Skip to main content

tv   Morning Joe  MSNBC  November 7, 2019 3:00am-6:00am PST

3:00 am
going to signup.axios.com. >> that does it for us on this thursday morning. i'm yasmin alongside ayman. "morning joe" starts right now. the attorney general says i'm going recuse myself. and i said, why the hell didn't he tell me that before i put him in? >> the race for the u.s. senate seat in alabama could get kind of interesting as president trump's former attorney general jeff sessions is eyeing a return to capitol hill. >> i think it's interesting that donald trump making fun of jeff sessions' accent. he made terrible fun of jeff sessions behind the scenes in the white house saying he was stupid in part because he went to alabama, the university of alabama. which is funny. when we were in alabama, steve bannon made fun of me claiming that i was stupid because i went to the university of alabama. he went to georgetown. >> oh, well. >> it's all very interesting.
3:01 am
so, donald trump's going down to alabama, very interesting, to a place that he thinks has stupid people there. >> well that's not very nice. meanwhile, the current ag, william barr, reportedly declined the president's request to publicly declare that trump broke no laws in his telephone call with ukraine's leader. uh-oh. that's a problem. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it's thursday, november 7th. along with joe, willie and me we have former treasury official and "morning joe" economic analysts steve rattner. republican strat inch susan del percio and cofounder and ceo of axios, jim vandehei. we'll get to the reporting about william bar in a moment. also more testimony released in the impeachment probe, the top u.s. diplomat in ukraine, bill taylor, told congress it was his clear understanding that military aid was linked to ukraine pursuing investigations.
3:02 am
that, while some republicans get more aggressive in their push to out the whistle-blower. but we begin with what is now a four-way race in iowa's 2020 democratic caucuses. according to a new quinnipiac poll, elizabeth warren is in the lead with 27% support. mayor pete buttigieg is one point behind at 19%. bernie sanders sits at 17%. former vice president joe biden at 15. all candidates sit within the polls almost five-point mar given error, but this is the third poll in iowa showing biden in fourth place. >> we're going to look at a national poll in a minute, but you look at iowa because it shapes so much of what happens immediately after in new hampshire, what happens immediately after in south carolina and nevada. but in this poll, like several others, you see two big
3:03 am
headlines. one, mayor pete is moving up fast in iowa. >> for sure. >> he's got the momentum behind him. and joe biden has fallen from first place, he was in a comfortable first place this summer. again, this is the third or so poll where he has been in fourth place in iowa. it's hard to see how short on money, fourth place in iowa, him moving to new hampshire and things going much better there. >> it's a four-way tie in iowa where we saw right there, all within the margin of error. it's almost exactly reflective of the new york times poll out last week that showed that same order and about those same numbers. another number that's exactly the same between the two polls is that only 46% of voters in iowa have made up their minds. that's all to say with a four-way tie and more than half of the voters in the state not yet made up their mind, it's wide open. but you're right, elizabeth warren's surge has been extraordinary over the last few months and we've taken it for
3:04 am
granted now. but the fact this that the mayor of south bend, indiana, a city known for its football team is sitting tied for the lead in iowa, that's an extraordinary story for pete buttigieg. >> it really is. and you also look, susan, at what's going on. and joe biden, politics is all about momentum and you can look at biden and see that his candida candidacy has really struggled. he's in fourth place. it's unthinkable a couple of months ago, but he's in fourth place now. and you would say momentum is everything when it comes to politics. but in this case, you do have -- there are two caveats that we always have to keep in mind. one is john kerry in 2004 basically finished a month before iowa before he came roaring back and winning his party's nomination. and four years later you had john mccain having his entire campaign collapse around him
3:05 am
about this time and he came back and won his party's nomination. so it's not over for joe biden, but a lot of things right now are lining up in a way that are really going to test him personally as a politician and also test his candidacy. >> that's right, joe. and in addition to that, joe biden started off running a national campaign. and he wanted to come in as the best chance to beat donald trump and really tried to make a national appeal for it, maybe even bringing in looking at moderate voters, not just typical primary voters which tend to be more to the left. but what we see in that iowa poll is he does not have an organization on the ground. when you're running a national campaign, you have to also pay attention to those details. and that's what, for example, pete buttigieg and elizabeth warren from day one when their numbers were low, they kept building their -- it was money that built their ground game.
3:06 am
that was essential. i agree with you on the momentum. i think what can help biden is, "o "a," his super pac if they can do good work there. but he's got to spend time in iowa convincing people to go caucus for him. the only way you do that in iowa is meeting the people. >> steve, i said a couple months ago because joe biden, if he makes it there in one piece politically will do very well in south carolina, will do very well in the super tuesday contest to follow and could be off to the races. that would require him to either win in iowa or finish a strong second in iowa. new hampshire after that is not much better for him because he's going to be squeezed from the senator from vermont and the senator from massachusetts. new hampshire is home state for them. if pete buttigieg does well in new hampshire, he's going to have that momentum that will push him there and joe biden is going to be risking being in fourth place. i'm wondering with all these
3:07 am
stories of joe biden running out of money with yet another poll showing the supposed front runner fourth place in iowa, how much concern is there among biden fundraisers and among democratic bundlers that this is maybe not horse they want to bet on? >> i would say there's a lot of concern, joe, for all the reasons you say. that the fundraising for joe biden didn't go well in the third quarter. these polls in iowa, as you know, biden -- iowa for biden in 2008 didn't go very well either. he doesn't have a great history in iowa. finishing third and north iowa fourth in iowa as the presumed front runner would be difficult for him. the one advantage he may have is bernie and elizabeth possibly splitting the neighboring state votes which might give him a way to thread the needle there, but also tough. nevada he should do okay, and then south carolina. but to your point about super
3:08 am
tuesday, super tuesday's about five days after south carolina. and so if you don't have the money, even if you do well in south carolina to raise the kind of money you have to raise in five days to deal with an almost quasi national primary, 45% of the delegates will be picked by the end of super tuesday in california, texas, and so on, this is all -- this is all tough. so the answer to your question is, yes, there is nervousness among the biden supporters as to how joe is going to sort of get from here to there because the alternative, as you have said, is elizabeth warren. and that's an idea that strikes fear into the hearts of many democrats whether you agree with her or not. it's the question of her electability. >> well, we're going to revisit this, but right now we need to get to other news and house against committee chairman adam schiff announced yesterday that open hearings will begin next week. on wednesday, the intel committee will hear from
3:09 am
ambassador william taylor and state department official george kent. then on friday, former u.s. ambassador to ukraine, marie yovanovitch is scheduled to testify. ambassador taylor is the one who texted ambassador gordon sondland that it would be, quote, crazy to make ukraine military aid contingent on investigations aimed at helping the president get re-elected. and in the transcript of his closed-door testimony which was released yesterday, we learned more about those text conversations like this one, when sondland responded, call me, after taylor asked if that really was the white house's position. taylor says he did call telling lawmakers, quote, during that phone call ambassador sondland told me that president trump had told him that he wants president zelensky to state public that i ukraine will investigate burisma, an alleged you're cranian interference in the 2016 u.s. election.
3:10 am
ambassador sondland, taylor continued, also told me that he now recognized that he had made a mistake by earlier telling ukrainian officials to whom he spoke that a white house meeting with president zelensky was dependent on a public announcement of investigations. in fact, ambassador sondland said everything was dependent on such an announcement, including security assistance. he said that president trump wanted president zelensky in a box by making a public statement about ordering such investigation. senator lindsey graham presented two new arguments in defense of the president yesterday, including trump donor turned u.s. ambassador sondland clued with democrats when he changed his testimony to acknowledge a quid pro quo. >> now here's a question. why did sonderland change his testimony? was there a question between him
3:11 am
and the operatives open the committee? did he talk to schiff? did he talk to schiff staffers? i've been a lawyer for a long time. when somebody suddenly changes their testimony, it makes me incredibly suspicious. >> what i can tell you about the trump policy towards the ukraine, it was incoherent. it depends on who you talk to. they seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo. >> so, willie -- >> that second argument is incredible. >> willie, the second argument -- >> they're too stupid to have a foreign policy and a quid pro quo. >> but on the second argument, lindsey is once again doing the they're too stupid to collude defense that a lot of people on the hill did during russia. >> yeah. >> and now they're saying even though they have all the documentation, as john bolton called it, rudy's drug deal, they had a very specific plan, laid it out. we have all the testimony, the sworn testimony. as to this first argument that -- i mean, lind sip, agases
3:12 am
he's been a lawyer for a long time. i don't think he ever -- i find it hard to believe that he was paying attention in law class. of course he doesn't know the evidence code, which he proved earlier this month. and now he's saying i've been a lawyer a long time. when somebody changes their testimony, they become suspicious. actually, everybody's been saying it publicly. he chose to tell the truth in sworn testimony because he didn't sign up to go to jail. and lindsey knows that. and, willie, i just wonder how low these people are going to go. how much they're going to degrade themselves. we're going to be playing in a second what a united states senator said, a childhood taunt towards nancy pelosi in a little bit. but you just look at them and you certainly -- i feel so sorry for them that they're allowing
3:13 am
themselves to be degraded by donald trump, a guy that won't return a favor, and lindsey put him in the front of that line here. this is just humiliating for him. >> it gets worse every day when you think they've found some wild new excuse to explain the president's behavior, they think of a new one. gordon sondland gave a million dollars to president trump's inaugural committee, a political appointee, the guy that was deputy padvertised by this administration to run this ukraine shadow operation with rudy giuliani. now he's in bed with the democrats? it's hard even to keep up with the stories their making up. i wondered when he came out with this new testimony how the white house was going to try to discredit him. and apparently now this argument introduced first last night by lindsey graham is that gordon sondland colluded with adam schiff to come back in and testify and make up a story. it's sad.
3:14 am
and there air lot of peopre a l we've had on the show who we respect who are now saying things to completely degrade themselves. and as you say for what? as if donald trump is ever going to return the favor and ever take care of them? we see what he does to people who cross him. we see what he does to people. i never met him, didn't really know him, can't remember meeting him. that's what happens in the end. you end up like michael cohen. you don't end up -- >> yeah. >> -- at the hand of the president of the united states. it's really pathetic and sad to watch as an american. >> it really is. and, willie, they're doing this even though it's clear it happened. this quid pro quo and this scandal and potentially, for sure, corruption, but even break the law, it happened. they're fighting to try and protect the president from something he did. >> by the way, something they know he did. >> they know he did it. >> something that -- so they're
3:15 am
lying and they're spinning tall tales and, again, they're degrading themselves in ways that they would not allow their children to degrade themselves. >> right. >> like, for instance, here's republican senator john kennedy of louisiana saying -- >> this is disgraceful. >> -- about house speaker nancy pelosi at a rally last night. >> speaker nancy pelosi is trying to impeach him. [ booing ]. >> i don't mean any disrespect, but it must suck to be that dumb. >> yeah, he actually does mean disrespect and he has degraded himself. by the way, senator, guess what? no matter what you do the rest of your life, that's your moment when you die. your bio 30, 40 years from now, whenever it have that's your
3:16 am
moment. congratulations, you did it for a man who committed crimes. you did it for a man who may be driven out of office. you did it for a man who actually was willing to sell out the united states of america for some dirt on joe biden. you did it for a man who, again, has destroyed the conservative movement. did it for a man that's run up national debt. did it for a man that's undercut nato. did it for a man who actually does whatever vladimir putin wants him to do, whether it's getting a foothold in the middle east, russia getting a foothold in the middle east. whether it's getting a foothold in ukraine, whether it's him running around saying to his aides that ukraine is not really a real country, who says that? oh, wait, vladimir putin does. and you just said that about nancy pelosi. i just -- i don't know. maybe the part of louisiana you
3:17 am
grew up in is part of different than the northwest part of florida i grew up in, but i don't know. in my neck of the woods, senator, parents don't teach their sons to talk about women or men that way. but maybe you're comfortable with that. whatever goes. and, by the way, on top of that, what republicans are doing with this whistle-blower is staggering. just a few years ago they were running around talking about the importance -- mike pence leading the charge about the importance of protecting the whistle-blowers. now they're going to rallies in kentucky and rand paul, the united states senator, is screaming that the whistle-blower must be -- for what? you know why? because donald trump wants the whistle-blower's name revealed. but why? think about it. what we have learned since the whistle-blower complaint is so
3:18 am
much more devastating than even what the whistle-blower put in that complaint. we know more now. so the whistle-blower's identity -- actually the whistle-blower's charges have now become irrelevant because, as they may say in northwest florida and also in parts of louisiana, they put meat on those bones. we know what it looks like. and it's worse than what the whistle-blower even said it was, which means this is all just about trying to be punitive. just trying to -- >> distracting. >> -- punish the whistle-blower. trying to distact people who thtoo stupid to watch the news. >> or read the transcript. >> it's not a transcript. >> jim, you know what's so fascinating is, and, again, i'm so embarrassed for kennedy, i'm
3:19 am
so embarrassed, humiliated for lindsey, i'm so humiliated for him to think if this doesn't work politically. they think this works politically. but those people, they're just screaming at the church choir. i've said it before in 2018, the largest landslide loss in the history of elections for the house of representatives, virginia completely -- republicans wiped out virginia in just a couple of years. you have a democratic governor in connecticutkentucky. this isn't working for them, and yet they continue to degrade themselves in a way to make them more loathed in suburbs, more loathed -- i wonder how kennedy is saying that nancy sucks and it sucks to be -- i wonder how that plays with all women
3:20 am
voters? it can't be good, can it, jim? >> the thing is, like all of this now is so predictable. not to be cynical about it, but we now know what's going to happen in these public hearings. it's going to be proven irrelevant refute abably there a quid pro quo that was directed by rudy giuliani and others at the direction of the president of the united states to undermine joe biden who at the time was number one in the polls. there's no mystery because we've seen that. and there might be little pieces put into that puzzle, but we know that. at the same time you watch what you saw from kennedy. you watch lindsey graham, we interviewed him a couple weeks ago and he was clear, if there's a quid pro quo, that's problematic, i might change my mind. and now he's saying there nothing, it's bs and there's nothing that can change his mind. when you talk to republicans, you know how this play ends now. you talk to any of them privately and they know there's going to be a quid pro quo proven and they're not going to
3:21 am
vote to boot him from office because of it. they're going to defend it, they're going to find some nuance to defendant it. they're goi defend it and it's too close to an election. and then they'll come out with -- whether it's a whistleblower, an always trumper who happens to turn on the president. it's all now so knowable because they're all in with him. they've always been all in. i've never understood this coverage where people are like it's different, republicans are going to change. nothing has changed in 3 1/2 years. there's not been a single moment where people rise up and say i'm going to do what i think i should do. they're going to do what they think is in their political interest. even mitt romney who has been the harshest, i would not be surprised if he does not vote with the rest of republicans when it comes to that trial because he's probably the harshest critic of all. >> susan del percio, obviously lindsey graham is embarrassing himself, he's offering
3:22 am
conspiracy theories about gordon sondland colluding with democrats. he also said again yesterday, i will not read the transcripts. he's the chair of the judiciary committee. in other words, irrelevant will not consider any evidence, i've made up my mind. by the way, he demanded the transcripts a week ago. he's not going to read them. here's why they're throwing out these conspiracy theories. that was my clear understanding, security assistance money would not come until the president of ukraine committed to pursue the investigation. that is a quid pro quo, that's what republicans don't want to talk about. >> they don't. and i'm kind of surprised that democrats have not changed the narrative a little bit. forget this quid pro quo. it is about donald trump using his office to benefit himself for the 2020 election. he is meddling in the election and he is using government resources to get dirt on his opponent. forget quid pro quo, go after meddling in the 2020 election and using government resources for personal gain.
3:23 am
that's something the public will be able to tack on to and it's not quid pro quo, it's not something that the republicans can just respond with and people going, all right, whatever that may be. i think that's -- that the american people, if they during the public hearings hear that argument laid out it will be much more effective. we can no the stress enough that lindsey graham is the chair of the judiciary committee. i don't know how he can still have that post. >> he said yesterday the mueller report to him was the final word on all things trump. the mueller report didn't consider this new question on ukraine. one other note, bill taylor's testimony revealed something else. when he thought something suspicious was up with the withholding of the money he went to the afc to say what's going on? ed is he could not get a meeting with the afc, this is the leading diplomat to ukraine because they were occupied with the president's idea of purchasing greenland. that's what they were doing and he couldn't get a meeting.
3:24 am
>> fantastic. you have to laugh because otherwise we could would cry. >> i'm not making that up. >> but the question honoring offering this poll was made by elijah cummings at the end of the hearings on capitol hill when he asked everybody and him at the end of the day when you're dancing with the angels, what did you do to save our democracy? for senator graham and senator kennedy we can mark them down in the category of absolutely nothing. and, in fact, they behaved badly. >> well, i'm going to say -- >> they behaved so badly and acted against their own core values. we know these men. and they went against their own core values for a wanna be dictator. it's incredible at this point. >> well, you know, them doing nothing, actually, would have been preferable. >> nothing would have been better. >> than humiliating themselves. but, you know, willie, everybody goes around talking about quid pro quo, quid pro quo.
3:25 am
let's -- let's just make this simple. what we're talking about is the president of the united states twisting and perverting u.s. foreign policy to get dirt on a domestic political rival. russia invaded ukraine. it is vladimir putin's number one goal to take over ukraine. because when he does that, suddenly russia is no longer russia anymore, it's the soviet union again. his demand they called the collapse of soviet communism, by the way, a scourge that killed over 30 million of its own people, he called that the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century. he knows and donald trump knows if ukraine becomes part of russia again, it is no longer russia, it's once again the soviet union.
3:26 am
donald trump knows that and that's why donald trump has been telling his aides, well, ukraine's not even a real country. >> yeah. >> it's really part of russia. he is reading vladimir putin's talking points there. he is reading vladimir putin's talking points in the middle east. he was reading vladimir putin's talking points in december of 2015 when he came on our show and said that the united states was every bit as morally repugnant as russia was, that we killed a lot of people too. he is reading directly from there. and your statement, you quoted lindsey saying that the mueller report was the end alltel a tel for all things donald trump. donald trump made this call right after. >> right. >> -- mueller's testimony. >> that's right. >> so that would be like saying a shoplifting case that closed was, well, you know what?
3:27 am
that was a be all end all, forget about the murder that happened the next day, we got the report on this guy from the shoplifting case. it's just, again, it's idiocy and it's shocking he is still the chairman of the judiciary committee. it shows that the republican party is so rotted to the core and that it actually it keeps getting worse every day. we keep convincing ourselves they can't degrade themselves anymore. they prove us wrong every day. and there are always consequences and there will be terrible consequences for the republican party over the next five years. terrible consequences. >> as jim vandehei said, all these senators have hopped on the bus now with president trump. there's no getting off. they've cast their lot with him. lindsey graham has chaired the judiciary committee says he will not consider the evidence in this ukraine case, all these transcripts that he previously demanded.
3:28 am
we're going to talk a lot more about this. still ahead on "morning joe," so far critics of elizabeth warren have not been able to get much to stick, but that could be changing a bit. we'll run through some of that just ahead. bit. we'll run through some of that just ahead. i'm your 70lb st. bernard puppy, and my lack of impulse control, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby! high protein. low sugar. tastes great! high protein. low sugar. so good! high protein.
3:29 am
low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein bars. try lemon cake. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there?
3:30 am
seaonly abreva cany to help sget rid of it in... ...as little as 2 1/2 days when used at the first sign. abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. abreva acts on it. so you can too. - [woman] with my shark, i deep clean messes like this, this, and even this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself.
3:31 am
3:32 am
nobody thinks it's $20 trillion. it's between 30 and 40 twill ondollars. she has things in her plan that are not realistic. but when you question it she talks like well, you just don't understand or you're sounding like a republican. this is a talking point that's reviews by the other party, you not who we are. it's just an elitist attitude, it's either my way or the
3:33 am
highway. >> joe biden taking on elizabeth warren's medicare for all plan. steve rattner is here with charts as well. and you're looking at healthcare from a couple of different angles, steve. >> yeah, last week elizabeth warren released detailed figures on how she would pay for her plan and the advantages she has detailed figures for the first time. the disadvantage is we've had a chance to look at them and joe biden is not wrong with what he says. let's look by taking a look at the overall healthcare picture in this country. we're looking at ten-year numbers for the next ten years. we would spend a total of $59 trillion. these are urban institute numbers, these are very nonpartisan accepted numbers. 59 trillion would be spent over the next ten years. in a normal world the federal government would spend about 17 trillion of that and the balance would be private and state as well as spending outside of medicare, people pay directly and things like that. and then if gyou go to medicare
3:34 am
for all, there's an additional $7 million cost with that. she would take into the federal government these two pie charts, and that adds up to the 34 trillion. so joe biden is right, she would take on 34 trillion of additional costs to the federal government. let's look at how that fits into the government's overall fiscal picture. this chart goes back to i'm going to -- this goes all the way back to 1930. and if you go all the way back to 1930, at the beginning of the depression, the federal government took in about 2.8%, it was about 2.8% the size of the economy. by the time fdr got done with the new deal had it moved up only slightly to about 7.5%. and then came world war ii and you can see how it jumped up. but since then it has stayed relatively steady in this sort of area. and this is -- this is a level of about 17%. what elizabeth warren would do is to take it all the way up to
3:35 am
27.5%, all the way up here. she would effectively add 50% to the size of the federal government relative to the size of the economy. every dollar that passes through the economy, 27 cents of it would then pass through the federal government. so it's a transformation of the federal government unlike anything even fdr contemplated. now let's turn to how she would pay for it, because to her credit she put out a lot of detailed plans for every penny of it. the problem is the numbers don't quite work. so what she's talking about are corporate taxes of about $12.6 trillion. that essentially relieves companies of the burden of healthcare, we can debate some aspects of it, whatever. then she's got her famous wealth tax and taxes on rich point, 4.4 trillion. she would effectively, this is another set of math, she would effectively tax billionaires at over 100% of their investment income to pay for this the but,
3:36 am
here's the magic asterisk. she's got 16 trillion, almost half of her pay for, so to speak, that are in things that are the classic gimmicks that people use when they can't get the numbers to add up. better irs of tax collection, cut waste, fraud, abuse, we're going to take the urban institutes estimate for how fast they think healthcare is growing and lower it a little bit to get the numbers to work in the addition to the size, scale, and the rest of this, she has $17 trillion she hasn't paid for. i think you give joe biden here for getting right. >> she has been challenged on the question of whether she'll are to raise taxes on the middle class. she dodged it at one debate then came out with her plan and said, no, we won't have to. is there any universe in which you have to raise 34 trillion new dollars that the middle class would not be taxed? in other words, is there any way this could all be put on the back of the wealthy? >> no. because as you could see even
3:37 am
the tax that she proposed on the wealthy, which i think is redis tic cue lous, are only 4.4 trillion. and she's got to come up with this 34 trillion. there is no way. she's used every gimmick you can find. but at the end of the day if you want to do this, the middle class is going to have to contribute to it. >> you know, jim vandehei, i really don't know where to begin in talking about what a bad idea this is, what a bad policy this is, how nothing adds up in it. you could start by talking about how medicare in its current form is facing a funding crisis, is facing bankruptcy down the road. and then she's going to expand it for everybody. but, again, that's too simple for some people to figure out. but then, can you imagine on the campaign trail running against a plan that takes away 165 million
3:38 am
people's private healthcare plans, takes away the healthcare plans of union members who have negotiated for those plans through the years, of workers all over america, taking away those healthcare plans and telling everybody, listen, don't worry, we're here, the government is now in charge of your child's healthcare plans. we're going to tell you what pediatrician to go to, we're going -- it's all government, everything's going to have to be approved by government bureaucrats in washington, d.c. can you imagine a less popular plan in the general election? >> i think people should pay attention to the charts ratner just showed that's because that's going to be the attack. and the problem with that price tag is ratner is right, you're going to have to raise taxes on middle income americans. but the point you made, joe, is the thing that politically is almost impossible to argue against putting aside the merits, which is people who like their insurance would lose their
3:39 am
insurance. it basically forces everybody on to medicare for all. and republicans will feast on that. you go back to 2018, for all of the trump hate out there, that election was determined on healthcare. you look at polls today, what do people care most about? health care's almost always at the top of it because all of us have it, all of us get sick, all of us know people who get sick and you want to have great insurance. and for elizabeth warren, it's going to be impossible for her to inn with twin the nominatione this plan. the reason kamala harris said i love medicare for all but wait a second, i still want to have an option for the private plan because she realized that politically she would get crushed if she continued to just be for medicare for all. so elizabeth warren is in a box and she's double downed on that box. it's defined her as a political force is that she doesn't compromise. but in a general election you talk to any democrats, this issue more than anything scares them the most about elizabeth warren.
3:40 am
>> so, jim, what doesn't make sense to me, it is political malpractice to push for something like this that is going -- again, it's going to devastate democratic support in the general election when you have the opportunity of saying, you know what? i'm really proud of what barack obama did, i'm really proud that he fought the republicans. i'm really proud that he passed obamacare. and i've been really mad that donald trump has done everything that donald trump could do to take away those guarantees. it upsets me that donald trump's republican party works around the clock to strip us of those preexisting protections that barack obama fought for. i'm really upset that donald trump has been gutting obamacare. what we need to do is we need mend obamacare, we need to defend obamacare, we don't need to end obamacare. that is an 80 -- maybe an 80% issue in the democratic party. it also makes the most sense
3:41 am
politically. makes the most sense economically. i just don't understand this lurch to the left that is going to have devastating political -- hey, if you live on twitter. >> yeah. >> then maybe you actually think this is a good idea. i just ask if you live on twitter, stay away from blenders and other household appliances because you are a danger to yourself when you step into the real world. this is the worst political idea i have ever heard in my 56 years on the earth pushed for by a major political character. so why are they ashamed of obamacare? why are they running away from obamacare? why are they doing exactly what donald trump is doing with obamacare and trying to end it, jim? >> because the reaction -- we all pay attention to trump. and the reaction to trump on the left has not been, let's embrace obama or embrace some kind of a nuance or return to normal, it's to go to the other polar
3:42 am
extreme. it's not just on healthcare, it's on open borders and other topics that barack obama never would have touched, positions he never would have taken that are now considered fairly mainstream inside the democratic party. and medicare for all, if you want to get activity on twitter, if you want people to follow you on facebook, if you want to get them to show up at an event and people give you money, people love of it because it's simple. it's like the healthcare system sucks, let's move to medicare for all. the problem vermont reason ais, move toward a single pair system, dsystepayer system, do it very slowly and continue that private option that may shrink over time. instead, they're going for what they think is the holy grail. i think the politics based on everything i've seen, i don't see how you sell that to people. that's why donald trump when people talk to him says give me
3:43 am
warren, give me waurp becaurrend say yes, you may hate me but you'll hate socialism more. that's the argument they want to make. >> here's the position democrats are in defending this. here's what claire mccaskill would say, the best we can say is if elizabeth warren is the nominee, don't worry, this won't get through the senate. in other words, she's got this big idea, maybe it scares you a little bit, but don't worry, there's no chance in hell it clears the senate. >> well, you see, that's the thing too. >> wow. >> as mayor pete said on our show a couple of days ago, democrats have to be better. i mean, elizabeth warren making this promise, it's like donald trump promising that mexico's going to pay for the wall. here we are, it's november the 7th, 6:43 a.m., write it down, i said it, give me this tape back three years ago. the chance of president warren getting medicare for all through
3:44 am
in this form is no more likely than donald trump getting mexico to pay for the wall. so making a promise that might excite the base that's never going to happen, it's going to run off a lot of voters. it's not realistic. it's not going to happen. and there is a great risk that it is going to run off people in wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, north carolina, in florida, and in arizona. and if you don't believe that, fine. enjoy yourself living your dream world and enjoy four more years of donald trump. >> she needs to explain why that's not the case. jim vandehei, thank you very much. >> thank you. coming up, donald trump won the suburbs of pittsburgh back in 2016, but the area went blue for congressman connor lam two years later. now republicans are targeting his district. but can they staunch the
3:45 am
suburban slide that we saw in this week's elections? >> congressman connor lam joins us next on "morning joe." conn us next onmo "rning joe." great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi!
3:46 am
only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ too many after-parties. new neutrogena® bright boost with dullness-fighting neoglucosamine. boosts cell turnover by 10 times for instantly brighter skin. bright boost neutrogena®. it's rukmini here from the new york times . hey, you see this? much. this week's elections? much. this week's elections? my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates
3:47 am
my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity.
3:48 am
fotonight, voters in kentuc
3:49 am
sent a message loud and clear for everyone to hear. as your next governor, i will listen more than i talk. i will work with anybody who has a good idea that we can deliver for kentuckians. with all the partisan bickering and nastiness that we're seeing in politics, we have an opportunity do better right here in kentucky. >> governor beshear in kentucky the other night. now we have conor lamb of pn, he's vice chair of the house committee on veterans affairs and serves as a major in the united states marine corps reserve. congressman, great to see you this morning. >> good morning. >> we were just talking about what happened in pennsylvania. there was a lot of focus yesterday, the day ah-ha happened in the suburbs, some of them turning blue. you had other places that didn't turn blue and you were discouraged by it.
3:50 am
what did you mean? >> there were areas where good people lost yesterday, people who just served with people and carried out their job well. they lost and they felt ha it h that it had to do with the commercials that the president is running and impeachment and that sort of thing. i think you saw mixed results and maybe some deepening of the rift that we all know is in our society. i thought maybe we were on the path toward starting to close that a little bit and it shows we have our work cut out for us. >> what do you see in your district on the question of impeachment? are people tuned into it? how are they feeling about it necessary specially in the light of the evidence we've seen, transcripts coming out, we'll have public testimony next week for all the world to see. how are people feeling about that question of impeachmently. >> stii don't have people runni up to talk to me like it's top on their mind because the testimony has happened behind closed doors and you have to be reading the national media or watching it constantly to understand it. i would say people are starting
3:51 am
out at a point where they want to know what is this all about? was this just a democratic plan all along? are you just ought to gt to get or is this something different? what i've tried to talk to people at home is i haven't made up my mind about any of this, many of us have not because it is about the good the country. it's not about the president personally or either of our parties. now we have a responsibility to show them that that's how we're thinking about it and that's how we're doing it going forward. >> congressman, we've talked a lot about that rift and where it's going, and some of that rift is within the democratic party as well. i'm wondering when you look at the candidates who are running, do you hear enough of them talking about your constituents, working-class voters in it seems to be a little bit lost in the argument as the democrats tend to go left. >> i am concerned about that. you hear a very different thing in the union hall than an election hall. some of these arguments kind of sound a little bit more like
3:52 am
they belong in a lecture hall. that said, pennsylvania's not an early primary state so we haven't had as many of the candidates there to listen to our people and kind of hear her concerns. so my hope is that as this thing goes on they're going to come to pittsburgh with they're listening ears on, as my mom used to say, and maybe understand a little bit more why people might be concerned and a little more distrustful of a huge government solution for every problem. >> i think back to where you start and where susan was, if you go back to the north carolina special election a few months ago with dan mccready, he did worse in the rural areas had he done just a short while before he ran in the regular election. there's a bunch of polling out that in trump country, even though those people are no better off than they were before, he's ever e every bit as popular. so it's a piece that we democrats still have ani issue n
3:53 am
converting those trump voters to our side. >> that may be so, but i don't believe in a place called trump country because if it were that simple i wouldn't be on your show right now. we won by 19 points and we went to the same places that his campaign did and talked to the same voters and made our case on the facts and issues and p.m. listened. my faith in at least the people that i represent and their ability to see through this cloud and listen to each person, you know, on the merits of what they have to say has never been higher because of what we went through. that still exists, but you can't take it for granted and you have to work for it. >> given all you've said about your district, what's your advice to democratic presidential candidates as they try to do what you to, to flip people who voted for donald trump to vote for a democrat. what should they be talking about? >> we were on the right track.
3:54 am
you led with the clip of governor beshear. people's overriding frustration is they feel like we don't do anything. we're just in trench warfare with each other, there's a red team and blue team and nothing in between is happening. that's not good. people know there are big challenges coming in our lives, and we need to solve them. so i would say let's stay on that track that we were on in 2018 and talk about working with the other side and not be ashamed of that or afraid of it. that's the job of an elected leader no matter who they are. and that may mean that you talk about issues that are more basic, but nonetheless important. social security and medicare are these core historic democratic achievesmen achievements that mean so much in the lives of my constituents and you rarely hear about it. same thing with union rights. you haven't heard these topics that are making people's lives better already. >> monday's veterans day. you sit on the veterans committee. what's an issue concerning vet
3:55 am
traps that's n tra trans because of all the stuff that's going on. what should we be thinking about with veterans? >> i think veteran suicide is at epic levels and we've had a hard time making a dent in it. part of the reason it needs more discussion is because, first of all, it's just intolerable that we have one that people that serve this country would come back with these afflictions. and many of them are totally beyond our grasp. there's 20 veterans a dha commit suicide and only about seven of them get treatment in the va system. most of them are sitting out there somewhere we don't know disconnected from us on our own. when she serve and sacrificed for us. this is also an area that democrats and republicans care about equally and we actually work together very well on and have spent a lot of this year on our committee working together well on. i think it would be good for the american people to see us working on that because the
3:56 am
mor moral importance of it, but the fact that we do work together well on some things. >> congressman, thanks for being here and thanks for your service to the country. coming up, republicans appear to be running low on arguments in defending president trump against impeachment. we'll play for you lindsey graham's latest argument. plus, the transformation of mike pence, once a fighter to protect whistle-blowers, the press. then he became president trump's vice president. vaughn hillyard reports from washington, d.c. where they will file the trump/pence 2020 ticket. "morning joe" is coming right back. "morning joe" is coming right back.
3:57 am
surprise! a new buick? for me? to james, from james. that's just what i wanted. is this a new buick? i secret santa-ed myself. i shouldn't have. but i have been very good this year. i love it...i love it... this year, turn black friday into buick friday, all month long. current eligible non-gm owners and lessees get 20% below msrp on most of these 2019 buick models. hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars
3:58 am
in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams. mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't.
3:59 am
neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena®
4:00 am
republicans continue to hang everything on ambassador volker. we have congressman mark meadows here. can we talk? he's walking by right now but republicans are really
4:01 am
struggling to defend the president -- okay, great. >> so the republicans are not struggling on anything. >> so, congressman, there's one person who has testified that there's no quid pro quo, many others have said that there is. how do you justify that and how do you continue to defend the president? >> well, there's more than one. there's one on terms of the deposition being released, which is ambassador volker's yesterday. and even with ambassador sondland, he said he didn't know why the aid was held up, still doesn't know. and certainly from that standpoint there was no quid pro quo. >> but is it getting more difficult to defend this president -- >> actually -- >> as more of these testimony's come out? >> actually as we hear more testimony. in fact, the testimony that we're hearing today, it's actually getting easier to defend the president. >> now here's a question. why did sonderland change his testimony? was there a connection between sonderland and democratic operatives on the committee?
4:02 am
did he talk to schiff? did he talk to schiff staffers? i've been a lawyer for a very long time and when somebody changes their testimony, they suddenly recall something they didn't know before, it makes me incredibly suspicious. what i can tell you about the trump policy toward the ukraine, it was incoherent. it depends on who you talk to. they seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo. >> speaker nancy pelosi is trying to impeach him. [ booing ]. >> i don't mean any disrespect, but it must suck to be that dumb. >> i mean, it's -- it really is staggering how -- >> it's actually heartbreaking. >> -- low senator kennedy's willing to go there, how low he's willing to degrade himself. and he knows, as does mark meadows, as does lindsey, i
4:03 am
mean, mark and lindsey, known lindsey for a long time pretty well. but they know that donald trump actually held up military aid and twisted u.s. foreign policy and we have all the testimony now of all the players involved and that he did so in exchange for political dirt on joe biden who was in first place at the time he was trying to make that happen back in july. so mark meadows knows it does not become easier unless you're willing to lie to the people of north carolina and lie to the people of the united states. it is not easier to defend donald trump, it is harder to defend donald trump because the evidence becomes clear for everyone involved in what john bolton called this drug deal of rudy giuliani's. and, you know, willie, i just -- i want to underline what john kennedy said again.
4:04 am
and, again, go back to this is the political equivalent of doctors putting leeches on patients back in medieval times. they think -- they thought that would help. and it ended up just weakening the patients even more. does he think this is going to help calling stupid -- >> oh my gosh. >> -- the first woman to ever be elected speaker of the house -- >> twice. >> -- and that first woman to be speaker of the house actually has been speaker of the house twice. the majority of americans actually support not only what nancy pelosi is doing with this impeachment inquiry, but the majority of americans, 51%, according to a fox poll, 49% in a lot of other polls, including another fox poll, say he should be impeached and removed from office. so i guess the senator thinks that it, quote, sucks to be as
4:05 am
stupid as 51% of americans and to be -- again, it's -- >> it's not like him. >> the crazy thing is, willie, this just further damages the republican party, damages their brand among swing voters, among women, among suburban voters, among educated voters. they're really boiling down this base of support. and they're just getting slaughtered in the suburbs of philly and kentucky and the governor's race. a shocker, a state that donald trump won by 30 points. virginia, i mean, it could not go worse. by the way, one final thing nancy pelosi did, she engineered the greatest political landslide in congressional history. her party through her strategy won the greatest landslide
4:06 am
votewise in the history of this great republic. and we got this guy playing his games down in louisiana saying it sucks. first woman speaker ever, been speaker twice, and engineered the greatest landslide victory in the history of congressional elections just last year. and you wonder what planet these people are on, and yet they actually are -- you want to talk about agents, whether they actually are agents for nancy pelosi and the democratic party. because everything they're doing is helping democrats win a landslide election next year. >> yeah, i mean, we've talked about the corrupting effect of president trump on washington, on republicans in particular, and we saw it perhaps as starkly as we've ever seen it last night. we've talked about senator kennedy, comes on this show a lot. we've always appreciated his insight, his candor, he's always
4:07 am
honest with us. that was incredibly disappointing last night and gross. and trying to be the mini me version of president trump never works. trying to be a poor man's version of president trump never works. it's worked for donald trump politically, it made him president to be an insult comic. but he's trying -- john kennedy was trying to do the trump act because donald trump was standing next to him. incredibly disappointing. reverend sharpton, they're doing this, republicans are -- reverend al sharpton joins us because the evidence is overwhelming and has been for a couple days. day after day new testimony and transcripts come out that confirm what's plain to see, that there was a quid pro quo. so you have john kennedy going out there calling nancy pelosi dumb. you have lindsey graham on fox last night proposing a new conspiracy they're that i gordon sondland of all people, a political appointee of donald trump is working with adam schiff, he's in cahoots with adam schiff now. this is all they've got. >> it is -- you know, meadows i
4:08 am
think said it right. it's easier now because they know that they're outright guilty so there's only two choices. either we're going to lie or we're going to tell the truth. it's easier now, there's nothing to figure out. there's nothing to wait to see if there's some evidence that will support the president. we just know he's guilty so we either going to lie for him or we're going to turn around and tell the truth. but i would hope that we don't reduce this to just a partisan fight where some of them are trying to reduce it to pelosi and the democrats against the republicans. we're talking about the standards that we are going to govern by. are we going to become a country that allows using foreign powers to affect our elections? and i agree, let's quit, just calling it quid pro quo. we're talking about foreign interference with elections. we're talking about absolute presidential shakedowns expand
4:09 am
torsi and extortions of other countries. it's that simple. if a guy stuck a gun to my head walking out of here and said if you want your life give me your money, it's no difference in saying if you want military aid to keep russia off your back, you give me joe biden and his son some garbage. >> that's correct. >> that's what you're talking about here. are we going to allow that or not? that's the only question. meadows is right, it's very simple. it's very easy. >> and you're very right, too, the quid pro quo sanitizes what happened here. >> yes. >> donald trump took one of the weakest countries in europe that was invaded by vladimir putin and russia, took over part of ukraine, has designs on the rest of ukraine. >> in the middle of a hot war. >> they're in the middle of a hot war. they desperately need a visit
4:10 am
with the president and aid and the president said we need you do something for us. and sondland and giuliani and everybody else that was running what john bolton called giuliani's drug deal, it was very obvious they were getting instructions from the president. then of course i know this doesn't shock anybody, republicans or democrats alike, but then the president started lying through his teeth about it saying there was no quid pro quo saying stupid things like read the transcript when of course at the top of that document it wasn't even a transcript. but, yeah, this is actually quid pro quo sanitizes it way too much. this is donald trump extorting a democratic power that's under invasion by vladimir putin's russia saying we're not going to help you survive. we're not going to help you push back the russian invaders. we're not going to help you save your country unless you get me dirt on my political opponent.
4:11 am
now, if republicans think that's okay -- they don't think that's okay. they know it's wrong. kennedy knows it's wrong. >> especially him. >> he knows it's sleaze. >> i lindsey knows it's wrong, he knows tes itit's sleazy. that's why he told axios a couple weeks ago if that's a quid pro quo that would be very serious. now he's weaseled into a new position and mark meadows knows that it's wrong. let's bring in former senior adviser for the house oversight and government reform committee kurt bardella. >> and, kurt, moving forward as we get into the public phase next week, what's going to be the opportunities or the choices that oversight has if others that they need to hear from refuse to testify? next week it appears we're going to be hearing more of that growing mountain of evidence that this happened. >> well, what we've seen to this
4:12 am
point, mika, is a lot of people for some reason don't want to talk to congressional investigators during this process who work for donald trump. i think that as we enter the public phase of this it's going to be a lot harder for those people to resist those subpoenas, to resist those calls to testify about what they knew, when they knew it, and what actually happened. it's interesting they always say in the investigations, follow the money. that's where you're going to learn something. >> right. >> why is it that almost everybody at omb who would have been in charge of disbursing ukrainian funds hasn't come when called upon? they've deliberately stonewalled every step of the way and i don't think they're going to continue to be able to do that. were they told to withhold the money? why? who told them to withhold it? and when they released it what was the reason they did so? >> there are so many people who backed this up. for example, mick mulvaney who told everybody to get over it, will we hear from him ever?
4:13 am
>> i think we'll have to. precedent tells us that white house chiefs of staff can be called to testify in these type of proceedings. republicans did it to multiple chiefs of staff when bill clinton was being tried for impeachment. there's no reason to believe that they're going to be able to get away with withholding mulvaney this time around. to this point we're working off of a written transcript of these depositions. it takes on a whole new life when it's done publicly on camera. >> right. >> let me tell you, these proceedings are going to be very different from the hearings we've seen. it's not going to be the volley of five minutes here, five minutes there, republicans able to misdirect the hearing. the chairman has the ability to start this hearing and go 45 consecutive minutes of questioning the witness. he will let this witness tell the story they told in the depositions. >> let's bring this right now msnbc correspondent vaughn hillyard. he's up in concord, new hampshire, where today mike pence is going to formally file the trump/pence 2020 ticket for the ballot.
4:14 am
vaughn, some republicans and president trump are doing everything they can to defame and reveal the whistle-blower, you actually have a look at how the vice president, along with a lot of republicans, were once stalwart defenders of those who had the courage to come forward and speak out. what can you share with us? >> reporter: joe, mike pence served in congress for 12 years, from 2000 to 2012. at the time he was the leading republican defender of whistle-blowers and journalists. today, though, vice president mike pence it's a much different story. >> would you join me in thanking donald trump, melania, and his entire family for the sacrifices that they are making to make america great again. >> reporter: the vice president of the united states back in 2016, the day he became donald trump's running mate. >> when the door opens, the job of the vice president is stand right next to the president and implement the policy that he's
4:15 am
decided. >> reporter: since he stood by president trump through it all. and now an impeachment inquiry, standing alongside the president. >> where's mike? thank you, mike. >> reporter: and taking the mic in his defense. >> democrats have been spending all their time on endless investigations and a partisan impeachment. but enough is enough. >> reporter: but that solidarity today, a shadow over his own past. that of then congressman pence. >> this business of high crimes and misdemeanors goes to the question of whether or not the person serving as president of the united states put their own interests, their personal interests ahead of the public service. >> reporter: pence today contends that these investigations are a scheme. >> a blatant attempt to overturn the will of the american people. >> reporter: but he once was a leading voice in congress for protecting the identities of whistle-blowers. >> without the assurance of confidentiality, many whistle-blowers will simply
4:16 am
refuse to come forward. many people conduits of information about government activity would be shut down. >> reporter: and the importance of that information. >> integrity in government is not a democrat or republican issue. corruption cannot be laid at the feet of one party or another. >> reporter: he sponsored a media shield block to protect journalists who refused to reveal their confidential sources. >> reporters will be unable to provide the public with information they need to make decisions as an informed electorate. >> reporter: and to launch the congressional caucus with freedom of the press with democrat adam schiff and in the process louted one of the most important one in history. the secret fbi informant known as deep throat who helped lead to nixon's removal from office. >> they brought together abuses of highest level of our government in the long national
4:17 am
nightmare of watergate. >> reporter: but today. >> the president has been vindicated. >> reporter: there's little patience for the complaints or investigations that have followed. >> the democrats have been plotting to illegally overturn the election. >> to try to overturn the lec. it's just not going to work. >> reporter: pence now three years into his vice presidency echoes more of the man he stands by today than the pence who once served just down the road. >> it's about protecting the public's right to know. >> those are incredible old clips that show the contradictions there. obviously we've been talking all morning about the corrupting influence of donald trump on republicans in the senate and now the same could be said for his vice president. how does vice president pence, how does his office respond to this idea that he's a long history of wanting to protect the identity of whistle-blowers and now not so much? >> reporter: well, look, willie, vice president mike pence is also refusing to comply with this congressional impeachment inquiry. and, quite frankly, i made the request to his office multiple times and to him himself to ask
4:18 am
a litany questions that he has not answered. those questions include had he ever read the transcript of the trump/ze trump/zelensky call from july 25th? was he aware, does president zelensky directly address with him that president trump's desire to have the bidens be investigated into that september 1st conversation in poland between the two of them? also did president trump ask him for his office to not amend the may inauguration of president zelensky zelensky? to what extent has he read the transcripts on those servers? and if not why not? and to what extent was he aware that rudy giuliani was involved with diplomatic efforts in ukraine, an individual who is a private citizen without the credentials? there are a lot of questions that the vice president has simply not been willing to answer and, frankly, the requests to him has been made and in the career that i have
4:19 am
had, you guys, i've realized when one is confident in their answers, they're usually confidence and willing to take the question. >> i suspect you're not getting responses because there's nothing good there. kurt, let's talk about the whistle-blower. rand paul is leading the charge to out the whistle-blower here. he did it from a stage in kentucky, gave some context around the identity of the whistle-blower that led some people, don junior was out posting potential names, retweeting reports from variouswomen websitvarious websites and who it might be. what's the danger in outing the whistle-blower? >> republicans have made the best case for protecting whistle-blowers back when they were using them when they were investigating barack obama. in 2012, 2014, they filed a brief with the supreme court arguing for protecting whist whistle-blowers saying that if you allow the government to go in and out whistle-blowers, it could have a chilling effect on
4:20 am
holding the executive accountable. whistle-blowers are crucial to helping congress hold the executive accountable. congress, as they've said, can't be everywhere all the time, it's a big government, a lot going on and money moved around. they have said publicly multiple times we need whistle-blowers to be our eyes and ears within the federal government to expos wrongdoing, waste, fraud, mismanagement. they authored new legislation back in 2012 to enhance whistle-blower security because they were using a whistle-blower do a huge investigation if the was called fast and furious. it went for for four years, culminated with the attorney general being held in contempt of congress. during that process they passed legislation to strengthen the whistle-blower because they knew how important it was to what they were trying to do. >> thank you so much. it's hard to watch all these people beyond trump degrading and threatening the whistle-blower, trying to out
4:21 am
him or her, him, when they know that it's not needed. the information that the whistle-blower put forward has been corroborated in open space. >> which actually makes it worse. this is -- this is all -- this is all about receipt contribution. >> it is. >> this is all about intimidation. >> they've got more information out now on the record, in testimony, sworn testimony, than the whistle-blower brought forth. there's no reason to bring the whistle-blower forth. >> the white house confirmed it. >> unless you want to intimidate not only this person and possibly put their life at risk, but also intimidate other whistle-blowers who would come forward. that's what this is about. and we expect that's what a thuggish behavior from donald trump, but -- >> but not from some of these -- >> -- we're seeing it from lindsey graham, rand paul, and everybody. and it is actually -- it is actually shocking. >> yeah. >> i'll say, it's hard to be shocked anymore, but, yeah, it is.
4:22 am
>> we are. let's bring in house senator for the cook political report, dave wasserman. >> dave, so we were -- we've all been talking about kentucky and the governor's race. we'll talk about that in a minute. but let's talk about two other states that you know a heck of a lot about. virginia and pennsylvania which actually some people are saying even republicans are saying gives more insight into the real problems republicans are going to face next year. >> yeah. i'm going to hit the mute button on anyone who calls virginia a swing state in presidential elections. i think it was political malpractice on the part of the clinton campaign in 2016 to believe that it was anywhere near as important as they thought it was. there are six states that are going to decide this presidential race. and those are michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin, arizona, florida, north carolina. in pennsylvania, the news was mixed for democrats. yes, they flipped some county
4:23 am
commissions in suburban philadelphia, but they lost control of a couple counties outside of pittsburgh. and, you know, a lot of democrats would say, well, there aren't many people who live in those counties. well, wes moreland county, lucerne county outside scranton and washington county, pennsylvania, voted for trump combined. so there are risks here for democrats nominating someone who doesn't play well in urban or rural pennsylvania and parts of michigan and wisconsin. >> it's susan del percio. i couldn't agree more. tuesday's election really just showed that the suburban is where the action is, especially for 2020. and one of the things i just keep thinking about is while the democrats did very well in suburban areas, they shouldn't take it too much of a victory lap if they nominate someone who is going to take away your private healthcare and going to
4:24 am
take -- give health insurance and college education to people who are here in this country illegally. and most of all, raise your taxes. so how do you think -- what's the best strategy now for the democrats to explain that they are for working class and suburban people? >> at 41% approval i think donald trump would lose re-election to a tree stump. unfortunately democrats have to nominate a live candidate not an enam mate object. they are beating trump in national polls. but "the new york times" siena poll that came out in the battleground states and those six states i mentioned, showed that trump has a path to re-election against these democratic front runners, especially elizabeth warren. and democrats are going to probably nominate either someone who has advocated for positions that are broadly unpopular with the electorate, as susan alluded to, or someone who is recented
4:25 am
by a large portion of the base. so i key i think is going to be can democrats bohl balance thal ticket next year? can they fire up the base and hold on to the voters they still have in those zones of the country? >> you know, looking at the election in kentucky, supporting what you're saying about the six states, the victory by the democrat was as much him dealing with the healthcare needs or desires of kentuckians and state issues as it was the national things by the presidential candidates. so do you feel that there must be this balance with the democrats where they have to deal with the specific needs of the constituents in any given state or region as well as these broad national beads that are getting the headlines, but really does not mean the same thing to people on the ground in
4:26 am
the key states that they're going to need to win if they're going to defeat donald trump? >> democrats have to speak the language of these voters. in kentucky, that meant defending obamacare. and that was a winning message for andy beshear that shouldn't be lost on democrats who are fighting for the nomination in 2020. it was the message that won democrats the house back in 2018. it wasn't kind of the base politics mess thing thage that hearing on impeachment. it was about pocketbook issues and democrats need to make the case that president trump has harmed voters' prospects in that regard. now, in mississippi the news was a little bit different. republicans held on to that governorship in part because african-american turnout was not what it should have been. and if there was a caveat to tuesday's results, and, look, democrats did great in kentucky. they should be really happy about that, they should be really happy about taking over both chambers of the virginia
4:27 am
general assembly. but black turnout say concern going forward in louisiana's runoff on november 16th, but also in 2020. because in five of six of those key states, african-americans are a robust share of the electorate. >> we got another "q" poll this morning that reflected other polls in that state that shows a cluster of four people tied up at the top. senator warren, senator sanders, mayor buttigieg and vice president biden making up that group of four. i'm just curious because you have such a good eye for all of this, how you see the first month of primary season, beginning in iowa on february 3rd, heading to new hampshire, south carolina, and through on march the third to super tuesday. the argument i guess from the biden campaign has been he can survive losing iowa and new hampshire because he's strong in nevada and he's strong in south carolina. how are you looking at it? >> well, this is the second poll, willie, that's shown joe biden in fourth place in iowa. and the question is where is the
4:28 am
urgency from the biden campaign? they either have to say, look, we're going to focus our energy on other states, or he should be making a push and be doing a 25-city bus tour of iowa to prove that he's in it to win it. and we're really not seeing that urgency. look, this contradicts the narrative that this has become a two-person race in the is still pretty wide open at least in iowa. and i kind of wonder given the potential weakness the field of the front runners in that "new york times" siena poll in those battleground states whether someone could get a second look, someone like amy klobuchar who comes from a state next door and has, you know, built a retail ground operation in iowa that -- that could appeal to some voters. >> all right, dave wasserman, thank you very much. and still ahead on "morning joe," presidential candidate kamala harris is moments away. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. skin sin #17...
4:29 am
too many after-parties. new neutrogena® bright boost with dullness-fighting neoglucosamine. boosts cell turnover by 10 times for instantly brighter skin. bright boost neutrogena®.
4:30 am
it's how we care for our patients- like job. his team at ctca treated his cancer and side effects. so job can stay strong for his family. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now.
4:31 am
cancer treatment centers of america. 25 cent boneless wings at applebee's. ♪ born to be wild... born to be wild...♪ get 'em while they're hot. i get it all the time. "have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro.
4:32 am
that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today.
4:33 am
welcome back to "morning joe." live picture of the white house. joining us now here in new york, 2020 democratic presidential candidate senator kamala harris of california. great to see you. >> good to be zblak we'back. >> we're talking about iowa, the poll in iowa, you've set up shop there and the voters there and how seriously they take their responsibility. what have you found there since you've spent so much time? >> i love being there. as we were discussing, one of the things i love about being there is that when people walk into a town hall, when they walk into a rally, when you visit with them in their living room, these are serious conversations. there is no room for, you know, grand gestures. it's about what are you literally doing that's focussed on my life? these are the questions that they want to have. and i love that conversation because there's so much about my
4:34 am
reason for running that really is about addressing those issues. be it the issue of teacher pay, be it the issue of putting in place what will be the most significant middle class tax cut we've had in generation. be it dealing with the issue of gun violence and, you know, i will never forget at the steak fry in iowa a young woman coming up to me crying and saying, i don't want to die because she has had these drills. these are the conversations i'm having in iowa. there's a lot of noise around the election. but those are the conversations that really matter. >> we've talked about the top line numbers. there does seem to be that group of four in that poll. but another number i pulled out of there earlier, it's that only 46% of people in iowa. >> that's right. >> have made up their mind. the majority of people are still out there shopping for candidates. >> yeah. >> what do you say to somebody who right now says i like elizabeth warren or bernie
4:35 am
sanders or pete buttigieg. how do you change their mind? >> with you they're talking to me when they say that. because they're interested. and that's the point. the majority of people have not made up their mind. there are number of people on the stage who have been on the stage for decades and they are familiar therefore. and so for those of us who have not been on the stage for decades, it's about an introduction. but what i find so energizing for my campaign is that when we are able to introduce ourselves, we move people. and so that's the challenge before me, which is a great one, actually, because the majority of people have not made a decision even though, again, there are some very well-known and very familiar folks in this race. >> elizabeth warren's at the top of that poll po. her numbers came out for her medicare for all plan. steve walked through the charts suggesting the numbers don't add up -- not suggest, proving that they don't add up. for people who aren't in the weeds and don't pay attention
4:36 am
closely, what's the distinction between elizabeth warren's plan and your plan to change the healthcare system? >> i'm not taking away people's private plan options. i supported medicare for all at the beginning of the process. and i heard from people. and they said, kamala, we won't choice. don't take away my ability to make a decision over what is ultimately probably one of the most personal issues that i could confront, which is my healthcare, the healthcare of my family. another point of distinction is i talk to my friends in organized labor and they said, kamala, we've negotiated these contracts where we did not take a pay raise because we got an improved and a better healthcare plan. don't change that because then we're going to lose what we negotiated for. so my plan allows for a ten-year transition, as opposed to a four-year transition. i'm not going to increase middle class taxes. so there's very significant differences. but on the point about private insurance, look, i'm not trying to put private insurance
4:37 am
companies out of business, but i certainly am going to rein them in. i took them on when i was attorney general of california. i know how they put profit above public health and we need to reign rape th rein them in. but the beauty of my plan also allows for competition. which is if you want to be in my plan as a private company, as a private insurer, you're going to have to compete and play by our rules. which include you're not going to charge copays and deductibles. >> you say you will not raise taxes on the middle class. >> correct. >> elizabeth warren has said the same. do you believe she's telling the truth with that $34 trillion that she has to find. >> i think the voters will make that decision. >> yo ddo you think it's possib? >> i don't know. we'll see how the math plays out. i'll speak about my plan and the voters will talk about the comparison and decide what they prefer. >> to that very question, senator, it's great that you're range positive campaign and you
4:38 am
want to talk about your plan and i think everybody would love a positive campaign out of all of this. but in the last few days since senator warren released her details, the thing that people come to me and say is why aren't the other democrats pointing this out? why aren't the other democrats doing in effect what i'm doing, which is taking apart her numbers and showing that the numbers don't work? so why aren't you and your fellow democrats taking apart her numbers and showing that they don't work? >> i am so convinced that my plan is superior to that plan that i don't really feel the need to do that. i'm really convinced and i know it. we've done the work on my plan. i am not going to take away people's choice about having a public or private plan. i'm going to give people a transition period that allows folks like organized labor to renegotiate their contracts. >> right. but she's going to add $34 trillion of spending that she hasn't paid for. and don't -- doesn't the public have a right to understand that from people like you? >> absolutely. and i'm glad you've done that
4:39 am
work, steve. >> let me raise two concerns to you. as you know some of us in civil rights leadership met the other night with mark zuckerberg -- >> yes. >> -- about the giving false information in terms of political ads on facebook. >> yeah. >> how much does it concern you that we're in an atmosphere now that there's so much noise, as you say, that could be false and how we need to really rein in the polluting of the atmosphere that you and other candidates are offering with false information and targeted information? and second to that is that when we saw the african-american vote not come out the way it could have in mississippi and other places, how much of this voter suppression do candidates need to counter, including having people being able to use social media to drum down the vote
4:40 am
critical constituent communities like the african-american community? >> you couldn't be more right, rev. so i'm the only candidate on the stage who serves on the senate intelligence committee. so i have been over the course of that time in regular receipt of classified information from our intelligence community about hot spots around the world and threats to our national security. on the issue of russia's interference in our election, it is a fact, in spite of what donald trump would like to in his delusions think. and listen to christopher wrara he said we should be concerned about this for 2020. it's a misinformation campaign. what happened is that the russians decided to target populations that they knew would create tension and then in effect cause people to lack confidence in our election system and suppress the vote. and they targeted the black community. and they used the issue of race,
4:41 am
which is america's achilles heel, to create tension and to draw heat so that americans would turn on each other and ultimately many people said, you know what? this is too messy, i'm not going to vote. voter suppression. so russian interference, foreign interference in our election, has now become the latest form of classic voter suppression on top of what we know so many states at least two dozen states have done in passing legislation, including north carolina, that was found to be surgically, right, with surgical precision, intended to suppress the black vote. so we have now the challenge for the civil rights community is to deal with classic voter suppression and this newest form of voter suppression which is mississippi information misinformation. and that's where the legitimate media and press play such an important role. i think that in the last few years, the prominence and the importance of a free press has
4:42 am
become more apparent than ever before. both because of the need to have the check and balance on any abuse of power in government, but also to counteract what have so sleclearly been misinformati campaigns. back to your point. facebook and these social media companies have to be held to account. they have to be reined in to take on a responsibility, because, in essence, they have become public utility without any regulation whatsoever. and it is against their profit motive to self-regulate. so, we are going to have to do it and impose it on them even if they don't want it. >> by the way, christopher ray, fbi, dhs, dod, a host of organizations got together two days ago and sent up another red flare about what russia is doing in the 2020 election. mika has a question for you. >> senator, i'm curious about iowa and how you sort of push up
4:43 am
through to that top tier. what are you finding there? are voters there interested in impeachment? are they talking about president trump? are they talking about healthcare? is it something else? and what's your strategy to break through there? >> yeah, they're talking about all of it. and let's remember voters are people. so i'm concerned with putting gas in my car, the kids have to get fed, you know, we have to make plans for thanksgiving. voters have the ability to multitask. and what i find is that, yes, the conversations they want to have include very legitimate concern with whether our democracy's intact and is everyone going to fight for the integrity of our democracy regardless of party affiliation? what i find is that people are concerned rightly because over half of american families will go bankrupt with a $500 medical bill. they are concerned when the federal reserve has told us all that almost half of american families can't afford a $400 unexpected expense. and they want to know that we have a plan that is about
4:44 am
fighting for -- against the injustices, the various injustices that currently exist in our country. and that is about economic justice, it is about reproductive justice, it is about environmental justice. these are the conversations that the people in iowa want to have. and these are important conversations to have and i actually have a plan for almost every one of them. >> senator, we've been talking a lot this morning about republican reaction to impeachment inquiry. >> yeah. >> we showed senator john kennedy jedyesterday last night louisiana inn sulting nancy pelosi. we heard on fox news suggesting a conspiracy theory that gordon sondland is colluding with schiff and working behind the scenes. if this inquiry moves to the senate and you have to vote on lon to convict, how do you deal with a pool of jurors in the senate who have come out and said there's nothing to see here, lindsey graham said i'm not going to read the transcript, this process is a sham, robert mueller was the
4:45 am
final word won all things trump even though he didn't address this investigation on ukraine. what's your' action to the republicans reaction to the impeachment inquiry? >> disappointment. listen, i'm running for president. i need to be in iowa full time. i will tell you if the impeachment inquiry gets to the united states senate, i will be there. against my political interest to be in iowa every day. this has to be a moment where everyone says that we took an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic. the underlying issue here is that a foreign government was invited to interfere in our election for the highest office in our land. >> it's incredible. >> this is so basic, this is so basic. and, you know, and so i'm -- it is -- it is sad to see the level
4:46 am
of desperation that some people are willing to go through to protect someone who has been probably the most corrupt, unethical, most unpatriotic president we've ever had. you can disagree with policy, but this is a whole other thing. and, again, this is not like we don't know what happened. we know what happened. it happened in plain view. so what is this process about? and, you know, i do believe that this is a moment that certainly our framers anticipated. and the question for each of us, in particular those of us who took an oath, is to look in the mirror and ask whether knowing what are the foundational ideals of our country, are we willing to fulfill our constitutional responsibilities or are we going to play political games? >> senator kamala harris,
4:47 am
presidential candidate. great to see you as always. >> good to be here. >> i know you're probably catching a plane back to iowa. >> i'm heading back there soon. >> thank you, senator. >> thanks for being on. coming up, democrats pulled off an upset in virginia and officially turning the state completely blue. we will talk to senator tim kaine of virginia about that historic win in his state. as we go to break, a look at the you issue of "time" magazine titled the impeachment of donald trump by jon meacham titled "america on trial ". "morning joe" is back in a moment. n trial ". "morning joe" is back in a mome. nt
4:48 am
i am the twisting thundercloud. power... in its most raw form. speed in its most natural. i am royalty of racing, ...defender of the checkered throne. i am alfa romeo. high protein. low sugar. tastes great! high protein. low sugar. so good! high protein. low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein. the best combination for every fitness routine.
4:49 am
i have one kid in each branch of the military, but i'm command central. i'm a father of four. my wife's currently deployed in iraq. i talk to my wife at least once a day, even though she's on the other side of the world. (announcer) they get a special rate on unlimited plans that they can mix and match. them being able to connect with me means everything. (announcer) and they also get a year of amazon prime on us,
4:50 am
featuring tom clancy's "jack ryan." because the network more people rely on, gives you more. that's verizon. could you email me the part great about geicon, tim. making it easy to switch and save hundreds? oh yeah, sure. um. you don't know my name, do you? (laughs nervously) of course i know your name. i just get you mixed up with the other guy. what's his name? what's your name? switch to geico®. you could save 15% or more on car insurance. could you just tell me? i want this to be over.
4:51 am
wheeveryone is different.ta, which is why xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data, or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to other top wireless carriers. save up to $400 a year when you switch. plus, get 50% off when you buy any new lg phone. xfinity mobile. click, call or visit a store today. ♪ welcome back to "morning joe." joining us now, executive chairman of online gaming company win view, cnbc founder and contributor and now a senior contributing columnist for news week, tom rogers.
4:52 am
tom is here with the new piece for "newsweek" entitled "if trump defies the courts, we're in a nightmare. we need to arm them to fight back." tom, i will read just one conclusion that you make. for now we must instead contemplate the unthinkable. what if president donald trump were to go beyond defying congress and then also defy the courts? i sincerely hope this is not something we have to find out the answer to over the next 12 months. i'm going to make a prediction, tom, that i think we are -- i think he will do that. so what then? >> well, this is a very dark scenario if we face it, and the problem is there are no easy answers if we do. you have all of these congression congressional subpoenas working their way through the courts, and obviously president trump is defying them. a very good chance that a number of them are going to be upheld
4:53 am
by the courts, and then what happens if you defies those court orders? where this really gets tough is that if you look to enforcement there with the white house that says, hey, we have a president -- no president is subject to legal process while he's in the white house. you have a doj office of legal counsel opinion that special counsel mueller relied on that says you can't criminally indict a president. hough do you go about enforcing a court order if a president defies it? right now we don't have a very clear process. the u.s. marshal service, which is supposed to enforce court orders, essentially the police force of the judiciary, unlike the capitol hill police that work for congress, the u.s. marshal service is an average of the justice department.
4:54 am
if attorney barr said, hey, this is illegitimate, you can't force the president to cough up the documents or a secret server or whatever a court order might say should be seized. >> the attorney general could tell the marshal service to standdown and what do you do? we don't are a process in this country. so the suggestion that i put forward is obviously one that's a reform that cannot be implemented until president trump is out of office. but if we're going to face this scenario, we are learning we have to plug some holes when he does leave office. i suggest, look, in this kind of very dark scenario the courts should be able to use the military to actually be able to enforce seizure of documents. >> wow. >> now, some would say that's ludicrous, a homeland scenario, something that's unconstitutional because the military is subject to the commander in chief. but we actually used to after the civil war have the military responsible for implementing
4:55 am
civil orders because the south was defying all kinds of things and the military was there to help law enforcement enforce civil orders. we actually passed a law because the south hated that made it illegal for the military to impose those orders. in this narrow type of case where you don't have a way for the president to have law enforcement upheld against him, we may need to consider something like this to plug this kind of hole. >> so what would that look like? because right now i think you are suggesting that the supreme court be given some type of enforcement arm that they control that could take action, but they would -- whether it is the documents or even donald trump himself, if he refused to leave the white house, how would you -- where would he be held? where would they be held? i mean what mechanisms -- and maybe we can't talk about donald trump specifically right now, but in the future how do this look as legislation?
4:56 am
>> well, i think it is obviously something that has to be very limited. it obviously depends on believing that our military are real patriots, and you're not going to get into a situation where the military goes beyond the bounds of what the court direct them to do. it gets pretty scary if you contemplate a president not leaving office and a court ordering use of the military in that situation. i actually believe if we have a statute like this that would allow under these extreme circumstances for the military to be subject to the directive of a court, that just having the statute might, in fact, prevent the scenario from ever developing. that in itself might be a great prophylactic. on the other hand if we faced this scary issue and the statute was challenged as unconstitutional, we would be facing a scenario where the authority of the court and our entire checks and balances
4:57 am
system was in question, and those might be the kind of facts where the court says we have to up hold a statute like this because we have no other recourse. but i think it is something we have to contemplate, because what i can see happening is, look, the impeachment process is going forward fast and not waiting for these court decisions on subpoenas. but come the middle. next year or the fall, we could have a decision that says, hey, cough up the contents of the secret server. maybe there are conversations with vladimir putin there that are pretty damaging, and president trump makes a decision, you know what? i would rather take the political hit of defying a court order than allowing information like that to come out. just the opposite of what nixon ultimately decided to do in coughing up the nixon tapes. and if we face that kind of scenario, currently we don't have a process to deal with it. i think it is worth talking about it in hopes that we don't ever face that scenario next year. but in any event, i think one of the post-trump reforms we need
4:58 am
to consider is putting something like this in place. >> all right. tom rogers, thank you so much. the new piece is online for "newsweek" right now. still ahead, joe biden comes in fourth with the new iowa poll where the top quality most voters are looking for is electability. we will discuss where it leaves the race three months to caucus day. plus, senator tim kaine and long-time advisor to obama, valer valer valer valerie jarratt coming up in two minutes. jarratt coming up in two minutes. a patient's own cells to fight cancer. this is strategic investing. because your investments deserve the full story. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
4:59 am
hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
5:00 am
25 cent boneless wings at applebee's. ♪ born to be wild... born to be wild...♪ get 'em while they're hot. the attorney general says, i'm going to recuse myself. i said, why the hell didn't he tell me that before i put him in? >> the race for the u.s. senate seat in alabama could get kind of interesting as president trump's former attorney general, jeff sessions, is eyeing a return to capitol hill.
5:01 am
>> i think it is interesting that there's donald trump making fun of jeff sessions' accent. he made terrible fun of jeff sessions behind the scenes in the white house saying he was 1250u7d. >> yeah. >> in part because he went to the university of alabama. which is funny. when we were in alabama steve bannon made fun of me, claiming i was stupid because i went to the university of alabama and he went to georgetown. it is all very interesting. yeah, donald trump is going down to alabama. very interesting. to a place that he thinks has stupid people there. >> well, that's not very nice. >> no. >> meanwhile, the current a.g., william barr reportedly declined the president's request to publicly declare that trump broke no laws in his telephone call with ukraine's leader. uh-oh, that's take problem. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, november 7th. along with joe, willie and me, we have former treasury o
5:02 am
official, steve ratner. msnbc political analyst susan del persio and jim vandehei. we will get to the reporting of william barr in a more. more testimony released in the impeach probe, the top diplomat in the ukraine, bill taylor, told congress it was his clear understanding that military aid was linked to ukraine pursuing investigations. that while some republicans get more aggressive in their push to out the whistle-blower. but we begin with what is now a four-way race in iowa's 2020 democratic caucuses. according to a new quinnipiac poll, senator elizabeth warren is in the lead with 20% of support. mayor pete buttigieg is one point behind at 19%. bernie sanders sits at 17%. former vice president joe biden at 15%.
5:03 am
all candidates sit within the poll's almost five-point margin of error, but it is the third poll in iowa showing biden in fourth place. >> willie, we're going to look at a national poll in a minute, but, of course, you look at iowa because it shapes so much of what happens immediately after in new hampshire, immediately after in south carolina and nevada. but in this poll like several others you see two big headlines. one, mayor pete is moving up fast in iowa. >> for sure. >> he has the momentum behind him. joe biden has fallen from first place. he was in a comfortable first place this summer. again, it is the third or so poll where he has been in fourth place in iowa. it is hard to see how short on money, fourth place in iowa, him moving to new hampshire and things going much better there. >> it is a four-way tie in iowa. what we saw right there all
5:04 am
within the margin of error. it is almost exactly reflective of "the new york times" poll out last week that showed the same order in about the same number. another number that's exactly the same between the two polls is only 46% of voters in iowa made up their minds. that's all to say with a four-way tie and more than half of the voters in the state not yet made up their mind it is wide open. i think you are right. elizabeth warren's surge has been extraordinary over the last few months, and we have taken it for granted now, but the fact that the mayor of south bend, indiana, a city known for its football team previously, is sitting tied for the lead in iowa, that is just an extraordinary story for pete buttigieg. >> it really is. you also -- look, susan -- >> you got opportunities here. >> -- at what is going on here. joe biden, politics is all about momentum and you can look at biden and see that his candidacy has really struggled, that he has -- he is in fourth place. it is just unthinkable a cup of
5:05 am
-- a couple of months ago but he's in fourth place now. you would siay momentum is everything when it comes to politics but two caveats to keep in mind. 2001 is john kerry basically in 2014 finished even a month before iowa, before he came roaring back and winning his party's nomination. four years later you had john mccain having his entire campaign collapse around him about this time, and he came back and won his party's nomination. so it is not over for joe biden, but a lot of things right now are lining up in a way that are really going to test him personally as a politician and test his candidacy. >> that's right, joe. in addition to that, joe biden started off running a national campaign. he wanted to come in as the best chance to beat donald trump and really tried to make a national appeal for it, maybe even
5:06 am
bringing in -- looking at moderate voters, not just typical primary voters which tend to be more to the left. what we see in the iowa poll is that he does not have an organization on the ground. when you are running a national campaign, you have to pay attention to those details. that's what, for example, pete buttigieg and elizabeth warren from day one, when their numbers were low they kept building. as they got money they built their ground game and it was essential. i agree with you on momentum. i think what can help biden is, a, his super pac if they can do good work there, but he has to spend a lot of time in iowa in convincing people to caucus for him. the only way you do that in iowa is meeting the people. >> you know, steve rattlenener, said a couple of months ago that if joe biden makes it there, he will do very well in south carolina, will do very well in the super tuesday contests that
5:07 am
follow and could be off to the races, though it would require him to either win in iowa or finish a strong second in iowa. new hampshire after that is not much better for him because he will be squeezed from the senator from vermont and the senator from massachusetts. new hampshire is home state for them. if pete buttigieg does well in new hampshire, he will have the momentum that will push him there and joe biden once again will be risking being in forth place. i'm wondering with all of these stories of joe biden running out of money, with yet another poll showing the supposed front-runner in fourth place in iowa how concern is there among biden fundraisers and democratic bundlers that maybe this is not the guy they want to bet -- the horse they want to bet on? >> i would say there's a lot of concern, joe, for all of the reasons you say, that the fundraising for joe biden didn't gel we go well in the third quarter, these polls in iowa, and as you
5:08 am
know iowa for biden in 2008 didn't go well either. he doesn't have a great history in iowa, finishing third and fourth in iowa as the presumed front-runner would be obviously very difficult for him. the one advantage he may have in new hampshire is bernie and elizabeth possibly splitting the neighboring state votes so to speak, which might give him a way to thread the needle there, but also tough. nevada he should be okay, and then there's south carolina. to your point about super tuesda tuesday, super tuesday is about five days after. to raise the kind of money you have to raise in five days to deal with an almost quasi national primary, 45% of the delegates will be pick by end of super tuesday in california, texas and so on, this is all tough. so the answer to your question is, yes, there is nervousness among the biden supporters as to how joe is going to sort of get from here to there because the
5:09 am
alternative, as you have said, is elizabeth warren. that is an idea that strikes fear into the hearts of many democrats, whether you agree with her or not. it is the question of her electability still ahead on "morning joe," republicans wanted the impeachment inquiry public and that's exactly what's about to happen. we'll preview next week's testimony on capitol hill where witness after witness will go on the record about a quid pro quo. you're watching "morning joe". we'll be right back. ♪
5:10 am
- [woman] with my shark, i deep clean messes like this, this, and even this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ high protein. low sugar. tastes great! high protein. low sugar. so good! high protein. low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein.
5:11 am
the best combination for every fitness routine. aveeno® with prebiotic striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ wayfair's got your perfect mattress. whether you're looking for a top-brand at a great price. ready to upgrade. moving in. moving on up. or making big moves. deliveries ship free and come with a 100-night free trial. no matter your budget. or your sleep style. we have quality options for everyone. so search and shop. save and snooze. and rest easy, knowing that we've got your back. literally. that's what you get, when you've got wayfair.
5:12 am
so shop now.
5:13 am
♪ the house intelligence committee chairman adam schiff announced yesterday that open hearings will begin next week. on wednesday the intel committee will hear from ambassador william taylor and state department official george kent.
5:14 am
then on friday former u.s. ambassador to ukraine, marie yovanovitch, is scheduled to testimony. ambassador taylor is the one who texted ambassador gordon sondland that it would be, quote, crazy to make ukraine military aid contingent on investigations aimed at helping the president get re-elected. and in the transcript of his closed-door testimony, which was released yesterday, we learned more about those text conversations like this one when sondland responded, call me after taylor asked if that really was the white house's position. taylor says he did call, telling lawmakers, quote, during that phone call ambassador sondland told me that president trump had told him that he wants president zelensky to state publicly that ukraine will investigate burisma, and alleged ukrainian interference in the 2016 u.s. election. ambassador sondland, taylor continued, also told me that he now recognized that he had made
5:15 am
a mistake by earlier telling ukrainian officials to whom he spoke that a white house meeting with president zelensky was dependent on a public announcement of investigations. in fact, ambassador sondland said everything was dependent on such an announcement, including security assistance. he said that president trump wanted president zelensky in a box by making a public statement about ordering such investigation. senator lindsey graham presented two new arguments in defense of the president yesterday, including suggesting that trump donor-turned-u.s. ambassador gordon sondland colluded with democrats. >> oh, dear lord. >> when he changed his testimony to acknowledge a quid pro quo. >> oh, my gosh. now, here is a question. why did sondland change his testimony? was there a connection between sondland and democratic operatives on the committee? did he talk to schiff? did he talk to schiff's
5:16 am
staffers? i have been a lawyer for a very long time. when somebody changes their testimony, they suddenly recall something they didn't know before, it makes me incredibly suspicious. >> what i can tell you about the trump policy toward the ukraine, it was incoherent. it depends on who you talk to. they seemed to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo. >> so, willie -- >> wow, that second argument is incredible. >> the second argument -- >> they're too stupid to have a foreign policy and a quid pro quo. >> yes, but on the second argument lindsey is doing the they're too stupid to collude defense that a lot of people on the hill did during russia. >> yeah. >> they're saying this, even though they have all tv dock thenatidock -- all of the documentation, they have a specific plan, laid it out, the sworn testimony. as to the first argument that -- i mean lindsey again, he says he has been a lawyer for a very long time.
5:17 am
i don't think he ever -- i find it hard to believe that he was paying attention in law class because, of course, he doesn't know the evidence code, which he proved earlier this month. now he's saying i have been a lawyer a long time, and when somebody changes their opinion i become very suspicious. well, actually, everybody has been saying it publicly. he chose to tell the truth in sworn testimony because he didn't sign up to go to jail. >> right. >> lindsey knows that. willie, i just wonder how low these people are going to go, how much they're going to degrade themselves. we will be playing it for a second, what a united states senator said, a childhood taunt towards nancy pelosi. >> oh, my goodness. >> in a little bit. but you just look at them and you've got -- i feel so sorry for 'em, that they're allowing themselves to be degraded by donald trump, a guy that won't return a favor, and lindsey put
5:18 am
him in the front of that line here. this is just humiliating for him. >> yes, it gets worse every day. when you think they've found some wild new excuse to explain the president's behavior they think of a new one. gordon sondland gave a million dollars to president trump's inaugural committee, a political appointee, the guy depp tiesed by the administration to run from his position as ambassador to the eu, having nothing to do with ukraine, to run this ukraine shadow operation with rudy giuliani. now he's in bed with the democrats? it is hard even to keep up with the stories they're making up. i wondered when he came out with the new testimony how the white house was going to try to discredit him, and apparently now this argument introduced first last night by lindsey graham is that gordon sondland colluded with adam schiff to come back in and testify and to make up a story. it is sad. it is sad. and there are a lot of people we've had on this show, people's whose points of view we respect, who are now saying things to
5:19 am
completely degrade themselves. as you say, for what? for what? as if donald trump is ever going to return the favor, as if he is ever going to take care of them. we see what he does to people who cross him. we see what he does to people. i never met him, didn't really know him, i can't remember meeting him. that's what happens in the end. you end up like michael cohen. you don't end up -- >> yeah. >> -- at the end of the president of the united states. it is really, really pathetic and it is sad to watch as an american, not as a partisan question. >> it really is. willie, they're doing this even though it is clear it happened. this quid pro quo and this scandal and potentially for sure corruption, but even breaking the law, it happened. they're fighting to try and protect the president from something he did. >> by the way, something they know he did. >> they know he did it! >> and so they're lying and they're spinning tall tales.
5:20 am
again, they're degrading themselves in ways that they would not allow their children to degrade themselves. >> right. >> if, like for instance, here's republican senator john kennedy of louisiana saying -- >> this is disgraceful. >> -- about house speaker nancy pelosi at a rally last night. >> speaker nancy pelosi is trying to impeach him! i don't mean any disrespect, but it must suck to be that dumb. >> yeah, he actually does mean disrespect. >> yeah. >> and he has degraded himself. by the way, hey, senator, guess what. no matter what you do the rest of your life, that's your moment when you die. your bio, 30, 40 years from now, whenever it is, that's your moment. congratulations. you did it for a man who
5:21 am
committed crimes. you did it for a man who may be driven out of office. you did it for a man who actually was willing to sell out the united states of america for some dirt on joe biden. you did it for a man who, again, has destroyed the conservative movement. did it for a man who has run up national debt. did it for a man that's undercut nato. did it for a man that actually does whatever vladimir putin wants him to do, whether it is getting a foothold in russia -- i mean getting a foothold in the middle east, russia getting a foothold in the middle east, whether it is getting a foothold in ukraine, whether it is him running around saying to his aides that ukraine is not really a real country. who says that? oh, wait, vladimir putin does. and you just said that about nancy pelosi, i guess i -- i don't know. you know, maybe, maybe the part of louisiana you grew up this is different than the part of northwest florida i grew up in,
5:22 am
but i don't know. in my neck of the woods, senator, parents don't teach their sons to talk about women or men that way, but maybe you're comfortable with that. >> coming up on "morning joe," two strong voices in our back half hour, former obama adviser valerie jarrett is with us plus senator tim kaine of virginia where the political landscape is fast changing. "morning joe" is back in a moment. i am the twisting thundercloud. power... in its most raw form. speed in its most natural.
5:23 am
i am royalty of racing, ...defender of the checkered throne. i am alfa romeo. low sugar. mmmm, birthday cake! pure protein. the best combination for every fitness routine. that's unnecessarily complicated. make ice. making ice. but you're not because you have e*trade which isn't complicated. their tools make trading quicker and simpler so you can take on the markets with confidence. don't get mad get e*trade.
5:24 am
the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. so why treat your mouth any differently? listerine® completes the job by preventing plaque, early gum disease, and killing up to 99.9% of germs. try listerine®.
5:25 am
need stocking stuffers? try listerine® ready! tabs™.
5:26 am
♪ it is 26 past the hour. now to the start of the roger stone trial. phone records introduced in federal court yesterday are drawing renewed attention to the trump campaign's efforts to obtain the stolen democratic e-mails. this includes numerous conversations between trump and stone during the summer of 2016, which was when stone was trying to obtain the stolen e-mails from wikileaks' founder julian
5:27 am
assange. prosecutors say while it is unknown what trump and stone discussed, the timing lines up with major developments related to the theft and release of the e-mails, including three calls trump and stone had on june 14th, 2016, the very same day that "the washington post" reported that russian hackers had infiltrated the dnc's computer network. stone faces charges of lying to federal investigators about his efforts to contact wikileaks during the 2016 election season, obstructing justice and witness tampering. joining us now, senior legal affairs contributor for "politico", josh gerstein, who has been in the courtroom covering the trial. josh, how has it been going on? >> well, the first day was a pretty rough one for the president, mika. i mean we're expecting it to be rough on roger stone. i was not expecting quite so much focus on the president. i think back to the trial a year
5:28 am
ago of paul manafort where mention of trump and the trump campaign was basically off limits. in this sort of hour-long opening statement to the jury yesterday, the prosecutor was not pulling punches, not pussyfooting around. there must have been dozens of mention of trump and the trump campaign, the phone calls you just talked about and even more phone calls and e-mails and messages between roger stone and the people running that campaign, manafort who we just talked about, steve bannon, rick gates sitting in a limo seen apparently with future president trump, all at a time when roger stone was making a very concerted attempt by hook or by crook to either obtain damaging e-mails from wikileaks or product wikileaks to put the e-mails on the internet in order to do a number, as you might say, on the clinton campaign. >> so how do you see roger stone navigating this trial as between
5:29 am
obviously trying to do the best he can for himself and how he deals with the fact that there is all of this damaging information that he has about trump? >> well, i mean that raises the question of whether he's going to take the stand in his own defense or whether he's just going to leave it to his lawyers. i think a lot of us thought that he had no choice really but to take the stand and to say that he either experienced some sort of failure of memory when congress asked him about texts and e-mails that he did not provide to them or that he didn't understand the questions, that there was some sort of an innocent oversight. but opening statement from the defense yesterday suggested they might go in sort of a different, more technical, legal direction, and argue that stone thought the questions were all about russia. since he claims he didn't have any knowledge that anybody was actually representing russia at wikileaks, therefore, he didn't think he needed to answer their very direct questions about julian assange and
5:30 am
intermediaries between him and the folks at wikileaks who had large stashes of hacked democratic e-mails. that's the direction they're going. they obviously don't need to decide for a few more days whether they're going to put stone on the stand or not. >> josh, one of the arguments we've seen from the trump orbit is that roger stone was a master of the political dark arts, freelancing, doing his own thing, reaching out to wikileaks to get dirt. what the prosecutor laid out is that he was not freelancing, they argue, but working directly with donald trump to get these e-mails to get dirt on hillary clinton. >> right. that's right, willie. it was very directly tied not only to the president personally -- remember, roger had no official capacity at this time in the summer of 2016. he had left his formal role in the campaign maybe a year or so earlier, but it was clear that he remained in close touch with the president. apparently he had his personal cellphone number. there was one call that was shown where the president called stone from the president's
5:31 am
house, from his home telephone number, and prosecutors apparently had a list of calls that trump was making that summer. so they were not suggesting that this was sort of somebody that was out there just trying to do trump a favor. that said, stone is an operator and his defense said, you know, he was playing people and he was trying to ingratiate himself to people like bannon and manafort with these various promises that he could get in touch with or perhaps facilitate the release of the wikileaks' e-mails. >> all right. "politico's" josh gerstein. thank you very much for being on this morning, keeping us posted on that one. >> okay. up next, senator tim kaine joins us on the heels of this week's historic democratic takeover in virginia. "morning joe" is back in a moment. ning joe" is back in a moment they're america's biopharmaceutical researchers.
5:32 am
pursuing life-changing cures in a country that fosters innovation here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that. the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside.
5:33 am
the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. fred would do anything for his daughter! even being the back half of a unicorn. fortunately, the front half washed his shirt with gain. ahhhhhhh. the irresistible scent of gain. a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena®
5:34 am
when didwhen i needed ton? jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. ...and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com. dana-farber cancer institute discovered the pd-l1 pathway. pd-l1. they changed how the world fights cancer. blocking the pd-l1 protein, lets the immune system attack, attack, attack cancer.
5:35 am
pd-l1 transformed, revolutionized, immunotherapy. pd-l1 saved my life. saved my life. saved my life. what we do here at dana-faber, changes lives everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. ♪ joining us now a member of the armed services foreign
5:36 am
relations and budget committees, democratic senator tim kaine of virginia. great to have you back on the show. great to see you. >> thanks, mika. >> yeah, great to be with you, too. >> so what happened in the state of virginia this past election day and what do you think was behind it? >> well, mika, you and joe, you guys know virginia pretty well. when i started in state politics in 2000, republicans had everything. tuesday night democrats regained the last two pieces, majorities in both of our state legislatures. we now have every statewide office, both senators, majorities in our congressional delegations, electoral votes three in a row and both state legislatures. why did we have a good night? first it was a massive repudiation of president trump, just like in 2017 and 2018. in 2019 virginia voters said, no way. i have been saying we have a state seal with a victorious woman standing across a deposed tyrant. our state was born out of
5:37 am
opposition to tyranny and we still hate tyrants. we don't like bullies. we don't like narcissists and bigots. what president trump presents to us is exactly what we don't like. second, we are doing really well in the suburbs. you see that all across the country. you have been talking about it this morning. third, when democrats were given the chance beginning with mark warner in 2001 to govern, we showed we could govern well. people trust us to run things in a sensible, practical but progressive way. so that's why we've been winning. >> senator kaine, al sharpton. >> hey, al. >> good morning. what is the virginia lesson that other states can learn to really do what you were able to do? because we saw in kentucky that the governorship was won when he dealt with health care goes , ht with the issues of the state as well as the anti-trump feeling but not just majoring on an
5:38 am
anti-trump feeling. what are the lessons that you think people in the democratic party nationally or in other states can learn from what happened in virginia on tuesday? >> reverend al, a really good question. you put a good point on it. while the election was a big repudiation of president trump, our candidates didn't have to spend much time talking about president trump because everybody knows what they think about this guy. the antipathy to president trump was a factor in our turnout. our candidates though talked about the need to address gun violence, the progress we made with medicaid expansion and trying to protect it from a republican rollback. so our candidates really could focus on core democratic issues, things we have gotten done, but other things like ratifying the equal rights amendment and dealing with gun violence that still need to get done. so the antipathy to trump is a turnout factor, but our candidates were able to put on the table, here are the issues we care about. then the second thing is we are now nominating an incredibly
5:39 am
diverse array of candidates. you know, i was in prince william, which is a really diverse county, on election night. the previous chair of that county board had made anti-immigrant policies his priority since 2007. one race after the next was getting called, a muslim-american chairman of the school board, the first african-american sheriff in the county. four out of the eight members of the county board of supervisors are african-american, 50%, even though the population of the county is only about 20% african-american. so young men and women, diverse candidates, and that creates an energy. that's been really, really helpful to us. >> good morning, senator. it is susan del percio. >> hey, susan. >> congratulations on the win that you had in virginia. now the tough part starts and that's governance. >> right, yes. >> and there is just a small three difference between the ds and the rs in the senate. >> right. >> you do have a good number of democrat -- i think it is 54-43 in the house of delegates.
5:40 am
but governing now takes on a different meaning, and i think we have seen it at the national level in the house where you have different -- you have know, you go from all the way left to moderate. >> right. >> we see that now. what are going to be the biggest challenges in governing with having all three legislative branches, or two -- >> i think a little bit of experience of this. when i was governor from '06 to '10 we flipped the state senate from red to blue and had to deal with, okay, we have a majority we haven't had in a while. here are pitfalls. first, when the republicans go into minority after having run the houses, they try to trip you up every day. they try to use knowledge of the procedures and rules to embarrass you. so the two democratic majorities have to be really prepped and disciplined, that's number one. number two, there's such a pent-up demand for getting good things done that you can try to do a million things. forget the sort of left, right
5:41 am
or center. you can scatter and try to do too many differ things, where i think what the leaders and our governor need to say is, you know, we have a short legislative session every year. what are the four or five big things we could do and let's focus our energies on those. i think that discipline and focus, what are the four or five big things and we will have another four or five next year if we can get the four or five done this year. don't try to do too much at once is really important. >> hi, senator. it is steve ratner. >> hey, steve. >> hey. let's turn to 2020 if we can. you were on a national ticket less than four years ago. there was a "new york times"/cnn poll a few days ago that basically showed in five out of six battleground states joe biden would beat donald trump. in a slightly different group of five out of six battleground states elizabeth warren would lose to donald trump. what does it tell you about what candidate we should put up in 2020 if we want to win? >> i read those polls with concern, although i've had the
5:42 am
concern for a while, a concern that the democrats disappointed about 2016 and we should be, would overcorrect. we did win the popular vote in 2016. for a third term which is tough, with a woman nominee, which is tough, in the face of both the fbi and russia which is tough. we still won the popular vote. we need to make some changes but we don't need to scrap everything. so what should we be thinking about with 2020? steve, here is the way i look at politics. a common way to look at it is it is on a spectrum of left-to-right and, you know, some say, well, you should be in the middle. but the middle is kind of mushy. i don't look at it that way. i look at it as politics as a diagram that i learned back in my catholic grade school in second grade. there are things democrats believe and there's things independents believe and there's an overlap in the circle where democrats passionately believe in equality, for example, including lgbt equality as do
5:43 am
independence. we have to do something about gun violence, so do independence. what you do as a candidate to be successful -- and we have done it in virginia -- you don't run in the mushy middle. instead you pick lead issues, you pick things both democrats and independents passionately believe in. you don't pick parts of the diagram where there is not an overlap. that's my advice to democrats as we start to get into next year with the first caucuses and primaries, pick your lead issues. you can pick things that will energize the democratic base but that independents also are with you on and they're worried about trump on. >> so, senator, it is willie. let's talk about specifics inside your vin diagram. what issues are you talking about not in the overlap that are perhaps too far left? >> well, look, i think there is a pivotal debate going on right now about health care. now, look, we need to always stress democrats are trying to expand health care and make it more affordable for everybody
5:44 am
and president trump every day in the courts today, in congress today, they are trying to scrap obamacare and take health care away from millions. we always have to leave with that. i have the proposal with michael bennet i think is a great proposal, which let's keep obamacare and celebrate it and add one element to it. that one element is that the centers for medicaid and medicare services should be able to offer on the exchange a government option policy that anybody can buy if they want. because medicare doesn't have to collect a profit, doesn't have to pay fancy salaries, don't have to advertise on the evening news, doesn't have to pay state and local taxes, the premium on that policy will be very favorable compared to a private policy. and if you qualify for an obamacare subsidy under obamacare, you could use that subsidy to bring the medicare premium down even more. i think that speaks to people's desire for more options and lower cost in a way that would be very compelling. >> you are talking about a medicare option, which is what
5:45 am
some of the presidential candidates are talking about. others, elizabeth warren and bernie sanders, are talking about a public mandate, taking away private insurance and getting medicare for all. do you believe it is a bad idea? >> i like my proposal better, but i always lead, if i'm asked about single payer and medicare for all, i always lead with, democrats are united in trying to expand health care and lower costs for americans while republicans and president trump are trying to take health insurance away from millions. there are differences on the democratic side, but the differences on our side are nothing compared to the grand canyon between us trying to expand health care and lower costs and the republicans trying to take health insurance away from millions. >> all right. senator tim kaine, thank you so much. congratulations to what happened in the great state of virginia. >> great to be with you guys. thanks. >> yeah. up next, senior adviser to barack obama, valerie jarrett
5:46 am
joins us. keep it right here on "morning joe." ♪ to our cancer patients- like viola. when she was diagnosed with breast cancer, her team at ctca created a personalized care plan that treated her cancer and strengthened her spirit. so viola could focus on her future. their future. this is how we inspire hope. this is how we heal. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. cancer treatment centers of america. at to cover the essentialsyou have in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. because when you're ready for what comes next, the only direction is forward.
5:47 am
a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena®
5:48 am
that life of the party look walk it off look one more mile look reply all look own your look... ...with fewer lines. there's only one botox® cosmetic. it's the only one... ...fda approved... ...to temporarily make frown lines... ...crow's feet... ...and forehead lines... ...look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic, may spread hours to weeks after injection,
5:49 am
causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. so, give that just saw a puppy look. and whatever that look is. look like you... with fewer lines. see results at botoxcosmetic.com last year we went big. millions of new voters made their voices heard for the first time. now the stakes are even higher. that's why i've been reaching out to some friends to expand my voting squad for the year ahead. >> it all starts with you. >> you're the only person.
5:50 am
>> that can have that conversation. >> with your family and your friends. >> and your girlfriends. >> and even with your community. >> to get them registered and ready to vote. >> or just send them a text or slide into their dms and say, yo, you up? good because we need a squad. >> we need you. >> to draft your own championship voting squad. >> it is up to you to change the game. >> because when we squad up. >> when we make our voices heard. >> when we all vote. >> when we -- >> all vote -- >> we can change the world. >> head to when we can change the world. >> go to when we all vote.org. >> join us. >> that was michelle obama with some of her new cochairs joining the "when we all vote" organization. joining us now to announce the new initiative, the long eest serving senior advisor.
5:51 am
great to have you on the show. this is amazing. congratulationing, tell us what the strategy is here. >> it is to get every person to vote. this is a long-term play. mrs. obama decided to do this in a nonpartisan way because she was really troubled after the last presidential election by what was 43% of eligible americans that didn't vote. that is not a it democracy. we want to make it fun again, make it cool. go to the people you know and expand that circle and get as many americans to participate in what is our responsibility as citizens. >> are you working on the ground? the a-listers are amazing, but it is also trying to find folks, right? >> it has to be a ground
5:52 am
strategy. we're working with colleges and universities. they go in and talk to every student and say let's register you to vote. we look at high schools, the likelihood of them becoming life-long voters go up. we'll announce partnerships with the business community. everyone can adopt a high school, help them with a tool kit to register the young folks to vote. they are the ones that traditionally don't get engaged in growth. they might not knoknock on doorn election day they don't necessarily show up. the business community as a huge role to play. they have to talk to their workforce and their customers. everybody up and down the chain. why would we not get engaged. >> the turnout in 2016 was
5:53 am
depressing. this was the election of a lifetime, the first woman to become president, stopping donald trump, 55% was the turnout number, at a 20 year low. do you worry despite the news, the protests, the only activism, will the numbers stay there? >> i think they will go up and let's look at the midterms, they were the highest numbers. there are folks i know working on the ground all over the country. young folks in parkland went to red and blue states alike. i think we can't take our food off of the pedal. lyft offered rides for people
5:54 am
that could not afford to get to the polls on election day. so let's look at creative strategies to make it easier for people to vote as opposed to what we're seeing in some states where they're trying to pass laws to make it harder which just suppresses the vote which is undemocratic. >> as we see this round of activism, former president obama made a important statement about not given ing in, following the noise to be involved, how important is that? michelle obama pabcks arenas. she is a number one book seller, how is it important to know don't be intimidated by the
5:55 am
noise but vote your interests. >> find the person that meets your values that you think best will look out for you and have an open mind. part of the challenge is people have to do their home work. you have to show up and get to know the candidates. and the media makes that easier for us. figure out who do you want to get behind. i think the ideological impurity, you have to be willing to compromise. i think unfortunately part of the challenge with social media we're pushing each other further and further away. what i have loved about the democratic party is to say it is a big tent and a lot of folks are welcome in our tent and that has been the strength of the party and we should lose that. >> especially when you a twitter in chief. >> there are pieces to the
5:56 am
puzzle. one is getting them registered, one is all of the voter suppression. the other is making it more convenient with polling times. are you focused on showing up on election day? >> it's all about changing the culture of voting. it is to convince the secretaries of state. we need to have early vote in as many possible places as we can. if you're working a job where you have no flexibility, how will you be able to vote if you can't take off of work. employers should let people have time off to make it easier for people to vote. it is an education campaign, a broad strategy. we're not doing the work on voter suppression, but many people are, we saw an increase
5:57 am
in voter election. and part of it is a reaction to president trump, and in part because people realize my vote did matter and we know that it is basically 100,000 people if they would have shown up on election day the results would have been difficult. on the flip side, hillary clinton did win by nearly 3 million more votes. how do you tell them their vote matters when they show it still matters. >> it would have mattered if you took five friends, too. it is such a slim margin and it shows you every vote matters. it matters who is your mayor. who is on your city council.
5:58 am
who is in the legislature making these decisions. it is a cultural issue. >> the organization is when we all vote, great to see you. >> i will be looking today to see what the defense it, we had a schoolyard insult. we had senator lindsey gram pha proposing a new conspiracy theory. >> i think as we see the impeachment inquiry -- as they are arming, this is about the standard that's this country
5:59 am
will stand up for, standards they will intimidation. that is what this is about. >> i happen to be with a very conservative senior republican. his talking point is what so what if there is a quid pro quo. it is not imeachble, it was a phone call. >> i hope that senator kennedy tries to walk back what he said. >> it was a very depressing time
6:00 am
for the presidency. it was a fall from grace. he doesn't usually step in this stuff. he was serving one person, that's not who you serve, senator. that does it for us. they are gearing up for next wednesday and we have a good idea of what the first public witness will say. bill taylor is a a veteran. he came back to ambassa

120 Views

1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on