they shared. what memories does she leave behind for you? >> every time i look at the dogs, i think of her. they were her children. she was quiet, a little bit of an introvert. just a caring individual. i see many, many times someone needs a hand or someone just needs someone to talk to, she was there. >> in some ways she still is, but he knows that for every welcome memory, there's a brutal one of her and what happened churning somewhere like a storm, surprising and devastating when it hits.. i'm ♪♪ this sundays, my interview ♪♪ this sundays, my interview with former vice president mike pence. >> for me the fuse is lit. >> his inside account and how he broke with donald trump. >> all i know is what the president asked me to do, i

would have violated my oath to the constitution. >> what does he think should happen now? do you think a crime was committed? >> i don't know if it is criminal to listen to bad advice from lawyers. >> his thoughts on the miss terms. >> we had some surprising and disappointing results. >> and who he blames. >> i was disappointed in mark meadow' performance. >> plus his criticism of merrick garland. >> i have great concerns about his judgment in the leadership of the justice department. >> and his believe on the supreme court's was the singlemost achievement. >> i celebrate that from really the depths of my heart. >> the former vice president opens up, as he considers his own run for the white house. joining miss is "new york times" peter baker. republican strategist brendan buck, kimberly atkins stohr, and ana -- and if it's sunday, it's

"meet the press." >> announcer: this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning, we have following the breaking news reports of a shooting overnight at a gay nightclub in colorado spring, colorado. at least five are dead, another 18 so far are wounded. police say the suspect was injured, is in custody, currently receives treatment at a local hospital. the fbi is already on the scene and assisting local law enforcement. the club writes lq is devastated by the senseless attacks on our community. we thank the quick reactions of heroic customers who subdued the gunman. stay tuned to nbc news for more updates. turning to politics,

republicans have taken ban control of the house, squeaking into a narrow majority. the biggest question after a disappointing miss term performance, the third in a row for gop, will republicans rally behind donald trump against? 721 days before the next presidential election, donald trump became one of a small group of ex-presidents to announce he will again seen another term even after being defeated. just one of those, grover cleveland, has been successful. at the time of his anoint machine appears to be an effort ahead of several criminal investigations, and on friday, in reaction, attorney general merrick garland appointed a special counsel to take over investigations he was overseeing into the former president's role

in the event leading up to the january 6th attack on the capitol, as well as the former president's decision to retain classified government documents at mar-a-lago. >> based on recent developments, including the former president's announcement and sitting president's intention, i have concluded it's in the public interest to appoint a special counsel. >> the goal is to create some political distance between that investigation and obviously the biden administration. that's the reason for this appointment. jack smith is a longtime federal prosecutor, who's most recently

been working at the international court at the hague. there are a handful of republican hopefuls that are ready to challenge him, including mike pence. his new memoir "so help me god" the same day that firmer president trump announced. i spoke to the former vice president at the reagan presidential library in simi valley, california, and i began by -- >> the former president said it's disloyal for some in the party to challenge him. he's not just talking about you, but governor desantis, mike pompeo. >> i think the american people love competition. my loyalty is to my faith, to my values, and to america. i think if we're a part of that debate next year, our family will sort that out before the

end of the year, chuck, or if you're just chipping in from the sidelines and others are in the contest. i think a good, healthy debate over the direction of the country is warranted. since the first days of the biden/harrison administration, it almost seems as though we have a new administration intent on weakening america at home and abroad. whether it's the disastrous withdrawal from afghanistan, whether it be the gusher of spending that ignited the worst inflation in 40 years, the war on energy that's caused gasoline price to say go through the

roof, a crime wave in our major cities, and of course, after undoing all the successful policies that secured our southern border, we now have the worst crisis at our southern border in american history. i truly believe that rep primary voters want to hear a strong debate, so that having won back the house, which became official last week, we'll have a chance to win back america in 2024. >> you laid out a reason why you think the biden administration has led america down a path you don't like. why do you think voters didn't accept that premise in 2022? they clearly didn't in the battle ground states. >> they did in many states around the country. in new york, four new congressmen elected may by the margin itself. in the stay iowa, the first time in a century, all republican representatives in the house. i take your point. a win is a win. i'm glad to be kevin mccarthy will accept the gavel to be the next speaker of the house, but i would like to see more republicans elected. but for me the common denominator had to do with whether or not candidates were focused on the future. as i traveled around the country -- >> that sounds like it's code for whether or not candidates were in the trump spell. i think you're trying to be polite. it does seem that what you're say anybody close to trump didn't do well.

>> i think it's broader. >> i went to 35 states in the last year and a half, campaigning for automatic kinds of men and women, running for statewide office, for the house, the senate. as i sort through the results, there really is a common denominator, candidates focused on the issues of today, solutions for tomorrow. focused on the future did quite well, but candidates focused on the past, candidates focused on relitigating the 2020 election can be fare as well. we had some surprising and disappointing results. you stopped short of saying ter president trump is unfit to serve again. but it's former defense secretary mark esper says he's unfit.

is he fit to serve as president of the united states for another four year? >> i really do believe that's a decision for the american people. >> don't you think your pin matters to the american people? how about this? the fact that you may run, are you sending that message without saying it? >> i'll keep you posted on whether i'm going to run or not, but i think we'll have better choices. what i won't do is -- i won't join those that want to dismiss the four years of our administration and all that we accomplished for the american people. as i was writing "so help me god" the president's leadership was at the essential in everything we accomplished. the decisions to allow our

forces to crush the isis caliphate, or to take out the man responsible for the death of hundreds of americans service members during the war in iraq, and it was the president's vision to cut taxes, roll back regulation, and his direct engagement on capitol hill with members of congress that saw past tax cuts that sass 7 million jobs created, unemployment at a 50-year low. it was the policy, that energy, securing our border, three supreme court justices are all a great source of price to me. in my book, i try to give the president his due. i was brow to be his vice president and advance those policies that worked for the american people against an avalanche of opposition by the democratic party from day one, and frankly by many in the national media, who were preoccupied with controversies, conspiracies and the russia, russia, russia message that dominated for 2 1/2 years. >> you're making an ends justify

the means. >> well, many people that want to draw broad conclusions about the president or anyone else in the public sphere, want to dismiss the balance of the record. in my book i try to make sure i present it, but also, chuck, i think i'm very clear in saying that the administration did not end well, that i took a strong stand. it had to be -- >> let me ask you this -- >> it had to be in public. every time the president and i differed, as vice president i thought it was important i kept those things in private. >> did donald trump damage the republican party? >> when it came down to the peaceful transfer of power, doing my duty under the constitution of the united states, we had the tragic day of january 6th and its aftermath. all of that, in totality, is the president's record and the record the america people will decide upon. >> look, you want the public to try to split this. are you concerned his behavior

post-election, damaged the republican party and 2022 is sort of the evidence? >> well, i think it does depend on our candidates, and whether or not republican candidates around the country will learn the lessons that we learned through that tragic day. frankly, in many of the elections that took place in the mid termed. i write did it in the book, i will never forget, it was the night before january 6th, the president and i were alone in the office in what was ultimately a tense conversation. i had made my position clear, as vice president, i did not believe i had the authority to return or reject electoral votes when the house convened to count

the electoral votes, but there was great tension in the room. at the outset, i remember the president looking at me and pointed at the window of the crowd gathering, and he said, did you see that crowd out there? i said, i did, mr. president. and he said those people love us. i said, those people love you. he said, well, that's probably true. then i looked at him very seriously, and i said, can those people love the constitution, mr. president? i believe republican voters and rep party's future is ultimately grounded in us producing men and women who will stand up for the ideals in the constitution and the declaration. ideal ronald reagan stood for without apology and our that the carried or movement forward.

>> did the president tell you he doesn't respect the constitution? >> all i know is what the president asked me to do, i would have violated my oath. >> so that's not respecting the constitution? he certainly didn't respect it enough to ask you to be disloyal to the -- >> the president in the united states in that moment was receiving counsel from attorneys who were telling him, as the bible says, what itching ears want to hear. he had beginning in mid november, dismissing some of the capable and extraordinary

attorneys serving in the white house and in the campaign, and replaced them with a gaggle of lawyers who brought in conspiracy theories and made promises that they never kept. i write in the book about how it would be a year or after that tragic day that one of those lawyers, sydney powell, actually said in a court filing, no reasonable person would have assumed what we were saying is factual, now she tells us. the president was receiving terrible advice from people who not only should be in the office, she shouldn't have been let on the white house grounds. >> you raised that point, and praised john kelly for how he managed that oval office. how much of january 6th is on mark meadows. >> the president has to rely on his team. the term gatekeeper sounds offensive to the american mind

f. you think of open access, but when john kelly became white house chiefs of staff, and frankly what all the best white house chiefs of staff have done throughout history is to make sure the only people that get in the oval office have the credibility to be there, and they make sure the president understands what they're coming to talk about, so he can make the decisions only a president can make. general kelly created that order, and sadly when he left, i think mick mulvaney did his best to bring that about, but i was disappointed in mark meadows' performance as chief of staff,

particularly at the end. from the very early on, when he can talked the president out of the coronavirus press briefings, and in a very real sense, i think his tenure as chief of staff did not serve the president well. >> it sounds like it's just not on january 6th. are you saying a lot of the covid misinformation that sometimes dame out of president trump's mouth was due to meadows' lack of gatekeeping? >> we can talk about covid -- >> was he a bad gatekeeper then, too? >> i have also believe in a public health emergency, more is more.

we quickly began press briefings on a daily basis. i think we served the country well, but -- but once we went through the early difficult period with covid and the new chief of staff started his tenure, the pressure began a month or so during the pandemic too move away from the briefings. >> you imply in that book, that that meeting with the lawyers, the campaign lawyers, and rudy giuliani, some of these other lawyers, you concluded that in some ways they helped foment the insurrection on january 6th. that was the moment that they went down the wrong road. is that how you intended it to be read? >> for me the fuse was lit in mid november. >> in that phone call by rudy giuliani? >> no, the oval office was filled with advisers, the president's campaign advisers were there, other senior

members. on the speakerphone were the new lawyers, vying for the opportunity to lead the election challenges. justin clark, who is an extraordinary attorney and man of great integrity, was telling the president about the dozens of lawsuits that had been filed, challenging election results. he was painting a somewhat pessimistic view of the prospects of those, but the campaign had every right to file those lawsuits. that's the process that we have. states conduct elections, and if there are questions, they're to be brought into the courts to review the evidence and the law. they were painting a picture to the president that things were likely not going to be

successful. when rudy giuliani said over the speakerphone that your lawyers are not telling you the truth, mr. president, things got very heated. in that moment, that was a new low. there was shouting, yelling, but in the aftermath of that meeting, the president made the decision to replace his capable campaign lawyers with this widening circle of outside attorneys, who ultimately, ultimately led him to the conclusion that i had the authority to overturn the election, which was demonstrably and historically false. >> do you think the president committed a criminal act in fomenting the insurrection? do you think a crime was committed? >> well, i don't know if it is criminal to listen to bad advice from lawyers. the truth is, what the president was repeating is what he was hearing from that gaggle of attorneys around him. you know, presidents -- like all of us who have served in public life, you have to rely on your team, rely on the credibility of the people around you. so as time goes on, i hope we can move beyond this, beyond that prospect. this is really a time when our country ought to be healing.

frankly the just department's actions have been exposed from during our administration where fbi agents were advancing political agendas, falsifying records, using what came to be found out to be opposition research paid for by the clinton campaign and the democratic party, the so-called dossier. and then this past summer, when we see the justice department execute a search warrant against the personal residence of a former president of the united states, i think the america people join me in hoping we can

move past this contention. >> is he above the law? if he violated the law, should he be held to the same standard as i am? >> no one is above the law, but i would hope the justice department would give careful consideration before they take any additional steps in this matter. whether we come back, mike pen wall streets in on attorney general merrick garland, and his decision to authorize a warrant to search his home. >> i have questions about his leadership in the justice department.

welcome back, central to the special counsel investigation, is the documents found at mar-a-lago. federal prosecutors cited an obstruction of justice statute, because he evaded a subpoena for months. justice was trying to do this without the fbi, and without a section of -- on friday, trump's

former attorney general bill barr said he believed the justice department probably already has the evidence they need to indict donald trump. the former vice president struck a different tone. >> i'm not hesitating to criticize the president when i think he's wrong, and clearly possessing classified documents in an unprotected area is not proper. i was on the judiciary committee for ten year in the house of representatives. i know how the justice department works.

this had to be many other way to say resolve those issues. >> think tried for a year. >> they didn't try everything. i have to tell you, going to the last resort of executing a search warrant against a former president of the united states sent a divisive message, that i think we're still -- it was the wrong message to the wider world. isn't the idea that nobody is above the law, our democracy is so strong, that they it can than that former presidents don't get a pass. >> you follow foreign affairs, and it's much more commonplace

in the third world that when one leader comes in, they prosecutor and jail the previous leader. america should never be associated with that image at all. >> you must not -- how many times he wanted to weaponize the i.r.s., or you've seen these report -- perhaps he didn't say it in front of you, but do you think the former president respects these institutions? i'd let him answer that, but i never had reason to believe he didn't respect men and women who serve in law enforcement at every level. everywhere we go around the country to this day, i have people in law enforcement thanking me for the support we gave them, at a dime the democratic party was giving voice to the defund the police

movement, and assuming the worst every time a tragic incident happened in a police shooting. they saw in our administration a reflexive willingness to support law enforcement, seek the facts, make sure that justice was served. in all the time that i've served in the trump/pence administration, it was clear that we stood with the men and women on the thin blue line. >> okay. but you did just hit the fbi pretty hard yourself, with some accusations you made about politicization. how do you square the two? >> i think the men and women who serve in the fbi, rank and file, are some of the best people in the united states. i put the blame for the decision to execute a search warrant at the personal residence on the leadership of the justice department. it's inconceivable to me it wasn't a decision that wasn't made at the highest level. >> the attorney general said so. he owned it. >> that's right. i think he should have thought better of it, chuck. there were preliminary steps.

i want to be very clear -- if they had additional evidence that there were additional documents, they could have gone to court -- >> they did. everything you're describing they did before. >> trust me, they didn't do everything they could have done and avoided this incredibly divisive step that sent the wrong message to the world. i want to see the justice department -- and i think -- i want to see the credibility of the justice department restored after years of politicization during the trump/pence administration. what went on during the time of jim comey's tenure, the early days of our administration, the conduct of the fbi with regard to the russia collusion, the hoax, on and on it went. as someone who cherishes the men and women who serve in the

justice department, especially the fbi, i think it's time for them to be focusing on restoring. >> you don't have confidence in merrick garland? >> i have agreed difficulty with the decision he made. i have great concerns about his judgment and leadership at the justice department. up next, more of my conversation with mike pence, and what he didn't like about the biden administration's dough individual response. >> president biden came in and essentially empowered dr. fauci. i think the american people recoiled at that approach.

welcome back. i asked pence whether, given hi own role as leader, that dr. fauci has been so vilified on the right? >> i think in the early days of the coronavirus task force, dr. fauci was a great source of comfort to millions of americans. he had an easygoing bedside

marine that he communicated at the podium. as i said, we always had a good rapport. dr. fauci, during mime time i. stayed in his lane. i'm the scientist at the table. i'm going to tell you -- he would almost invariably say, i know the president and you have a lot more to consider than that. you have to think of the broader impact on the american member and on the country as a whole. so for me, in those early days, he made an enormous difference of the development of a very balanced policy, lighting the entrepreneurial spirit of companies to development the supplies, the masks, ultimately

the medicine and vaccine in record time, but i must tell you that, when the biden administration came in, essentially turned over the management of covid to dr. fauci, i was not surprised to see them put all of their emphasis on vaccines, and then after promising they wouldn't mandate vaccines, then seeking to mandate vaccines, and it's still a mandate on healthcare workers and military personnel today. that was the doctor approach. i think when president biden came in and essentially empowered dr. fauci, i think the american people -- i think they recoiled at that approach, and sadly the biden administration lost more americans in their first year than we did in our first year, a year where we had none of the tools, few supplies, no testing, ultimately no medicines until the end. >> this vaccine -- you were -- you made sure people saw you get the vaccine. >> right. >> the reason we had they deaths was people who wouldn't get vaccinated. that was a stew that was boiling around in some of these, you

know, internet conservative circles. >> i -- for give me for saying it's the cliche in the national debate. >> it's not a cliche. >> with great respect, chuck -- >> i understand -- the data is the data. >> the biden administration focused exclusively on vaccines, our administration focussed on empowering them with supplies, counter-measures for nursing homes, made sure we had therapeutics -- there could have been an operation warp speed on therapeutics. the biden administration ran short of testing by the spring of their first year, but there was no effort to develop lifesaving therapy continues. >> you don't accept the idea that both administration maybe struggled with testing? >> no, no, we didn't have covid testing when i was tapped to

lead the task force t with the entrepreneurial -- we reinvented testing from a standing start. by june, because of american innovation, because of american companies that we turned to and empowered to develop those technologies, we literally were testing tens of millions a month. >> still, the vilification of dr. fauci, was it -- you explained why it happened. should it have happened? is it fair? is it fair what president trump has said about him and what some critics have said? >> well, this is a freedom-loving nation, and early on we asked the american people to make sacrifices in the 15 days to slow the spread so that what was happening in new york and new jersey, detroit, seattle, wasn't happening everywhere, that we wouldn't run

out supplies in america. the american people shouldered that burden, but shutdowns were always just a temporary effort to essentially take a knee while we spun up the supplies and the resources to make sure no american would be demy of the health care you would want any member of your family and mine to have. the problem was, i believe that dr. fauci ultimately aligned himself with many democrat governors who took who were temporary policies, and made them long-term policies in their state, and the american people love freedom. >> the democratic governor, in their minds, they were just trying to save lives. do you accept that? >> um, look, i never judge people's intentions, but i do

judge their policies. the truth is we created a framework in those early days to ask for a pause in our economy so that we could make sure that our healthcare workers would not be lacking in the supplies and resources emphasize mask and gowns they would need to meet this moment, the worst pandemic in 100 years, but i must say, one of the things i'm proudest of, our administration, as quickly as possible, by mid

april, laid out a framework to open up america again. would you like to see a ban on abortion. >> it was a joy to actually reflect on the fact that, after 49 years, three supreme court justices appointed in our administration, we gave -- the dobbs decision returned the question of abortion to the states and to the american people. i celebrate that from really the depths of my heart. you know, i -- when -- when i was a young man, the most important decision i made was when i put my faith? jesus christ. i opened up the bible and before i formed you in the womb, i knew you. i said before you life and death, i choose life so that you and your children may live. >> i knew in a moment that the cause of life had to be my

cause. i must tell you, chuck, to enable champion life, to have been part of an administration that gave the american people a new beginning for life is something i'll cherish in my life. >> is that the most important achievement? >> i truly believe the opportunity to restore the sang at this time of life is the center of american law may be the most consequential legacy, if not the most. but i would also say, in regard to your question, when senator graham introduced legislation to establish a 15-week ban s. i thought it was useful. if i was still a member every congress, it was uses, and i would have voted for it. the democratic party is the extreme position. it supports abortion on demand up to the moment of birth and

taxpayer funding of abortion. i recognize this issue is likely going to be resolved one state at a time. some states have already acted. i've said to people, when the dobbs decision was overturned, we haven't come to the end. we have country to have end of the beginning. chuck, it may take as many years do roe restore the sang at this time of life, but as long as i have breath -- >> you're a limited government guy. i know this. are you comfortable with the idea of essentially government-mandated pregnancy? somebody doesn't want this child, doesn't want this pregnancy to go through, you're not advocating a law that

essential the government is ordering you to go through it. are you comfortable with a government mandate like that? the folks in kansas were not. >> our founding documents saw we're endowed with certain inalienable rights. the first one mentions life. i think government exists to protect life, particularly defenseless life. i intend to be a part of this, but i think we have an opportunity, chuck, to approached this in a new way. when the supreme court took this issue away from the american people 49 years ago there were strong dividing lines that have endured for two generations, but

now we have a political debate. we have the opportunity not just to craft thoughtful protections for the unborn, but also to extend protections and support for women in crisis pregnancy and for newborns. i'd like to see us redouble our efforts to demonstrate the compassion of the american people to live out the idea there is no unwanted child, and in the freest and most prosperous nation in the world, we can make that he a reality. >> do you think unborn children have constitutional rights? they don't in our law right now, but do you believe they should? >> i believe in the right to life. >> do you believe an unborn fetus has a constitutional right? >> we are protect from being denied life or liberty without the due process of law.

i believe those should extend to the born and the unborn. this is a long-term cause. it's as much moral persuasion in america, as political debate. >> should it be moral persuasion, though, and not a government mandate? >> i do believe now that it's returned to the political process, chuck, that we have an incredible opportunity to demonstrate the real heart and compassion testify the american people in this cause, to per suede our neighbors and friends to the day that it's in -- unthinkable, and -- >> there's a lot of women uncomfortable with the idea that a politician will make this decision for them. >> i understand that. i do. i really do believe that restoring the sanctity of life to the center of law, in every state in this country is at the very heart of achieving a boundless future for the american people. still ahead, our panelists here with their thoughts on my interview with mike pence and the new special counts investigation into donald trump. plus our "meet the press" minute looks back on how ronald reagan answers the question, how would is too old to serve as president?

welcome back. president biden is celebrating an important event of his own. it's his 80th birthday, now the oldest serving president in history, previously held by ronald reagan. we look back to 1974, when then governor reagan was in his early 60s, and asked if his age would be a factor in a presidential run. >> you will be 63 on february 6th, and would be 65 during a campaign period. does the age seem to realistically be a factor? >> well, i think that's got to be a determination the people are going to make. certainly, jim, by the time in 1976, if it should be my

decision that i am going to be involved in that race, and i think it's certainly too early to make that decision by a long way, the people will know my age, and they'll make that determination. we have had presidents that have pretty much spanned adulthood as their age. to decision into the "meet the press" archives, scan the code on your tv right now. that is home to 75 of the biggest moments in "meet the press" history. when we come back -- . my a1c was still stuck. there is a better way to manage diabetes.

the dexcom g6 continuous glucose monitoring system eliminates painful fingersticks, helps lower a1c, and it's covered by medicare. before dexcom g6, i couldn't enjoy a single meal. i was always trying to out-guess my glucose and it was awful. (female announcer) dexcom g6 is a small wearable that sends your glucose numbers to your phone or dexcom receiver without painful fingersticks. the arrow shows the direction your glucose is heading: up, down, or steady, so you can make better decisions about food, insulin, and activity in the moment. it can even alert you before you go too low or when you're high. oh, the fun is absolutely back. after dexcom g6, i can, on the spot, figure out what i'm gonna eat and how it's gonna affect my glucose. when a friend calls and says, "hey, let's go to breakfast," i can get excited again. after using dexcom g6, my diabetes doesn't slow me down at all. i lead line dancing three times a week, i exercise, and i'm just living a great life now. i have eight grandchildren.

now i'm able to keep up with them again. we're not afraid anymore. it's so easy to use. dexcom g6 has given me confidence and control that everything i need is right there on my phone. if you have diabetes, then getting on the dexcom g6 is the single most important thing you can do. once a patient gets on dexcom g6, it's like the lights come on. (david) within months, my a1c went down to 6.9. (earl) my a1c has never been lower. (donna) at my last checkup, my a1c was 5.9. (female announcer) dexcom g6 is the #1 recommended cgm system, and it's backed by 24/7 tech support. call now to get started. you'll talk to a real person. don't wait, this one short call could change your life. (bright music)

we are back. the panel is here. peter, you wrote about the special counsel and almost the darned if you do/darned if you don't position that merrick garland was in. if you start with mike pence and

my interview, there's this -- there's a lot of republicans that want to let trump sort of dangle out there, but they're also not ready to jump on pushing him off, either. >> you're right, garland -- garland had no choice, probably under the rules established, but the idea of special counsel is to make it seem like politics is not involved. of course trump was never going to let that be a nonpartisan figure. he immediately attacked -- the latest in a long string, and we're right back where we started. >> you know, anna, i good he if garland could have done it differently, it would have been a special counsel from the beginning.

>> right. was the delay -- it wasn't just trump. we've seen a lot of republicans in the senate and house saying it's time to impeach merrick garland, and now an investigation into hunter biden. >> they're going to do everything they can to undermine this process. i will tell you, today -- newly in the majority, newly committee hearing -- >> is that a good focus? >> absolutely not. >> but when i was on the hill, working for speaker ryan, we spent a lot of time trying to get our members to not meddle in the mueller investigation. >> i know that the doj, merrick garland wants to stay unpolitical. one of the things he should have thought about, he didn't need one at all. the regulations don't mandate. he could have continued the investigation and it should have gone faster. >> do you feel like he's a

character from the pre-trump era, and that's what garland -- whatever you think -- isn't the way we're supposed to do it? >> but there is one thing that might be indicated here, merrick garland has made a threshold decision that it is okay to charge a president or presidential candidates if the elements of the law have met. that's a pretty big step if that's what going through his mind. >> other big event was this republican event. it was interesting. donald trump he ended up satellite-ing it in, because i think he realized that ron desantis was stealing the show, no matter what. but he gave a rambling answer about the mid terms. meanwhile, mike pence is saying it's the greatest achievement of the administration. >> you have donald trump who was pro-choice. mike pence, ever since i've

covered politics, this is very core to who he is, but that's one of the few distinguishing factors, when you look at the two of them. mike pence twisted himself into a pretzel where he didn't want to say that the former president was wrong, that what happened on january 6th was wrong. >> brendan, he wants to run on the trump at manufacturing more than trump did. >> he seems to be leading up to a campaign that would make sense if donald trump wasn't still around. he as a natural next in line, but he refuses to fake on donald trump. >> trump will take pence on. >> exactly. you have a situation where republicans are just hoping he goes away. donald trump is going to attacks mine pence and ron desantis. >> but is there a bit of trump fatigue? i feel like i'm sensing it. >> the mid terms were evidence

of that, but it's not fatigue -- >> because they're afraid of trump. >> it's an opportunity to say thinks waning, and we're going to take a different path, and mike pen excused everyone except to stop certification. >> mike pence is very different from where we're seeing that was, you know, a three-time loser. >> just don't want to go there. >> not at all. it's pretty stunning. >> well, he 'self-aware in that. i have to go. enjoy your thanksgiving weekend. you guys are terrific. there's an unedited version of my interview, including approximately 30 minutes we couldn't air here. thanks for watching. enjoy the thanksgiving holiday. we're back next week. we don't bring leftovers, but

real "meet the press," because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." 't bring leftovers, but real "meet the press," because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." our hearts go out to the victims and their families who are bearing the weight of this horrific tragedy. >> we know one or more patrons