earnings or news pieces. we have a bunch of traders worrying about the next piece of news. that's a bit of a technical explanation. generally a mild day on the stock market. i'm going to see you right back here tomorrow from las vegas. thank you for watching. "deadline white house" with nicolle wallace begins right now. hi everyone. it's 4:00 in new york where folks are watching donald trump who has a political -- will culminate arn pardon for his long-time friend and political advisor, roger stone. stone was sentenced to more than three years in prison today for lie took congress and witness tampering. the judge striking a blow at efforts to destort from the severity of his crimes. say, quote, he was not

prosecuted for standing up for the president, he was prosecuted for covering up for the president. and done nighable is the parallel universe in which a federal judge's ruling is received. donald trump seemed to be priming his base by live tweeting today's proceeding and announcing in the next hour he expect stone to be exonerated. >> i want to address today sentencing of a man, roger stone. roger stone. he's become big part of the news over the last little while. and i'm following this very closely and i want to see it play out to its fullest because roger is a very good chance of exoneration in my opinion. what happened to him is unbelievable. they say he lied. but other people lie too. just to mention comey lied. mccabe lied. lisa page lied.

her lover, struck, peter struck, lied. you don't know who these people are? trust me they all lied. >> and of course trump lied 16,000 times and counting. burt it's comments like those that have us on pardon watch this hour. but even if justice doesn't ultimately perveil, it had a hell of an afternoon. the doj took over when the four career prosecutors took the case after doj intervene was described by twitter. the characterizations were confirmed by nbc news. judge amy berman jackson asked did it get up to the u.s. attorney? yes, the prosecutor responds. the judge asked did it have to go up to main justice? the prosecutor responds. there were consultations with main justice.

and with respect to the second filing the judge asked you signed it, did you write it? the response, i'm not at liberty to discuss the internal deliberations from doj? were you directed to ask that? quote, i can't answer that. and judge amy berman jackson on the truth. quote, the truth still exists, the truth still matters. roger stone's insistence on it doesn't and his pride in his own lies are the threat to the most fundamental institutions, the dismay and disgust that the belligerence should transsend party. that's where we start with former federal prosecutor, who joins us after being inside the court room today and white house bureau chief and co author of "a very stable genius, phil rutger. and form cia director, john brennan.

take me inside what judge amy berman jackson was trying to doing with her questioning of the prosecutor? >> i think she was basically standing up for the rule of law. that's why trump is so upset about the independent judiciary. she's methodically started asking the prosecutors why the sentence was changed, what the sentencing guidelines were and the like and queried the other side and reached, i think a sol monic decision. but i think, fundamentally, what she was doing was -- she knows trump is a guy who pardons friends and crooks. so, she was laying the foundation to make it tough. obviously the president can do it anyway. but that quote you started the show with which is trump was not prosecuted for standing upen for it's about sending a signal,

don't worry, i got your back. >> let me ask you something personal. from all of your experience, did you think you'd see the day where a sitting president would live tweet the sentencing of a convicted felony, who happens to be his crony with the pospable softening the ground for a pard snn >> no there, is no precedent. even by nixon didn't act this way. and it is so profoundly betrayal of everything the justice department stands for and my heart goes out to those folks working there now. and they have a theckless leader at the top. >> i mean, you worked in another -- i mean, the intelligence community was being smeared and undermined by donald trump before he pivoted to his, really hot war with his own

justice darmtd. department. what happens to all the men and women who are making government salaries. it's a good salary but not as much as a lot of lawyers make in the private sector? when a judge makes so abundantly clear that the conduct of the sitting attorney general and the president is on the side of the bad guys, not good guys? >> i think first of all they're probably very heartened that we have individuals in the judicial branch willing to act with integrity and willing to stand up to abuses of authority by donald trump anducters. i think they're privately saying very good, i'm glad we're seeing we can push back on this. and more fundamentally i think it continues to undermine their confidence that the commander in chief of this country, that is doing things in the best interest of the country, as opposed to his own interest because he's clearly giving

every indication he wants to act like a mob boss and he's going to try to take care of him and his soldiers. and putting people in position wheres they're going to be able to carry out his actions and his wants despite what the intelligence community, the law enforcement communities need to do in terms of their nonpartisan, their professional activities to keep this country safe. >> so, put your intel chief hat on for a second. and i believe that was a police -- a law enforcement event he was standing in front of, proving irony is better than a door nail. he was seeking some sort of moral equivalence, i guess, between the former director of the fbi and his deputy. people who have been examined, almost, i think, a half a dozen times. and roger stone, who was convicted by a jury of his peers. sglil

>> it's outrageous he would try to make any moral equivalency with james comey and others. you can question their decisions and judgments but trying to carry out their duties responsibly and integrity. he wants that laughter in the room. >> they barely laughed. >> unfortunately, i did hear laughter. and talking about peter struck and lisa page and others. he plays to this debased group of people who are listening to what he is saying in terms of just trashing good public servants and defending people like roger stone? i mean, give me a break. >> phil rutker, it's so interesting and has to be from your perch with all the fantastic reporting out of your bureau there that we're all covering and watching the

revenge tour in overdrive. the political installation overnational security agencies. this pardon palooza, i called it yesterday. convicted felons and people convicted of fraud and corruption and the political and business world and then live tweeting the sentencing of his longest serving political advisor. what are you sort of on high alert for in the coming hours? >> well a couple of things. first of all we're obviously waiting to hear about the president pardoning roger stone, which appears likely, although we don't know when that could take place. perhaps more importantly is whether there's a further purge in the national security and intelligence ranks of the country. a big story that broke yesterday was the president's decision to appoint richard gri nel to be the acting director of national

intelligence. that, as director brennan knows, is a major job with major responsibility going to a loyalist, which seems to indicate the president wants his own set of eyes and ears overseeing the intelligence agencies. perhaps directing this revenge tour, this konlcontinued reveng tour in the months ahead. but driving all of this according to advisors of the president i talked to in the last few days is the president's own sense of fairness. he feels frustrated and betrayed that comey, mccabe, his other perceived enemies have not facesed any retribution or punishment by the law for what the president assesses to be their misdeeds and betrayals of him, so he's looking for ways to lash out and for ways to protect his own friends, who are facing punishment, because as you pointed out, they have been

convicted of crimes by jurys. >> just one follow up for you. you and your colleagues have reported on and other news organizations have as well, the pardon process. there's just such a volume of mayhem. the mayhem comes in such heaping doses that we've almost got behind the mass pardons of 48 hours ago. but there was something about the process. can you ix plain that. he's hijacked some of the process and put it into the west wing. how abnormal is that? >> it's very unusual. there's a traditional pardon process that goes through the justice department. sort of apolitical review of pardon applications for the president to grant clemency and trump has made this a very personal, very political process. he's now put it in control of

jared kushner, his son in law and senior advisor, who's one of the top strategists of the re-election campaign and criticized this process. one of the president's lawyers in the impeachment defense also is having influence over the pardon process as the president considers cases to pardon. and the one thing they have in common is some sort of high level connection to the president. either they got face time with him in the oval office or a friend of the friend cornered him at mar-a-lago. there's some ways these folks are getting access to the president and therefore getting their pardon applications granted. while other people who are nobodies or unanimous names are not getting the same clemency. >> by the way pardons are a tool

trump has dangled in front of people in his arorbit that have been insnared. and reportedly dangled pardons in front of mike flynn and manafort. what does it look like if you were someone normal, this use of pardons to people who, if as amy berman jackson said, was prosecuted for covering up for donald trump? >> you know, trump issuing a pardon for somebody like roger stone looks like one thing and one thing only, obstruction of justice. so f you're issuing pardons against a person who went a judge went on record this morning saying roger stone committed these felony offenses to cover up donald trump's crimes. i don't know how anybody with a straight face can argue that

donald trump pardoning roger stone is anything but an abuse of the pardon power. and when i hear he tweets things like i suspect roger stone will be exonerated, i'm not sure the president understands pardoning roger stone would be the farthest thing from an exoneration. judge amy berman jackson just spent three hours in the court room meticulously going through roger stone's crimes, how it was not a political prosecution. she even took the audience through roger stone obstructing his own case. if i could read one quote quickly. she said and i quote, you, roger stone, used the tools of social media to disseminate in the broadest way possible your incendiary messaging on instagram and twitter, designed to disrupt these proceedings. nicolle, that was over and above

his obstruction of congress and his tampering with a witness. he continued to try to disrupt his very criminal case. i mean, there is nothing the president can say or do that would even come close to an kpaun rag exoneration of roger stone. >> the president today in his own words, in public promised an exoneration of roger stone. how do you exonerate him other than a pard snn >> that's all i could think of. i guess because he's the top law enforcement agent, he could perhaps try to dismiss the case before it has been finalized because the judge suspended execution of the sentence to give roger stone's attorneys more time to litigate yet another new trial motion, which is destined to fail.

even the judge foreshadowed it by saying on tuesday i've skimmed it and, in substance, i'm not that impressed. i was disheartened when i saw, after judge amy berman jackson, sentenced roger stone to 30 months, she then let him walk out the front door instead of taking thoutd back door by the u.s. marshals. pending the resolution of the new trial motion. >> this is in the wake of the senate acquittal of donald trump and his seeming acceleration of the purge of life-long public servants, of the mercy and pardons for political allies. do you think there's any remorse they named him as an unindicted coconspirator but didn't receive the memo not to or do you think

any -- where they found him to have convicted ten acts of criminal obstruction of justs but had a convulewded reason why they couldn't be charged? >> i haven't talked to them but i can tell you there's a lot of people at the justice department, career people, who feel we have a president not playing by the books at all. and why did mueller so cue to the book in every circumstance. didn't even ask for an indictment to happen against the president? i used to over see the pardon's attorney office. there are 34,000 federal prisons. who are the people the president is pardoning? all people connected to the mar-a-lago crowd. that's so corrosive to the justice. and that's why i think over 2500

former prosecutors have signed a letter calling for barr to resign. >> the new dni director, the united states of america, is a man named rick grunel. i knew him when he was a flack, the kind of jobs i used to have, for john bolton. what does it say the intel community that he's their new boss? >> well, he doesn't have any experience or credentialal. >> has he even had a top secret intelligence? >> there have been dnis in the past without experience. denny blair was an accomplished naval officer and a admiral. so, you want people who have some exposure and experience. dan coates really got into the details of the intelligence business and profession.

but grenell, the only credentialal he has, as far as i know, is he's supported trump loyally over the years. i think this message is one that's very worrisome. there's going to be a loyalist of trump who's going to oversee the 17 intelligence community agencies and what does that say to those bringing pan obligation the intelligence but if you have someone like a grenell, is he going to shape it? is there an acting? there is no senate conformation process needed. but it is something i think a lot of people are looking at with a very worried expression. >> i don't know that he's ever had the kind of security

clearance as a praeess person a ambassador that would allow him to consthum kind of intelelike humeen intelligence -- >> ambassadors yulgszy go through a security clearance process. so, i'm sure he has some clearances, probably at the top secret level. he theoretically should not be having access. >> what a time to be alive. unbelievable. director brennan, thank you all for spending some time with us. coming up, about last night. even some of the democrats are today expressing regret that donald trump wasn't the target of the harsh attacks levelled against fellow democrats. this as trump surges to some of his highest approval ratings. and did the hot red performance

from elizabeth warren help her or just damage bloomberg's? and battle over experience and records. the purge and we'll go inside the on going war and the mueller investigations. [ fast-paced drumming ]

[ fast-paced drumming ] they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer

all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/try and never go to the post office again! let's put forward somebody he's actually a democrat. look, we shouldn't have to choose between one candidate who wants to burn this party down and another candidate who wants to buy this party out. >> i'd like the talk about who we're running against a billionaire who calls women fat

brauds and horse-faced lesbians and no, i'm not talking about donald trump, i'm talking about mayor bloomberg. >> this idea he figured out it was a bad idea after he sent in monitors and said it must stop, even then he continued the policy. >> you literally in part of the committee over seeing these things and we're not able to speak to first thing about the politics of the country himself? >> are you trying to say i'm dumb? are you making me, pete? i said i made an error. people sometimes forget names. >> it was a circular firing squad, if i ever saw one. but with their knives out for each other, did they miss an opportunity to strike at the ultimate target at the very moment in his presidency he's most emboldened and seemingly rising in popularity? some thought so. >> i think the main thing is i wish we had been talking more about donald trump.

because these personal slug fests, i'm not sure they benefit anyone. and so my hope is while debates are about contrast, that the next debate is a little more about him and what he's done and why we need replace him. >> the real winner in the debate last night was donald trump. because i worry we may very well be on the way to nominating someone who can't win in november. >> joining our conversation robert costa, political reporter from "the new york times," and former aid of the george w. bush white house and former top state department official. bob costa, the night that was, was particularly striking. we all saw the fireworks and if people didn't watch t they read about the clashes. most famously now, probably the attacks from elizabeth warren. but the regrets expressed just

minutes after they left the debate stage are something i've never seen before. have you? >> for many moderate sas in the party, they were disappointed they were hoping someone would take control of the message. instead it remains scattered and vulcanized and senator sanders continues to surge ahead and ahead of super tuesday when 14 states will vote, that puts a lot of top democratic establishment types in a complicated position. who is going to be their standard bearer in the long run? >> so, let me cue the twitter folks online for sanders. get your fingers ready because here i go. so, sanders got 27 in a national poll. 39% are split out among all the

moderates. so, he's actually an incredibly weak frontrunner in terms of not actually having a support of the majority. i say this as someone who still has ptsd and bakwakes up in the middle of the night over the 2016 republican primary when the exact same thing happened. i asked jeb bush and krichris christie, was it a mistake. chris christie killed marco rubio and elizabeth warren may have finished off mike bloomberg. okay. mayor pete may have finished off amy klobuchar. okay. but they strengthen bernie, who, a lot of people on both sides of the aisle think trump can beat. >> we saw it in 2016. i didn't see anything on the stage last night that changed the basic tenor of this campaign, which is that sanders is still a factional candidate

but he has the biggest faction and no one else can cobble together a bigger one. he's going to be the nominee unless something else changes. and he's got a trident sticking out of his chest. but the point is it doesn't really matter because sanders is ahead and warren was attacking the one guy she can't get voters from in the first place. >> i think it was about bush, if the term strusteejry was there. but that was troubling too. bernie's voters aren't available to her. is that the think sng >> and you wonder, hey, elizabeth warren, maybe you could notice there was a moderate wing in the spring, summer. you had an opportunity to switch gears. mayor pete certainly did, into the more moderate camp. but instead she's beating up on

the easiest person on stage to beat up on but not actually doing anything that's going to necessarily further her in nevada and then in south carolina. she did though, i thought, had the strongest debate of anyone on stage. if only we had been seeing that throughout the entirety of the process. >> i thought all of them had their moments. i thought mayor pete's comments, we played some of them there. and it's easy to plan an attack line. i've prepared some of the lowest regarded debaters in american political history in my curier. so, let me stipulate t is hard. to come up with an attack line is one thing, mayor pete gamed out the conversation and i not what he did to klobuchar was the most significant blow she suffered since her strong finish in new hampshire. i thought what warren did, as a performance, in a league of its own.

but i have to say i don't think any of us know anymore how voters process any of this. >> this is an estarik reference. >> police, i cont on you for this. . >> 19th century artillery firing and the phrase is firing wildly in all directions. that's what the debate was. yes, i guess there may have been some stragery there. i don't think mayor bloomberg's performance was as devastating and awful as i think. i like a president who doesn't wave his hand wildly like a third grade wr too much ridline. he's calm. i think that contrasts well with the current occupant with the white house. as everybody said the moderate

lane is a way bigger lane. and to go back to 2016. i mean f you hadded to do it all over again, you'd say let's consolidate to donald trump. bernie could lose to any of the people on the stage. >> if they became the nominee. >> and premature for mike to say, which he did during the day, all of the moderates should drop out except for me. but if you're head of dnc and you had power, you'd say that's the way to do it. >> year going to sneak in a break. afterwards, as we said elizabeth warren's take-no-prisoner's approach to last night's debate guaranteed her the spotlight. will it reorder her standing in the next two contests?

mayor buttigieg really has a slogan thought of by his consultants to paper over a thin version of a plan that would leave millions of people unable to afford their health care. it's not a plan. it's powerpoint. and amy's plan is even less, it's like a post-it note. insert plan here. bernie has started very much. has a good start but instead of

expanding and bringing in more people to help, instead, his campaign relentlessly attacks everyone who ask as question or tries to fill in details about how to actually make this work. >> it's a point by her finishes in iowa and new hampshire, she thought to reset the race and came out swinging. her attacks on mike bloomberg have been a headline. but she did more than attack the billionaire. she didn't just turn her sights on bloomberg, she called out amy klobuchar for having only two paragraphs explaining hers and calls out the idea of being a moderate in the first place, saying we can't be so eager to be liked by mitch mcconnell, we're afraid to remark. she made this in response to comments biden and klobuchar made.

i said this last night and i believe it. what we say matters a lot less than how these performances go down in the room and more importantly in the state. what is the feeling there on the ground in vegas and in nevada about this field? >> reporter: this is the challenge. i was in the debate hall last night. and when you're talking about artillery fire t seemed like you were lasting the last scene of resident -- you're like, wait a minute there's a guy standing that shouldn't be. so, it's really hard. and when we were having the debate watch party. the undecideds didn't walk away more decided and that is not okay. they really missed an opportunity. no one said hi, i'm excited to be here in nevada. that could have been taken place in any town u.s.a. and as a result, they didn't talk about

the issues that are going to help grow the base, didn't talk about juvenile justice, things that, in nevada, are very important but they resonate in southern parts of the country people need. that is the challenge -- yep, tell me. >> i'm so happy to hear you say that. because there's not much of a disconnect between what you saw and we saw. i've already disclosed i did not prep any of the world's great debaters. but what i would have recommended someone do legacy a putting kids in cages and the immigration policy. you had one of the moderators, an anchor at telemundo, obviously well versed in the impact of trump -- frankly, all my colleagues are bewell versedn what's going on at the boarder. no one thought to turn it around

on issues affecting latinos more broadly, or issues in the state. is there a sense saturday's race is as sort of up in the air as the last two? >> reporter: i mean, bernie sanders walked away unscathed. he's not necessarily growing his base but he walked away in scathed. i don't know why they turned on each other. they could have tried to stay number two or three because biden didn't have a strong performance. and people walked away saying you still did not address the elephant in the room, that is donald trump. let's be really quite honest. the stakes are so high that we can have marginal conversations on policy but this election is not about policy details, it's about the existential threat to our democracy and no one talked about it after we know the doj has been compromised. they missed an opportunity to talk to 11 million americans and remind them just happened

the prior week with this president. they missed the opportunity boss in such a biefericated media market, you want to use that opportunity to talk directly to the people that are going to be affected, quite frankly, if we have another four years. here in nevada, you have the highest concentration of mixed status families. this is very real. i was in a high school just three years ago where 20% of the kids were homeless because their kids had been deported. it's not something far away. and no one talked about it. >> robert costa, there's new polling nationally in battleground. donald trump enjoying some of the highest approval ratings of the presidency. is there a sense this whole democratic primary process is helping him? >> reporter: they feel pretty confident in the west wing.

traveling to las vegas in california. they see on the horizon a possible nominee in sanders. they're prepared to paint the enti entire democratic party as socialists, not in the term of democratic socialists but as out in out soviet-style socialists. but that's the republican battle plan at this time. but they are a little bit, i would say uneasy about mayor bloomberg because they look at the suburban gains he made in 2018 and know he has a ton of money to spend. >> it's great to have you from out there. thank you both for spending some time with us. after the break, new details breaking in the past hour just before trump ousted another intel chief. that's next. does your broker offer more than just free trades?

fidelity has zero commissions for online u.s. equity trades and etfs, plus zero minimums to open a brokerage account. with value like this, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelity.

saving for ava's college. financial security. on our terms. no matter what your goals are, our trusted advisors can help you reach them. ameriprise financial. lobster fan like wild caught lobster, butter poached, creamy and roasted. or try lobster sautéed with crab, shrimp and more. so hurry in and let's lobsterfest. or get it to go at red lobster dot com try to win by attacking, so hurry in now, we know the trump strategy- distorting, dividing.

mr. president: it. won't. work. newspapers report bloomberg is the democrat trump fears most. as president, universal healthcare that lets people keep their coverage if they like it. a record on job creation. a doable plan to combat climate change. i led a complex, diverse city through 9-11 and i have common sense plans to move america away from chaos to progress! i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message.

we talked to phil rutker about the need for a loyalist and since we've been on the air this brand new reporting in "the washington post" that reveals the astonishing back story. a republican ally of trump's told him the intel official in

charge of election security gave a classified briefing to the house intel committee, the whole committee but the president, apparently, erroneously believes the official who worked for mcguire gave information to adam schiff and that it would be helpful to democrats if released publicly. trump blamed mcguire and removed him from his post. this is a scary story in that political retribution now is being sort of meated out with bad information. >> for the last three years we' we've had this weird thing where the president would go on twitter and contradict or attack it. i think the president is getting better at exerting his power in his own white house and we're going to see more of that. he knows how to move people more effectively. and we're going to see more and more of this.

he wants the official output of government to resemble his personal output. >> but do you read in this that he doesn't want the career public servants or political appointees to brief congress on election security? >> my read is election security is a topic that donald trump wants no one speaking of, period, much less a career intelligence official giving classified information to his opposition party. this is par for the course. that information that might have gotten to donald trump, saying this was only to adam schiff. he makes a rash decision. at the end of the dayso-called state as often as he can. >> let's read something the acting director wrote about russia.

so, this is from an op-ed. campaigns of misinformation have been happening for decades, he wrote in 2016 on fox news.com. the view is at odds with senior u.s. intelligence officials who have said russia's operation was sweeping and systematic and unlike previous russian or soviet efforts. >> so, this is a theme we've been talking about for a long time. when you prize loyalty over competence, you get mediocre flacks for very important jobs like this. when you prize loyalty to yourself to the american people, you're violating your constitutional oath. donald trump's first responsibility is protect the homeland, the elections as part of that. the fact is he won't allow congress, an equal branch too,

be briefed on threats at the homeland. that too, me, is complete violation of his oath and responsibility. that, to me, is frankly an impeachable offense. i agree with elysse. we learned times that he doesn' to have the legitimacy of his election in 2016 questioned. >> what about 2020? this is about 2020. >> and is that why he should be removed from office. but anything to do with la i didn't tell -- >> if you watch facebook and twitter do takedowns over the past few months of different bot nets and foreign actor, it will happen again. so is this a way to make sure that the mergamerican intellige aren't coming out and saying somebody is screwing with us. >> unbelievable. all right. coming up, a confrontation with

john bolton over the testimony that he never gave. give me your hand! i can save you... lots of money with liberty mutual! we customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ what do we wburger...inner? i want a sugar cookie... wait... i want a bucket of chicken... i want... ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win.

an update to a story we've been covering for months. john bolton who offered to testify in the senate impeachment trial if subpoenaed, but then didn't show up or tell his story, was called out for all that on stage last night at vanderbilt university in an event that he did with susan rice. she is a former national security adviser for president

obama. and he said that if she had firsthand knowledge of a gross abuse of presidential power that she would withhold her testimony from the accountability process. bolton's response, my testimony would not have made any difference to the ultimate response. >> i'm not going to give john bolton an ounce ever credit for anything. his behavior is edge bembarrassd profiteering off of trance parns par transparency and truth. he sucked americans in to thinking that he would talk out and then he didn't come forward like he should have. >> but if -- aside from if that vote had gone down differently, and it appeared at the beginning of that final week that with romney and susan collins being

supportive of hearing from witnesses, they were two votes away from wall to wall testimony, do you think the outcome nullifies the offer? >> i don't at all. the point is that he knows more intimately than any of us the threat to the country. he has witnessed is t firsthand and he has an obligation to come forward with that rather than to protect his book advance. that is really bad. >> so what we know is from the "times" reporting. is he right that that is unknowable? >> i'm not sure that it matters. there was always a very small chance of the president being convicted in the senate and a number of civil servants risked their careers and are now being purged. purged. their careers ended for testifying even though they knew the risks and knew it probably

wouldn't make a difference as ambassador bolton said. but they did it anyway because it was the right thing to do. >> all right. we'll sneak in the last break. we'll be right back. let me tell,

i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio and so much more. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more. i'm proud to be a part of aag, too.

my thanks to you for watching. that does it for our hour. mtp daily with chuck todd starts right now. ♪ if it is thursday, it is meet the press daily. i'm chuck todd here in los angeles. out west, democrats are navigating the fallout from last night's debate between what we now know is the most watched democratic debate. and it was certainly a nasty one arguably exposing the divisions. and a newcomer, michael bloomberg, who was hoping to