this sunday, when will this end? the government shutdown now in its 23rd day. negotiations going nowhere. >> ourting did not last otng. >> and he just up and said, then we have nothing to discuss and he st walkedout. >> president trump says he can declare a national emergency. >> i haven't i donet yet. i may if this doesn't work out, probably i will do it. >> the insists he doesn't want to. >> i'd rather not do it because this is somethinthat congress should easily do. >> with neither side giving in t and congress even in town, is there any way out of this mess? joining me this morning, republican senator ted cruz of texas and democratic senator tim kaine of virginia. plus, the bombshell russia

story. "the new york times" reports the fbi opened an investigation into whetherhe sitting president was secretly working for russia against the united states. , mr. heart of the pro trump's firing of fbi director james comey and evidence that he linked it to the russia in stigation. >>said, you know, this russia thing with trump and russia is a made-up story, it'scu an . >> the president responds by harshly criticizin comey and other fbi leaders.e we'll hav "new york times" reporter michael schmidt and ben wittes on what this could mean for the mueller investigation going forward. and joining me for insight and analsds are democratic pollster cornell belcher, peggy noonan, republican strategist al cardenas and nbc news national political reporter carol lee. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press." >> announcer: from nbc news in washington, the longest running show in television history, this is "meet t todd.s" with chuck

good sunday morning. we have two stories that are driving this day. the first, that explosive story posted by "the new york times" on friday night that in7 2 the fbi opened an investigation into whether president trump was a working as russian asset as against ng president interests of the united states. the investigation was opened after mr. trump fired fbi director james comey because he mentioned the russia investigation in his dismissal letter to comey and because the president told my colleague lester holt, that he fired comey in part because of the russia investigation. now, it's important to note that "t times" says no evidence has emerged publicly that mr. trump was in fact workin for the russians when he fired mr. comey. thishe second big story is government shutdown now in it's 23rd day and now officially the longest ever. nowhat we're seeing is so much the consequences of divided nt governwhich voters say they like because each party acts as a brake on the other. what we're seeing are the consequences of aed polar

government with two parties that often don't talk to each other, sometimes n't talk to each other, and right now may not want to talk to each other. caughtmen the middle, s 800,000 federal employees who are out of work and no currently getting paid. thatua has ay led some in washington to hope president trump follows through on his constitutionally questionable threat and declare a national emergency. if he does, this would national emergency designed to solve his own political emergency. >> shutting down the government is not oroverning. >> president trump, the focus on a wall and the symbol it represents to his supporters may be the political crisis he needs to deflect focus from his own legalje pardy. >> they can name it whatever -- they can name it peaches. i don't care what they name it. but we need money for that barrier. >> but ultimaty the shutdown leaves the presidentin boxed and weakens him for the fights ahead. mr. trump respded to "the

times" story about the fbi's ri counelligence investigation tweeting that it was opened for no reason and with no proof and attacking james mey as total sleaze. >> are you now or have you ever worked for ssia, mr. president? >> i think it's the most insulting thing i'ver e been asked. i think it's the most insulting article i've ever had written. and if you read the article, you'd see that they found absolutelynothing. >> the president's mounting legal problems areahedrop to the shutdown stalemate. mr. trump and democrats are both dug in with no end in sight. >> i t don't wanto give an easy way out of something as simple as this. > i'm a mother of five, grandmother of nine. i know a temper tantrum when i >> after floating the idea of a, quote, national emergency -- >> we don't make a deal, i would say it woulinbe very surpris to me that i would not declare a national emergency. >> on friday the president said he is not olympiplanning to dec

one after all. r i have the absoluteht to do it, but i'm not going to do it so fast. >> we need to have an end game. if the end game is an emergenar deion by the president, do it. do it now. >> but most republicans pand the idea. >> tomorrow the national security emergency might be climate chaoe, s let's seize fossil fuel plants or something. >> democrats also see no incentive to negotiate. >> let's put all of this in context, right? the president at this point is american people hostage over his vanity project. >> most republicans are standing with the president f now. >> it is laughable to think that you can seal a ,900-mile border without some sort of barrier. >> but the sshutdown already causing pain. >> we want towork. we're not pawns. we're not bargaining chips. we're people. >> including for mr.'s truwn voters. >> i'm starting to get scared. i've been a trump supporter. i think he's done a lot of wonderful things, but this is not one of >>them.

ne white house advisor appeared to compare the shutdown for furloughed workersto a vacation. >> we have a shutdown and so they can't go to work and so then they have the vacation, but they don't have to use their vacation days. and then they come back a then they get their back pay, then in some sense they're better off. >> and joining me now from houston is republican senator ted cruz of texas. senator cruz, welcome back to "meet the press," sir. go>> chuck, always to be with you. >> let me start with the fact u'at you're in houston and not here. not the only one. i have senator kaine on and coming to me from richmond and not here. why isn't the united states senate here, sir? >> well, it's very simple. i'm here over the sweekend, most senators go home to the state and come home during the weekend. i came back to texas on thursday to travel with the president to go down to the border. and so working down here, eting with stakeholders on the border, meeting with border atrol agents, meeting with i.c.e. officials, meeting with families who have had family urmbersred by criminal

down l aliens, and so i'm here doing my job. i'll be back in washington on monday. i hope on mond s what we'll is finally washington coming together and opening up the government. what that's going to take is for the dmoocrats to off the position that they have been taking so far of no compromise, no movement. their extreme position,o hey have got will to give in on. >> does the president need to move? he hasn't moved at all publicly. it's not clear what the offers are other than concrete to steel. >> chuck, that's actually not accurate. the president has said over and over again, i've been in the room when he's said it, that he's more thilling to compromise, he's more than willing to meet in the middle. the reason we have shutdown is -- let's go back to december. in december the then republican house passed funding for the entire federal government. it included $5.7 billion for an additional 4 miles steel barrier. when it got to the senate, chuck

schumer and the democrats filibustered that bill. every democrat said no, we will not allow the government to be funded so long as they're building even a single mile of ba wier. that's whave a shutdown. that's not a reasonable position. the president's position h has bes perfectly happy to negotiate, to compromise. he said manyimes it doesn't have to be $5.7 billion, he could find some other number, but the demo have said no. the only thing they're willing to consider is zero, zero, zero. that is not reasonab that's why we have a shutdown. >> senator, you yourself i think in 2017 -- you were lamenting the fact that y here had all republican control of the house, the senate and the white house, and things weren'ting very quickly. he didn't make his case for a wall he didn't -- he didn't plow the field over those two ye s to try to make this work, and he tried to jam it in at the last minute. isn't this on the president for his lack of being able to get congressional republicets to

come tr much earlier? >> you know, i don't think that's true at ll. don't think it's the president's fault that chuck schumer and nancy pelosi and thr des are being political. if you look at the two years we had republican contro of both houses, we saw incredible forward progress. we saw an historicax cut. we're seeing booming economic results. we've got the lowest african-american unemploymentr that has e been recorded, the lowest hispanic unemployment that's ever beenrd re -- >> but my question is about the immigration issue. >> all right, let's take it -- >> he didn't do anything to try to actually get republicans united on this an he jammed it through at the last minute. >> well, but that's not actually right. you remember the fairly remarkable oval office meeting between chuck schumer and nancy pelosi and the president,na and y pelosi said then, she said, mr. president, you can't pass this in the housh. basically said i dare you, you don't have the votes. he said yes, i do. she said no, i don't, i dare you. so he turned around, took it to the house which was ican and they passed it. and, chuck, here's the

ridiculoushing about the position of senate democrats. this is not eybstantive. oted for it before. chuck schumer and every single democrat in the senate in 2013 voted for 350 miles additional border fencing and border security. they have now shut the government down on 234 miles. of so i think an awful lot people are asking, well, if you voted for 350 miles, why would you force a shutdown on 234. that is not reasoheble, and president remains willing to come together and compromise but so far the democrats don't want to do tha >> why not open up the government and just -- and move the homeland security debate to the side and debate that whiley you government workers? >> well, the house passed bill opening the government, funding all of the government nd securing the border. the democrats' position can't be we've got to force a shutdown.

we're going to hold -- what the democrats are saying we're going to hold federal workers hostage. you've got my friend tim kaine coming on in a minute, he represene virginia. the a lot of federal workers in the commonwealth of virginia. if tim kaine and mar wrner were to say we're going to put the jobs of the men and women of virgia ahead of our partisan interests, ahead of the fact that our b hates donald trump, tim kaine and mark warner, it would take only five more democrats in the senate to ha the votes to say this second schumer shutdown is over. we'rinreop the government and we're going to implement security se border that the american people want. >> and i think they would say the same thing about you and your fellow republican is and t political tse. i wa move to another topic. >> i want to say something on that point, chuck. there is a difference between one side, the democrats, who are saying we will not move, we will not compromise, we will not ne tiate, and the other side, the president who is saying i'm happy to negotiate and he's

proposing, the democrats have already votefo they're playing politics because they hate trump and that's not a good enough reason for chuck schumer and the democrats to shut down the government. "the new york times" reported on friday night that the fbi afterhe comey firing because of what the president said, both in a letter to mr. comey and to my colleague lester holt, they opened up a unterintelligence investigation concerned that a sitting president was working on half of a foreign agent. ow much of a concern is this to you? well, i don't know the details of the specifics there. i know what was repord publicly in the media. and i sit on the senator judiciary committee, so we will consider any algations that come forward. but i'll tell you, chuck, something that is really interesting. you d i work inwashington, but i also come back to texas just about every week. i'm backoutside the beltway. there is an incredible dividein between waon and the rest of the country when it comes to bob mueller and the russia

investigation. the mainstream media, washingtoe is obsd with it. and when you get outside the beltway, i don't find anybodywi concerne this at all. they're concerned with jobs, lower taxes, higher wages, more opportunity. they're concerned with securing the border.ti so the qus i get are not about the latest obsession and allegations about russia,ia ru russia. they're about, hey, when are we actually goingo secure the border? when are we going to keep making this country safer? that's going to stay my focus. i'll consider whatever evidence is produced but i'm not going to base it on unsubstantiated media reports. >> how about on the forei relations committee, "the washington post" is reporting that the president is not sharing what he discusses with vladimir putin behind closed doors. do you think you guys in the senate ought to, for instance, subpoena translator so that you have a real readout of what the president and vladimir putie are saying th other?

>> i think it's premature for that. i've seen the allegations. i want to find out a little bit more about what happened there. i want to learnan more just the allegations in the press. listen, i will say if you compare objectively president trump's policies to russia compared to president obama's policies to russia, by any measure pr mident obama wash easier, was much more gentle on russia. you and i both recall obama leaning ov on a hot mike and saying just before the 2012 election, tell vladimir i'll have a lot more flexibility n.ter the elect now, there they weren't keeping a es, it just happened to be network had a camera going. if you compare substance -- for exame, trump went to nato and urged the europeans don't let the russians build a pipeline through europe. you want to talk about whatac ally makes a difference, standing up to russia, that on policy was far, far more important than much of the weakness and appeasement we saw under obama. >> finally before i let you go,

i want to get you to comment on your colleague tim scott's op-ed in "the washington post" about steve king, iowa congressman, who was your national co-chair for president. some in our party wonder why republicans are constantly accused of racism. well, it is because of our silence when things like this are said. king's comments arenot conservative views but separate views that should be ridiculed at every tn possible. he questioned why we findse phlike white nationalism to be offensive. where are you on this, sir? >> well, sisten, tim a good man and a good friend. he and i have worked together on many, manyissues. what steve king said was stupid. it was stupid, it was hurtful, it was wrong, and he needs to stop it. i think all of us ought to be united, regardless of party, in saying white supremicism is h e hatred, it is bigotry, it is urge and i'm going to everyone to provide that clarity.

>> are you going to support him in the future? >> you , what i'm going to do is urge everyone to stand for principles that matter. this same weekend in texas, there was a movement from some tactivists that asked remove a local official in ft. worth who was a muslim. spoke out actively because it was my home state, i spoke out actively against that. i said, listen, we believe in religious efreedom, we beli in free speech, we believe in diversity. ultimately the voters in tty tarrant coop did the right thing. they didn't remove that official, so i'm going to st ak d engage. heen it comes to speaking out against bigotry,er it is the klan or nazis or anything else, i have a lifetime of standing up to that bigotry and i'll continueit. senator cruz, appreciate you coming on and sharing your views this morning. thank you, sir. nk you, chuck joining me now from the other side of the aisle and from richmond is democratic senator tim kaine of virginia. welcome ck to "meet the ess." >> thanks, chuck. >> why are you guys not whhere?

aren't you in washington this weekend trying to force a way to open up this government? >> well, chuck, we are trying to work a deal overhe weekendo open the government, but i'll tell you why we're not here. i objected to adjourning in the senate on thursday because i have been talkinto all these victims of the trump shutdown. it was president trump who said he would be proud to shut down the governmt, that would be on him. he's done that. people are hurting, worrying about missing mortgage payments, having to rescheduledical appointments. so i objected to the adjournment on thursday, which is very, very rare. then i ended up working a doeal with the majority leader that we would be in on friday, the daye whene missed their paychecks and the shutdown became tied for the longest ever and thereblicans agreed to fast track and pass my guarantee of back pay. i was a co-sponsor a bill to guarantee back pay for every federal worker. we got it passed unanimously in

the senate. president trump has agreed to sign the house passed it friday morning. so i think we should be in, but i was able to get the senate and the house to act to protect our federal employees. i've been on the phone all days day and i'll be on the phone today with republican colleagues trying to find that path so we can reopen government. >> is it time to give the president something here? let me put up a quote here from the virginia delegation, abigail spanberger, who just won from a district that president trump carrie she said thi if i am getting comments and contact from my constituents expressing concern that the demoats are not prioritizing skourt, then i think we can do better. she' obviously concerned that it looks like the democrats aren't for anyorder security. do democrats have to meet the president somewhere north of where they are now? >> chuck, the willingness of democrats to invest billions of dollars in border security is not in doubt.

in 2013 we did a bill in the senate that ted cruz voted against that wasg go to invest $40 billion plus over ten years. cruz voted against it, house rips killedit, democrats support border security. in february of this year, we took a deal to the president, $25 billion in border ,securi 46 out of 49 dems voted for it. senator cruz voted against it. president trump killed the deal. at the end of december, we reached a deal with thepu icans, ampl eboaeample border security funding. in the committee and on the floor we submitted it three eks ago. president trump put out a tweet that he didn't like it and republicans have fled for the hills. democrats invest over and over and over again in border security. just this week edrepublicans, by lindsey graham, tried to negotiate a deal of border

security and president trump blew up the negotiations. this is a guy whoayas for a shutdown. and get this, chuck, who he is ? injuri we've got 13,000 fbi agents, more than 10,000 bureau of prison prison guards, air traffic controllers, coalk guard who interdict drugs, all of them working without p cause of this president's shutdown and yet he says he cares about national security wh he's taking paychecks away from hard-working public safe professionals? it makes no sense. all that has to happen is the republicans have to beng to vote the way they did just three weeks ago, open up e' government and dialogue about border security. >> it does sounding lik like, t you're willing to support some fencing, barriers, if they call it something se, if itreopens the government. >> we first should reopen government. why punise people who applying for food stamps because the president is having a temper tantrum.

open government first. but democrats have always been willing to investment in border security. chuck, all we want to do is make sure that it's spent the right way. drugs come in through pos of entry. let's beef up ports of entry. the biggest groupf undocumented people in the country come in on legal visas and overstay. if you build a million foot wall, it won't deal with that problem. what we don't want to do is waste taxpayer money on a vanity project that's ineffective that the president said mexico would pay for. but spending massive amounts o border security to keep us safe, dems do it ovr and ovegain and it's been republicans that have been blocking it. >> senator, on the campaign trail in 2016 you spent the last two months regularly que tioning president, at that time candidate donald trump's ties to vladimir putin, complimentary ways he talked about things. so you have those questions that you had as a candidate. now you have this story in "the new york times" that as the f worried that the president acted

on comey at the behest of the russian government. what does that tell you where thgs arenow? does that mean that democrats should be looking at actually beginning impeachment proceedings? or is this something you think let the mueller probe go first? how much more do you know? >> yeah, chuck,to we've got protect the mueller investigation. you're right, i was very worried about this in 2016 because the president took a public stage in july and encouraged russia to cyber hack the election at the same time as my son and his entirewe battalion deployed helping allies on the border of russia protect themselves against russian aggression. i found that highly unusual for any american, muchomlessody who wanted to be president. but now what we have is near 100 documented instances of ties between the trump campaign transition and administration with russiar b failure to

be honest about meetings and now this indication that president trump has gone to unusual lengths to hide the content of discussions with vladimir putin. but the right answer yis, asu suggest, it is to protect the ueller investigation at all costs.le t it get to its end. make sure reat the results made public so then we can cocide. >> are you at alerned that the fbi looked like it overreacted in trying to esinvestigate a sitting pent this way? this is a pretty alarming investigation, that the sitting president was acting against the intests of the united states of america. >> well, i flip the question around, chuck. i think it's less did the fbi overreact. i think the question is is, they had to have a very deep level of concern about this prident to take this step. and that's, again, why we need mueller ct the investigation. and i think that's going to be a critical issue in the judiciary committee hearings about the attorney general nominee. will you guarantee to protect this investigation and will you ke sure that tamerican

public and congress get the results of it. >> senator tim kaine, democrat from virginia, i have to let you go there. sharingor coming on and your views. appreciate it. >> absolutely. when we come back, we're storyto have more on that about russia, the fbi and president trump. i'm going to talk to michael schmidt, one of "the new york rs times" reporte who broke the story and ben witte ♪ ignition sequence starts. 10... 9... guidance is internal. 6... 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... ♪

for people 50 and older at average risk. i'm here for an important reason. colon cancer screening.

there's a bunch of places where screening wouldn't be easy. like here. or here. nope! but here's a place you can screen for colon cancer anytime. with cologuard. in private. without any special prep. there really is no place... like home. cologuard is not right for everyone, so ask your doctor if it's right for you. welcome back. wee going to d a little deeper into "the new york times" story about president trump and russia. frankly, we think it deserves ai exr so with me are michael schmidt, one of the reporters who broke the story about the counterintelligence investigation about whether mr. president as sitting president was work as an agent for russiao we have ben wittes, editor in chief of the national security law fare and worked with mr. schmidt on th story. welcome to both of you. michael, walk us throughthe ece here.

the designation is a counterintelligence invealigation. we'vys thought of the comey firing and the mueller aspect as simplon obstruc of justice, as sort of separate. but we're calling itkourch counterintelligence and it's a bit confusing. why? >> it was a two-pronged investigation. it h c aminal aspect, did the president break the law in trying to obstruct t investigation, interfere with it, and this other russia question.'s and important, as you said, because our collective understanding was much narrower. it was just on obstruction, did the president break the law there. and now we know that it was far broader, it had national security concerns. the fbi was afraid that the firing of comey was a way to help the russians stop the fbi from figuring out what they did in the election. >> are they- is this still a investigation into whether mr. trump himself is acting as a russian agent? is that what the mueller probe inherited? >> we know the mueller probeit

inherite we know the mueller probe has spent an enormous amount of tim tryinggure out what the president has done in office in regards to theinvestigation. his interference with it, they have talked to all these white officials. do we know if there is still this belief and aspect that the president is working for the russians? i can't answer that. >> all right, ben, this was all -- the nut of this scoop was based on testimony by now a former fbi general counsel, james baker, and this is what he told congress. this was in "the new york times" story about why they vieed it as counterintelligence. he said not only would it we an issue of obstructing the investigation, but the obstruction itself would hurt our ability to figure out what the russians had done, and that is what would be the threat too na security. it led you to write that the collusion question and the obstruction question are now the same thing. collusion is obstruction and vice vers explain. >> well, so as mike just

described, we had sort of thought of the struction investigation as this kind of separate criminal investigion that aro at the time of the firing. in other words, that you had this underlying election interference investigation going on, the so-calledollusion investigation. then the president comes along and knee-caps the investigation by firing the fbi director. a few weeks later we learn that bob mueller is investigating whether that's obstruction of justice, i.e. a crime. the significance of mike's and adam goldman's story is that it forces you to reimagine how the fbi understood what it was t said which as mike j and as the quote that you read from jim baker reflects, was we had this investigation f national security reasons of russianacivity. then somebody on the u.s. side,

i.e., the pres of the united states, took some action that kind of looks like they're trying to shut down the investigation. that raises national security concerns about whether we wl able to find out what the russians were doing, whether we will be able to t stop what russians were doing. so the bureau understood, appears to have understood what happened in terms of whether the president was workg with the russians. that's a very different thing, and it clapses the obstruction inquiry into that larger collusion inqui >> michael, it made me think of another scoop th yours a m ago, six weeks ago, where you had rod rosetein apparently saying should i wear aabire, talkint the 25th amendment. the question is was he serious, was that rcasm. when you open a counterintelligence investigation on the president of the united ates and fbi is going to get sign-off from the justice department, one would assume it came from rod

rosenstein since he overseeing it. is that where this may have come from when was trying to figure out if he should wear a wire? were they trying to figure out s how do you igate the president of the united states? >> they were struggling with that. these two stories i take usside and let us see what the fbi and the justice department were loing at in this critical period of time, a little more than a week in may of 2017. comey has just been fired. the fbi thinks there could be this huge threat coming from them. rosenstein had just provided trump with a rationale for firing comey that wasn't trump's rationale. so the fbi is looking at rosenstein, who's overseeing the investigation concept katisklly >> so they were not trusting him at that time? >> he had just provided not what the president's ration e was for thfiring, and he's supposed to be overseeing the investigation. so they're sitting there.th know there's this larger investigation into russia. they know tere are these questions about the election.

and they are struggling to t figure out w to do. and it is in that context that they open investigation. >> all right. legally, the obstruction question has always been y can't indict a sitting president. maybe they can't even interview him about his actions as a sitting president, but if it's part of counterintelligence, does that give mueller a shot of subpoenaing the president and having it upheld? >> i don't think it affts the likelihood that a subpoena would be -- would have legs one way or the other. i do think that it will profoundly -- it should profoundly condition our expectations of what mueller's toport is going look like. >> meaning? much more damning? >> well, much more of a continuous story, as in the russians did this stuff to influence the election and here are all the things that we investigated on the u.s. side that may have been done in support of that. people lying, people doing x,

and z, president trying to shut down our investigation. i think its provi a through narrative potentially to the report that is tentially quite profound. >> michael schmidt, ben wittes, appreciate you trying to help us out here. i think basically now t thatmp is the hub and everything else is the spoke. russia is the hub i and trump the spoke. >> and it was russia, full stop. does president trump hope the government to most, he's phil mickelson... ..pro golfer. to me, he's... ...well, dad. so when his joint pain from psoriatic arthritis got really bad, it scared me. and what could that pain mean? joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain... ...helps stop irreversible joint damage... and helps skin get clearer. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events... including infections, tuberculosis... lymphoma, other cancers,... nervous system and blood disorders... and allergic reactions have occurred.

tell your doctor if you've been some place where fungal infections are common. or, if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure... or if you have persistent fever... bruising, bleeding, or paleness. don't start enbrel... if you have an infection like the flu. since enbrel... dad's back to being... dad. visit enbrel.com... and use the joint damage simulator to see how your joint damage could be progressing. ask about enbrel. enbrel. fda approved for over 16 years. [kno♪king] ♪ memories. what we deliver by delivering.

your but as you get older,hing. it naturally begins to change, causing a lack of sharpness, or even trouble with recall. thankfully, the breakthrough in prevagen helps your brain and actually improves memory. the secret is an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. (burke) parking splat. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen thing or two. we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

welcome back. the panel is here. democratic pollster cornell belcher, peggy noonan, nbc newt al political reporter carol lee and republican strategist al cardenas. welcome, all. like everything in the trump era, carol lee, there's always a government uncertaintyan then scandal ncertainty. want to start with this fbi story because on one hand it seems gigantic and on the other hand -- i found it interesting, senator ted cruz did not exactly dismiss the story. i do think it hasit landed a level of concern in washington. >> yeah, it was interesting he saiddoyou know, it know the

details. we'll need to learn a little bit more about this. ii'm going to lookto it. i think what we've seen, and we saw this a little bit with the michael cohen developments several weeks ago, that the republicans are getting a little bit more nervs. the big questions coming out of this "new york times" report is whether this counterintelligence investigation involving the president, what the status of that is. and then this question of whether -- the question they were asking is whether he wasy wittin working for the russians or unwittingly, under russian influence. we've already seen in some of mueller's indictments that are there are americans out there that were unwittingly under the russians. of i think it's interesting that a number of things that all of us have covered and that democrats and the president'sic cr have used against him on these various data points, whether it's changing the platform at the republican convention or, you know, russia, are you listening, can you get hillary clinton's e-mails, these really raised ver serious and weren't

just political talking points, they were seen as very serious within the and then eventually that boiled over with the comey firing. so i think we're supposed to see mueller's report soon.it and ifs air tight and is of high significance and this particular piece is real, then you'll see republicans like ted cruz get even more concerned. >> the first thing we can't forget is that this investigation was opened to see what russia'sin medg in our election process was all about, what interference was all about and who else may be culpable in addition to russia. we already have hard facts on theiinvolvement in soci media and hard facts on a lot of other things. at the beginning there's a lot s ofeculation that the president's objection was purely political based on the fact that, hey, they're questioning and challenging my electability, and so i'm going to fight back because i don't want people

questioning the integrity of my being elected. a lot of other things have happened since. a lot of indictments o people in the president's administration have taken place. all of a sudden, the inquiry looks far more personal than l. politi and so we're all questioning where's this thing going to lead us to. you know, the fbi is supposed to turn suspicion into fact. that's what an investigation is about. ere is a suspicion as to why would you fire comey? was this beyond just political strategy? and so, you know, we'll see where it ds. we already know that there are a lot of people close to thevo president ed with russia. whether he personally got involved for whatever reason, we don't know, so s we'. >> pegpeggy. >> it is astonishing, chuck. we are talking about a major newspaper report that the federal bureau of investigation in america has launched a counterintelligence probe president -- i

>> it's like a bad movie plot. >> you know what,ld you w reject it if you were a producer. you'd say that's a little over top. my only thought coming out of this beyond astonishment is the t that, you know, congress must know something about this because indeed they probably have been dealing with the fbi on this. they know a few things. i also think, my goodness, this mueller report, if this is what we're talking about, could wese plet it out there quickly? >> yeah. like we're it's sitting in the shutdown, cornell, and you have this out there. it does color everything that is facing us right now. >> well, you know, two things. one is i want to underline sort of the -- all the people around thetrp campaign involvement sort of touching base with russians because we learned that theyassed polling information on to the russians, chuck. as a campaign polster, our polls in our campaigns are sort of what you see, you know, a

horse shot of the horserace. it is strategic, right. at we'reing in these polls, we are outlining strategy andsi des and where you should target. and for a campaign to be giving it to the russians, how is that not collusion, right? i don know if it's collusion in a court, but certainly in the public opinion it has to be. i think itmells like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duckit is in fact aduck. it's hard for you to say that's not collusion. >> i'll say this, the other side of the situation he is for some reason the mueller investigationpr clearsident trump. i mean that's a death blow to a lot of democrat hopes as well. >> that's a fair point. >> and the white house is preparing -- you know, they'rer y for basically a street fight over this. they're saying that they're going toxert executive privilege and say they want to see the report, they're going to tryta to block c portions of the report. >> you've done a lot of reporting on this.

do you tnk rudy giuliani was blindsided that the obstruction -- i can't figure this out. do they know that obstruction and counterintel are the same thing or not? do you think they know this? or knew it until now? >> no.ar it'sto know sort of what they know. and i think that from their t perspective, t the biggest problem that they have is that they're gying to in and they're preparing to wage this battle against the mueller report, they want to write their owreport, they want to review it, they want to challenge it andasally exert executive privilege to cover some of portions of it up potentially. the problem that they have is they don't actually know what they're going in to fight, and i think we've seen that rticularly with this story. >> i want to push back here. i don't think most democrats are saying i hope the president colluded. at's the death wish for democrats. i'm a democrat. i'm a pretty liberal democrat. i hope the president didn't collude because if he did we have somlarger, more problems than republican versus democrat. >> especially how well he

ashed the fbi. now we know this year and a half long camign that trashes the fbi and now we have this news, this is disconcertin >> you know what we're talking about at bottom is what is the story with donald trump and vladimir putin, okay? that's really what we're talking about. and i have to tell you, republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives, i think we would all like an answer. one question i have is why has the president kind o bragged that with lester holt and with rosenstein that his reasons for his firing of comey were if you're a russian operative, your not bragging th reason is russia. can i say i've never understood this part of the story. > maybe he needed to let somebody know that he was doing it for that that's the thing. with trump, you just don't know. i'm going to pause it here. we've got some shutdown conversation to talk about as well. so when we come wback,'re going to get to that. but first, not long ago republicans love democrats liberal.

they didn't mean it as a compliment. for a while it was effective. today democrats are embracing the lal. the lal. that's hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪

with fitness... ...friends and farxiga, the pill that starts with "f." farxiga, along with diet and exercise, helps lower a1c in adults with type 2 diabetes. it's one pill a day and although it's not a weight-loss drug, it may help you lose weight. do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar, and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis which is serious and may lead to death. ask your doctor about the pill that starts with "f"

and visit farxiga.com for savings. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

welcome back data download time. when it comes to ideology, there'sre d of difference within the parties, not just between them. there are conservative democrati andral republicans. but here's a question we had in response to data released from week. this among democrats, is the term liberal no longer a dirty word? boy, will that have some impact on 2020. 2018 was the first time a majority of democrats, 51% of them, called themselves liberal. 13% said they were conservative. while only 34% of democrats refer to themselves as moderate. it's quite a change from where things stood when bill clinton was president. in 94, 25% of democrats called themselves liberal 25% called themselves conservative. the rest, moderate. it's nem just rats, by the way, who are more comfortable calling themselves liberal.bl the overall is more comfortable calling themselves liberal. in 1992, 17% of americans said

they were liberal. in 2018, the number is now 26%. a 9-point increase. in the same period of time, the percentage of folks calling themselves conservati remained mostly flat among the electorate as a whole while the of moderates has decreased by 8 points. hello, polarization. now, this shift in language we use is mirroring the shifting attitudes in our politics. consider issues that used to b criticized add too liberal in the mid-'90s of the only 25% were in favor of marijuana legalization and only 27% thought gay marriage should be n reed. in 2018, those numbers 66% and 67% respectively. bill clinton was the democratic candidateho felt that he had to say, quote, he didn'tnle marijuana, and he was the democratic president who signed the defense of marriage act. these were a big part of his candidacy and presidency. here's further evidence the electorate has ifted leftward. in 199241% of americans believed

their taxes were ab too low.or believe it or not, in 2018, a majority of caame, 51% said the same thing. none of this is to say the united states is now some bastion of liberalism. buts at as thetyemocratic p moves even more leftward in the age of trump, may attention to how democrats handle issues the beral base is pushing for, like medicare for all or abolishing and replacing ice coming back end game and why the second time around is looking l tougher for bernie sanders. >> announcer: coming up, end ing, brought to you by b continuing our mission to connect, protect, explore and connect, protect, explore and ...used almost everywhere on almost everybody. like the face of a flower girl. the arm of an artist. or the hands of a happy camper. prescription eucrisa is a nose-to-toes eczema ointment. it blocks overactive pde4 enzymes within your skin.

and it's steroid-free. do not use if you are allergic to eucrisa or its ingredients. allergic reactions may occur at or near the application site. the most common side effect is application site pain. ask your doctor about eucrisa. who transition out of the u.s. formilitary every year...ers ...one of the toughest parts is the search for a job that takes advantage of the skills you've gained while serving. you can now search with the phrase 'jobs for vetans' directly on google... ...and then enter your military occupational specialty code. google brings together job openings from across the web that match the skills you gained in your military role. just click to apply and use your experience to guide your future. if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make-or-break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen

and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure; trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip, or tongue swelling; rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones. and the army taught me a lot about commitment. which i apply to my life and my work.

at comcast we're commited to delivering the best experience possible, by being on time everytime. and if we are ever late, we'll give you a automatic twenty dollar credit. my name is antonio and i'm a technician at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome.

>> announcerend game, brought to you by boeing. continuing our mission to connect, protect, explore and inspire. all right, end game,om we to blame game. we have the first national polling out. who do you blame when it comes to the government shutdown. our friends at the washington post and abc are out this morning. president trump and the congressional republicans 53% deserve ble for the shutdown, congressional democrats 29%. peggy noon, those numbers aren't close. >> no, they're but i think what will end this

thing -- first of all, i think both sides are obviously dug in. i ink this is a moment in which politics is totally triumphing over reason. i think neither party is looking to the country. i think they'rkiboth l to their base. i think an obvious solution is a trade border security for daca, r the dreamers. so that's the side thing. but i think what settles this whole mess is the public coming forward and saying we're mad at both of you. you are screwing this up. it's been0 years, get a policy. >> you know, i've got to disagree with you a little bit, peggy, wch is not surprising, we disagree with each other sometimes. listen, the polling isn't close. and by 35 points women blame trump and republicans more than democrats. by 20 points independents blame trump. anwhen you look at this from electoral instead of a political standpoint, we had 9 million more voters vote for democrats this past time. from a political stdpoint,

shutting down your government for an extreme position that the vast, va majority of americans in fact don't want to have happen, it's not good politics. and it's going to -- and it's only seals yourbase. what i've said about trump many times before is he is notha someone wh grown the republican party. over the last couple of years, he hasot made it a bigger tent party. >> al, inside the numbers. here's the thind this is where you wonder if there's a perverse incentivetructure here. inside this poll, a plurality of democrats say democrats should f not movem their mission even if it goes on, -, more democrats want them to stick to their guns thanis compr 58% of republicans want the president to stick to his guns. only 22% want to seecompromise. so the bases of both parties, more people don't want them to compromise than compromise. >> well, you know what, everybody is wearing their team

jersey. evy is supporting their particular base, regardless of the merits of the case.h the tr of the matter is, you ow, as senator tillis said the other day, democrats voted for the $1.6 billion for the wall just weeks ago. the bill didn't pass the senate but we voted fo it. then the president came up with $5 billion and $5.7 billion and apparently didn't give them a reason why he upped the ante. you could settle for a $2.5 billion wall, as peggy said, throw in the daca kids which the president said before, and get government back together again. to me this is putting politics over country, politics over 800,000 workers on both sides of the fence. i think, frankly, they're equally to blame. there's no reason why you can't -- and look, the truth is that this wall is not the overall answer to anything. it's one of many potential ingredients. and it's just-- it's just in my opinion a silly reason to keep

government close >> well, look, this is an existential politi crisis for the president because there are two things that are just incredibly important his brand tied up in this. one, that he's a big negotiator and he can get deals done. and two is the wall. and i thought newt gingrich, who was an ally of the president, had this icredible quote in "the washington post" where he said the president's entire reputashon and relati with the base is on the line. and the base is all he has, if you look at his lls. at the same time, you have nancy pelosi, this is her first big mark and she can't afford to screw that up. and so what you see is the white house kind of trying to this inverse policygak becae the president has announced hisga end without actually having a strategy. and what they're going to try to do is psek off t democrats that they think might come around and try -- want to compromise. whether or not that's going to work, who knows. but the longer thisgoes on, no one winds up looking good. >> before i go, cornell, you'rel theter in the bunch.

i want to pick up a quick straw poll that we had from daily coas this is our only 2020 comment. it showed here these are activist democrats. i put this up. here are the top five. bernie sanders sits at 11. four yearsago bernie sanders had nearly 70% of these folks. what's going on here? >> you also rember michele bachmann won a straw poll. a lot of what bernie sanders, i think, represented was the choice against hillary clinton in the primary. i think some of that wasore vehicle for anti-hillary than a vehicle for pro bernie. >> new is winning, that's f sure. that's all i have for today, a jammed show as you saw. thank you forwatching. i really appreciate that. we'll be back next week, because if it's sunday, it's ""et the pres

z34hcz z16fz y34hcy y16fy

denise? oh hey, sandy. hey. this is a trick my nonna taught me to make sure my produce is fresh. but aldi produce is delivered fresh every single day. every day? yeah. so you don't need to... do that. you're not even going to hold that cantaloupe against your face? the only trick you need to save time and money is to shop at aldi. save on your choice of little salad bar chopped salad kits, now just $1.99. aldi. shop differentli.