made no money, that got thrown out of the military, with no money at all is working for $3 million up front, 83,000 a month and that's only ukraine.

goes to china, picks up $1.5 billion, then to romainia, i hear, and many other countries. they think that's okay. because if it s is ivanka in the audience? my kids could make a fortune. they could make a fortune. it's corrupt. >> his kids are making a fortune and i think ivanka takes global summits and i think they all stuff brochures in their pockets on air force 1. it's the audacity that's staggering, appalling or impressive. what's that line that maybe ivanka should do it? >> it's not just that he says the quiet part out loud. one of his greatest political assets is his shamelessness and the ability to take something he is doing or his family is doing or charge that could be levelled against him and level that same charge back on a lesser crime

with ten times the strength. and the sense of righteousness. and he does that repeatedly. and i think it catches people off guard, even though it shouldn't be because they cannot believe the audacity of a man doing the thing he's accusing someone else of doing. this speech -- it's not the right word but it's off the cuff and free form. i don't know that he intentionally performed it, but it's classic for how he behaves. >> it was also very specific. free form is the right word for how he speaks. but it was very specific. i mean he was prosecuting men and women who have been investigated by their own departments inspector general, men and women who have been investigated by congressional committees. now investigated by a attorney general nodding and smiling, as did his cia director a couple nights ago at the stated of the

uni. and there is a very serious investigation underway still by john durham, a u.s. attorney from connecticut. is he telegraphing to that investigator his desired outcome? something -- there are no accidents with trump. do you have any idea in terms of foreshadowing? >> there's not that much secret to it. we find out behind the scenes he ordered something up and we ask for that. as you say that part of his speech or riff was very specific and you could -- one would be forgivon for rightly interpreting it as going down in a list and naming everyone by name and putting them on notice. you are either with this president or you are against him. and if you're against him, he is going to name you.

he is going to be incredibly dismissive and angry and vindictive towards you as he was in that speech. and if you're not, you're a loyalist and you're going to get a shout out and asked to stand in the east room to accept praise from this president. and i don't think he was try foing to be particularly discrete. >> he named names today and i think ashley parker accurately describes those names as belonging on an enemy's list. >> the intelligence community is made up of career officials. and their job is to be completely apolitical. it is vite toal to our national security that people are askict based on what the facts are and what the laws permit. you don't want them to say whatever the republican or democrat wants to hear.

it's really important for the people to understand that is their job. it's an incredibly dangerous thing for the lead orof the free world to be sending a signal that they're supposed to be partisan. >> although that was the clear order from said leader. thank you for starting us off. as trump vows revenge, mitt romney and nancy pelosi fight back. with the president ahead of what promises to be a scorched earth bid for his reelection. a member of the intel communities join us to explain what those committees still want from john bolton ahead of his new tell all. and a do over in iowa just days ahead of the new hampshire primary. all these stories coming up.

he is purely, like nancy pelosi, just blinded by hatred. because when he had his shot, he couldn't do it. and he's more concerned about attempting to be loved by those who hate his gutsz, by the media, by the left who destroyed his political career, who destroyed his presidential run than he is about doing what his constituency wants. he's not brave. he's a coward. >> i promise you'll never have to see that again ever, ever. that's my promise to you. hasn't been two weeks since republicans clutched their collective pearls when he

clutched a narrative that attributed to a threat from team trump to put their heads on pikes. and here we are while trump seeks to relitigate against the justice department for its investigations, he and his allies are engaged in political retribution over impeachment. calling mitt romney a failed candidate. the attacks simply underscoring the elegance of romney's made-for-history speech in defense of it. >> i believe the act he took, an effort to corrupt an election, is as destructive an attack on the oath of office and our constitution as i could imagine. it is a high crime and misdemeanor in the meaning of the constitution and that is not a decision i take lightly. it is it the last decision i want to take. the personal consequences, the political consequences that fall on me as a result are going to be extraordinary. but i swore an oath before god

that i would imply impartial justice and that said what the president did was greivisly wrong. >> chuck went after romney about naming him at this morning's prayer breakfast, of all places. and the revenge tour didn't stop. >> i don't like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong. nor do i like people who say i pray for you when they know that's not so. >> you didn't have that slowed down. you can wait for another day to analyze the pace of his speech. the last job with nancy pelosi, who's repeatedly said she's prayed for trump. >> i don't know what the president understands about prayer or people who do pray, but we do pray for the united states of america, i pray for him, i pray for president bush

still, president obama a bit. because it's a heavy responsibility and i pray hard for him because he's so off the track. he really needs our prayers. so, he can say whatever he wants. but i do pray for him. what he said about senator romney was particularly without class. >> joining our conversation, someone full of class, and in washington heidi basel, all of it. >> it's startling, isn't it? >> rirlt so funny -- they're like what? which? so much. sglirl >> it's incredible that the gloves really are off. for nancy pelosi, who we talked so much about months ago, being so reluctant to go down the path and now she's ripping up speeches in the state of the union. >> is that a good thing or bad

thing? >> a lot of people like the fact that she did it. i'm from the bronx and all about putting things in your face and telling you how i feel. i made this point about impeachment before. just because the left is jinned up and excited about it, doesn't mean you're not going to get the same or similar reaction on the right . >> my thoughts on this. i have not. take the figures out of it. when you analyze both sides, donald trump said bull shit in the east room today. it's not like she ripped it up in the middle. >> i don't care but it does say to me that we're in a different place than we were years ago. and let's talk about the president's comment. when barack obama was president, there were a lot of times i wanted him to kul people out and show that level of anger. but because he was president and

he obeyed certain -- respected certain norms, because he's an african-american and would be judged differently, i understand why he did do that. the truth is his base loves that he does that, he has no trouble crossing it. as democrats, we have to be able to match that. i wasn't of that opinion before but my mind has changed a bit. >> i mean this is a moment where i think the democrats have to look at their kand dcandidates decide who can constantly wrestle this back to even. he vanquished 16 republicans because jeb bush would put up an ad saying trump wasn't conservative and he trump would say so. and what's his name would play with his hands -- rubio and say mine aren't that small and trump would get grosser. the democrats have to figure out

how to stop getting trump graded on a curve or his obliteration of norms will go that's what he does. and they'll talk about whether nancy should or shouldn't have ripped up a speech. >> and democrats tend to get their nickers in a twist over stuff like that in a way the republicans don't. there is always the case, even before donald trump, and part of the reason trump was possible in your former party, is there was always the greater latitude for that kind of behavior. republicans has more party loyalty and would accept deviation. they would basically line up behind them no matter what. democrats, whether you like it or not, they like to indulge indiana fighting more than republicans do and more pearl clutching. basel is a good example of what has happens over this time where people who previously wanted standards and decorum have said

look, we can't win if we continue to act like the old world is still the old world. there rr tclassic you don't wan to get in the mud with the pig. you get dirty. so, trump is the ultimate pig, the ultimate political pig. he's not in the mud. he's in all the other stuff in the ground. and if you get down in there with him, he's just going deeper and dirtier than you are. i think democrats are getting the sense that by playing by the old rules is not the way to win against donald trump. there's more to say about this but i think there's been a shift. the question now is looking around at the terrible week they've endured and as they look at bernie sanders and pete buttigieg coming out of iowa. which of those guys is the guy? or one of those guys the guy? i don't sense among democrat as whole lot of collective competence they've found the

person yet who knows how to get in this fight with trump and win. that's not -- the party doesn't feel like they're there yet when you talk to them. they like various candidates butted none of them feel like we got his number now. >> heidi, i want to bring you in on republicans. because the counterargument, of course, is from a place of faithfulness to his faith, high moral standing, mitt romney ruined the president's week more than anybody. he's more mad over mitt romney's speech on the floor of the senate, splitting the limelight and senate from him. i mean mitt romney's speech will be in history books ahead of the east room rally celebrating his acquittal. >> first, i wanted to say, nicois all of this head on a pike stuff

was so outrageous and wrong. >> spot on. they're going to miss this excuse. they're going to miss being blamed for cowards when they look corrupt. they should have stuck with heads on pikes when they had a chance. >> not only did mitt romney make history in terms of breaking with hispe party for the first time in history to vote for a conviction of a u.s. president. donald trump hasn't had this experience, to this date, of someone hitting him back so hard this way that mitt romney did where, it hurt. mostly the republicans have not lived to fight another day. they've all left congress. this is something where mitt romney hit him and hit him hard. chair wrote something really importantly today. he knows what's going on and what he is telling us is this has nothing to do with politics, nothing to do with believes or

philosophy or ideology. it's about fear. and what you're seeing here is something that all of us, anybody who survived junior high can relate to, which is there's only a few bullies but there's way more people going along with the bully because they don't want to be the ones bullied and when high school is over, it all looks very different, doesn't it? >> sure does. >> they've already written this. 2,000 historians have weighed in and said this president committed impeachable acts and 24 hours later, mitt romney is the one still trending on twitter. >> your coverage of impeachment for us was amazing. you mentioned the sharon brown piece and everyone should get online and read the whole thing and read it one more time? he basically writes that what republicans say to him in private is basically what mitt romney said on the senate floor. >> that is what i have heard

from a handful of republicans. look, they're not going to admit it from -- to a reporter in the hallway necessarily. but i am going to say that i have no ekwivication about reporting, that i've seen many come down and not even make eye contact. beat it out of there quickly, hang their heads. they know a lot of them know -- they know the same thing that mitt romney knows, which is the facts presented have not been, to this day, refuted. and that's why you saw so many of the interactions with president's, what he calls warriors. they're really warriors on truth. they were down there on a regular basis to basically distract and gas lite the american public about what actually happened in this case, which is pretty clear cut. and even senator alexander said we don't need more evidence. the case has been made. >> i think there was mercenaries.

you were a superstar. i loved watching all your reporting. after the break, the chairman of the dnc calls for a doover of the entire iowa caucus as pete plans to capitalize on his better than experienced.

so, what i want to do today, three days late, is to thank the people of iowa for the very strong victory they gave us at the iowa caucuses on monday night. some 6,000 more iowans came out on caucus night to support our candidacy than the candidacy of anyone else. and when 6,000 more people come out for you in an election, then your nearest opponent, we here in northern new england call

that a victory. >> i can't find that. it's not on my -- didn't he tie with mayor pete, the 37-year-old, not anymore, mayor? >> he's disingenuous, to say the least. he's not telling the truth. part of the problem with iowa is what do you want to do? simplify, simplify, simplify. they made it more complex. had three different metrics. so, he's counting the first metric of people who came in that night will tooling support bernie. but many of whom switched to mayor pete. my heart goes out toot him because, having covered many iowa caucuses and look for the head guy at 9:00, he would have got the same headlines barack obama had in 2008. and he missed them. in a way bernie got a break because people don't see him as

the loser in a way biden got break. >> bernie might have won. i looked at every piece of information out of iowa. i didn't see anywhere that bernie won by 6,000 and they're still counting and the dnc chair today said they need to count again. i agree and i think the political earthquake -- you and i were talking all day long. bernie sanders was expected to win. the expelkitations had bernie sanders running away with iowa. john kerry was on the phone in a restaurant saying i'm going to save the party. pete buttigieg beat him or tied him for first place. that's a political earthquake from my days in politics. i guess the opening of the spin from bernie came from the fact the results aren't official or known? >> are you talking to me? >> yeah. >> i think what happened is what rick said, we didn't have a clear outcome on caucus night.

so all the normal dynamics of caucus night and the following morning and the international press and the digital press and tv press, no one knew and no one could trust the results as they trickled out all day tuesday. iowa is not about delegates. it's about who gets the most delegates. the main reason the state has power is it goes first and when you get that first night, the first contest, someone has won, someone has lost. someone has exceeded expectations. all of that didn't happen on the normal trajectory. and so, you now have both bernie and pete. there's question about who won, who's going to get the most delegates. and we still don't know ultimately the popular vote. bernie probably is right. he might have more than 6,000 votesen the first alignment. but neektslgte neither one of t

clear claim to victory because we're still arguing about it and no one in the end trusts the outcome of this process now. it's been such a mess. >> and i think elizabeth warren is in the current ranking. number three. she got one. that should be a huge story. >> the debacle screwed everyone in the field. joe biden is the person -- >> lived to fight another day, right? >> i think when i look at the results t looks like bernie came ahead in the first ballot and they're go tag tie in the number of votes. i think what iowa did is undermine a number of the candidate's ragszal. joe biden has been saying i'm the one that can beat donald trump. to be electable, you have to win elections. he came in fourth. bernie sanders has said i can turn out massive amounts of new voters. turnout was down from 2016, let

alone 2008. that's a massive blow to his big argument, let alone the fact he got around half the number he got last time. elizabeth warren saying because i'm a woman that makes me electable. trying to flip a criticism on its head. she did perform pretty well, i think. i think what you're left with is a field who -- pete buttigieg did the best across most demographic groups. and one that doesn't appear and that's african-americans hispanic. >> the supporting barack obama in l.a. and hillary in 2016. what does it say? >> what does it say? tell me. >> this is not a race between moderates and progressives.

it's a race between people who run as establishment and joe biden is a third reiteration and a disruptive candidate. and pete fits a lot of that, but so does bernie sanders. if joe biden doesn't do well in new hampshire, i don't know where he -- >> he goes to south carolina, right? >> if he has the money and -- >> here's what i would say. i'm going to interpret the message is they want to mainstream candidate. they just want a young one, not an older one. >> or they want bernie. it looks like a tie. >> bernie got half what he got last time. he has many other competitors. he did way better than bernie in the fact he came from nowhere. thank you for getting to a studio and spending the hour with us. grateful to see you, my friend. after the break, erick stall

well joins us in the battle ahead. and seeking for an interference after his senate, whatever we're calling it, acquittal. , whatevee calling it, acquittal. i have huge money saving news for veterans.

mortgage rates just dropped to near 50-year lows. one call to newday usa can save you $2,000 every year. and once you refinance, the savings are automatic. thanks to your va streamline refi benefit, at newday there's no income verification, no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. activate your va streamline benefit now.

there's nothing wrong. if somebody calls from a country, norway, we have information on your opponent. i think i'd want to hear it. it's not an interference. they have information. i think i'd take it. >> and by the way, likewise, china should start an investigations into the bidens because what happened in china is just about as bad as what happened with ukraine. >> if that was donald trump before he was acquitted by the senate for soliciting foreign interference in the upcoming election, imagine what he's planning to do now. the fbi director yesterday told the next guest he's seen ongoing records.

joining our conversation, erick swalwell on the intelligence and judiciary committees. i saw some of your back and forth with fbi director wray. what is your assessment of russia's efforts to undermine the election in 2020. >> that they never left. good afternoon. they are emboldened by what they were able to accomplish in 2016. that they tried to attack us in 2018 and that they're going to do the same this upcoming election. but they may have others on the playing field helping the president. it looks like he has asked china and ukraine to help him as well. so, i believe the fbi will do all they can to stop them and the cia and all our intelligence agency patriots. but if the person at the top is not making a priority f he's not putting the whole of government, every resource behind it, they are limited in what they can do and no one can listen to donald trump and the clips he played

and believe he's someone serious about keeping foreigners on the sidelines when we go 92 ballot box to vote this november. >> and he's been given opportunities to take both comments back.back. he's never seized any of them. congressman schiff was on with my colleague, rachel maddow, last night and had this to say about one of the committees on which you serve with him approaching former national security advisor john bolton's counsel. oh, we don't have it. what he said was -- to rachel was i can tell you after the senate voted not to hear witnesses, after they voted to be the first impeachment trial in history without witnesses, we did approach john bolton's counsel, asked if mr. bolton would be killing to submit an affidavit under oath describing what he observed regarding the president's misconduct and he refused. are you still interested in talking to john bolton before his book comes out? >> i'm leave that to chairman schiff. i believe if he has information about other corrupt schemes that

the president is involved in that we should hear from him. the reason we should believe that's the case in 2016 the president asked the russians to help him. in 2020 he at least asked the ukrai ukrainians. what's in the russia room? what's in the turkey room? what's in the saudi arabia room? we should know. we have reason to look. if john bolton has information, i'm sure speaker pelosi will authorize us to use subpoena power to pursue that. >> i have 37 more questions for you. i'll probably get in just one or two. would you mind sticking around through the break? >> yes, of course. >> don't go anywhere. we'll be right back with congressman eric swalwell. we'llh congressman eric swalwell. versus the other guys. ♪ clearly, velveeta melts creamier. yes. yes. yeah sure.

yes yes. yeah, yeah no problem. yes. yes, yes a thousand times yes! discover. accepted at over 95% of places in the u.s. discover. including best director...d for 10come on! awards, best original screenplay... there's only one way this war ends. and best picture of the year. last man standing.

we're back. congressman eric swalwell is still with us. congressman action i don't know if you saw president trump in the east room today. it was a performance that seemed to foreshadow a lot of intentions. an intention to ramp up the war against the fbi and anyone who deigns to hold him accountable to investigate him. do you have any sort of new concerns or is there a more open pipeline between people at our country's national security agencies than there were before the whistle-blower complaint obviously came to one of the committeeis on which you sit or do you worry the result of this is there will be less communication with the congressional oversight committees? >> i worry that this is a president, a corrupt president

emboldened believing that he was acquitted. i look at the news today that also attorney general barr is requiring that he has to sign off on any investigation into any presidential campaign. of course he should be involved, as any attorney general is, but i'm afraid that this is going to have a chilling effect on hard-working fbi agents who may be provided a tip about something that's going on or prosecutors in local offices who may be worried that their careers could be at risk if attorney general barr is going to continue his pattern of protecting donald trump and acting as his personal lawyer. that's what i fear right now. the best thing i think we can do is to just overwhelm the ballot boxes and leave no doubt as to what the upcoming outcome is going to be. >> congressman eric swalwell, thank you for spending some time with us. we're grateful. we'll get in our last break and we'll be right back. in our last we'll be right back. [ applause ] thank you.

it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. i love you!

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ tom perez, the chairman of the dnc who today called for a

recanvassing of the iowa caucuses is doing an exclusive interview with rachel maddow, of course he is, tonight. my thanks to basil, matt and rick for spending the hour with me. moech most of all, thanks to you for watching. "mtp daily" with chuck todd starts right now. welcome to thursday. it is "meet the press daily." good evening, i am chuck todd here in washington for a few days. if you thought the situation for democrats out of iowa couldn't get any more chaotic, you'd be wrong. after joe biden acknowledged iowa was a gut punch to his campaign, this afternoon the head of the democratic party called on them to begin recanvassing the results. a bit of a