Skip to main content

tv   MSNBC Live With Craig Melvin  MSNBC  November 22, 2019 8:00am-9:00am PST

8:00 am
proceedings. i will see you monday bright and early right here on ms, but for now, i'll turn it over to my colleague. what a treat, ali shell svelshie handover, in the flesh. >> i was wondering whether you would know this is me. this never happens. >> oh, i've known for hours! i've been preparing myself for this moment. >> well, you delivered it well. hallie, have a great rest of the day and with some luck, i will speak to you again later today. good morning, everyone. i'm ali velshi in for craig melvin here at msnbc headquarters in new york. right now, washington is trying to figure out what's next in the impeachment inquiry. democrats are trying to make sense of almost 35 hours of public testimony and trying to boil all of the evidence down into a report, a report that will likely be used to draft the articles of impeachment. right now, senate republicans who have been the president's firewall are laying out their game plan, too. they just met with the president -- president trump's team at the white house. and the president himself shot back at the whole process in a brand-new interview. it's been a lot to take in this
8:01 am
week, and we've got the perfect lineup here this hour to help walk us through it all. let's dive right in. joining me now from the white house is nbc's hans nichols, and from capitol hill, msnbc's garrett haake. gentlemen, good morning to both of you. hans, let's start with you, because the president has spoken about this process in an interview he just gave to fox news. >> reporter: and spoke at length. he spent almost an hour with fox this morning. and what they're doing is previewing, ali, a new argument, and it's the idea that they actually welcome a senate trial. you heard that from the president. you heard it most recently from the former attorney general in florida. here's the tension in that argument, though, and that is, on the one hand, they're saying this entire process was illegitima illegitimate, using words like coup, and at the same time, they're claiming that this illegitimate process could ultimately lead them to a senate trial where the facts will vindicate them. so, listen to how the president continued to pile on, on the process. at the same time, they're claiming ultimately they're going to like the outcome.
8:02 am
>> this was an overthrow attempt at the presidency. they tried to overthrow the presidency. this is a disgrace. but i'm not surprised to see it. it's just starting to come out. but i think this is nothing compared to what you'll see over the next couple of weeks. all of those witnesses, they're all shifty shifts. don't forgot, there was no due process. you can't have lawyers. we couldn't have any witnesses. we want to call the whistle-blower. but you know who i want as the first witness? because frankly, i wanted -- >> the question is whether or not there will be additional witnesses, whether john bolton will be convinced to testify. there's been hinting on twitter that john bolton wants to get back in the mix of things. and what you hear the white house say is they are looking forward to this new evidence. and new evidence isn't necessarily directly related to it. it's the ig report at the department of justice, the fbi, and the origins of the mueller report. and then also this investigation by mr. durham, the u.s. attorney from connecticut. that's what the white house seems to be focused on today,
8:03 am
while claiming -- and i don't want to say vindication, but they claim that there weren't any lansing blows inside of that congressional testimony, and they think they got out. they're focused on the next phase of that, and they're claiming -- and i want to stress, claiming -- that they don't think the president is in any sort of serious impeachment or -- >> in fairness, if you only get your information from the president's twitter feed, he is talking about vindication. he says it's over, no proof of anything. so, that may come to pass -- >> yeah, but on the legal and political side, it's clear that they know that they have some more road blocks, and that's why they're managing this so closely and trying to massage the message. i mean, this isn't as clear as the president's twitter feed would have us believe. >> correct. garrett, let's talk a little bit about the discussion in the senate about keeping this trial in the senate, if the house votes for impeachment very short. who does that benefit? who does that disadvantage? i would imagine that a trial that goes into january starts to mess with democrats, too, in
8:04 am
terms of the primaries. >> reporter: that's exactly right, ali. i wish eked fact-check the president's interview on fox, pop-up video style. but just very quickly, they had, in fact, three witnesses that were called by republicans, and all of them were people who worked for the trump administration. so, the president can try to distance himself from these witnesses, but the facts remain the facts, despite his preferences on this. as to the senate trial, the rules for a senate trial, some of them are very strict and some of them are not. we know, for example, that the trial when it starts will be a six-day-a-week affair. it starts in the afternoons. it will go until it finishes on any given day. senators have to be there, and they cannot speak until the trial is over. but the length of the trial will be a political decision. basically, at any time, if there were 51 votes to end it, you could end the trial. and so, this is where you see republicans having these conversations. how do you hold a trial, which is both lengthy enough to be credible and not so lengthy that it either, you know, gobbles up all the other work that the
8:05 am
senate may want to try to do or becomes a problem politically. it could potentially become a problem politically first for the half a dozen or so democratic senators who are still running for president. they're required to sit on their hands, essentially, in the chamber for weeks at a time in january, when they cannot be then in iowa or new hampshire. things could get a little bit antsy, but the sense from the early reporting here, and the "washington post" is on this, we've been on this little bit as well, the idea to keep the trial short, if possible. the republican-controlled senate will be driving the bus on that, if and when they have the votes. the president's preference for a trial or not is irrelevant. >> guys, thanks very much for your coverage this morning. nbc's hans nichols at the white house, garrett haake at capitol hill helping us kick off this morning. there are no more public hearings on the schedule, so what is the next move for house democrats? joining me right now is someone who used to be in the room where all those decisions were made, former congressman joe crowley of new york. he was the fourth ranking democrat in the house.
8:06 am
congressman, good to see you again. thank you for joining us. talk to me about this. >> thank you, ali. >> is it all sausage being made stuff now, or is there some strategy involved with what the intel committee does with the information it has, how that makes its way to the judiciary committee and how that makes its way into articles of impeachment and then subsequently a vote? >> well, i think, ali, first of all, it's important that we step back just a little bit, you know, not necessarily talk about who won this week or who watched the impeachment hearings this week, but just the breadth of the testimony itself and how damning that testimony was, that these career public offices step forward to give this testimony. it was very brave of them to do that. and then the direct conversations that were had with the president, they really were very damning to the president. so, now the intel committee will go through this testimony, go through the hearings, and i think they'll come up with a recommendation, a report to the judiciary committee that would first probably -- it will likely be voted on in the committee,
8:07 am
the house intel committee. they'll go to the judiciary where they'll deliberate as well, and they will draft articles of impeachment. and then they will then have a vote on that and make a recommendation to the house of representatives writ large. and then it's anticipated that the house will take up impeachment legislation before the end of the year. >> the house is on break until december 3rd, so they've got from december 3rd until they stay in session. is momentum an issue? is there any -- pull back the curtain for us. is there any debate going on between democrats right now about process, or is this, the train has left the station and it will continue as you described? >> i think speaker pelosi -- and she will continue to be speaker -- she plays her hand very close to her vest. she's not necessarily revealing everything that they're talking about, obviously, between adam schiff, who is the chair of the judiciary -- sorry, of intel. you have jerry nadler, the chair
8:08 am
of the judiciary committee, of other committees that are also -- elliott engels on foreign affairs as well as carol maloney, the chair of government reform, all participating, as well as members talking to the speaker about this. but i believe that the intent is to get this work done and have a vote before the end of the year to give it to the senate to start in january to have the actual trial itself take place. >> so, will hurd, the republican from texas who is not running again, he was thought of as one of the potential republicans in the house who might in the course of these hearings or at some point side with democrats in realizing what the president's wrongdoing was. he in his commentary during the testimony yesterday with fiona hill and michael holmes said that he's not going to do that. does that mean anything to you? on the one hand, it's not all that surprising. it would have been a little surprising, had he done it, but he was the most likely of republicans, or at least in that handful of republicans. does it mean anything to you
8:09 am
that it does not seem that any republicans at this point in the house will support democrats in the impeachment effort? >> it actually, interestingly enough, i think had will hurd decided to stay -- and i think even peter king -- had they decided to stay, they would have had a more difficult time grappling with this issue, quite frankly. announcing they're leaving the house relieves them from that responsibility in many respects. >> meaning it doesn't cost them anything. >> right. it's no longer -- now they stay in good stead with the party moving forward, especially as it pertains to will hurd. i'm sorry that that's the case. i think that we -- i think speaker pelosi would prefer to move forward in a bipartisan way, but i do think this evidence has been damning to the president and they'll move forward anyway. i think what's also interesting is that you have senators who are actually going to serve as jurists themselves in this trial, actually canoodling in, talking to the defendant in this case, the white house and the president as to how the trial
8:10 am
will proceed. that's really very interesting. i think most defendants would wish to have that opportunity. >> do you think there's anything to this discussion about the senate wanting to keep the proceedings very short, maybe to two weeks? does it matter? does it make any difference to anybody in the end? the evidence is there. either it's going to work or it's not. >> i think the problem they have is if they dismissed it right away, it would have been looked at as if they're being shallow, which i think they'll be anyway, in terms of this two-week process. two weeks is given roughly the same amount of time that the intel committee and the house has worked in terms of its open hearings. there certainly have been many, many more hearings that have taken place behind the scenes. so, maybe roughly draws a distinction between -- no distinction between the house in terms of its movement. but i do think they should actually let the trial take place as long as it needs to take place, in order to hear the proper evidence and then come to a conclusion, a decision. >> former democratic congressman joe crowley, good to see you
8:11 am
again. thank you for joining us, sir. >> thank you, ali. >> even with the hours and days of testimony that we've heard in this process so far, there are several key figures in the ukraine story who are not talking to congress. joining me now, glenn kirschner, former federal prosecutor and an msnbc legal analyst. glenn, for all the people we've heard from, who in your opinion is it important that we have not heard from? >> well, ali, the obvious one is bolton. but you know, even beyond bolton, i think there is a real reason for the american people to want to hear from mulvaney and pompeo. and here's why i say that. you know, what we have right now is evidence that's been developed that shows there was not only bribery, but there was a conspiracy to bribe. ambassador sondland, president trump's appointee, said everyone was in the loop. dr. fiona hill told us that, you know, that loop was really the irregular track that was involved in a political earned
8:12 am
personally for president trump, who's in that irregular track, that political earned? it was mulvaney, pompeo, giuliani leading the band, and president trump directing everybody. so, if we project forward, ali, what might a vote look like? if votes are strictly along party lines, first in the house on the articles of impeachment, and then in the senate on the trial, conviction, and removal, and nothing changes from where we are, what does that mean? that means that conspiratorial loop that involves trump, giuliani, pompeo, and mulvaney remains intact. that conspiracy has not been fully exposed. and mulvaney and pompeo have not been made to account, what are we to do in the future when there are additional potential issues involving bribery? well, that conspiracy is still up and running. are we to write bribery out of
8:13 am
the impeachment clause of the constitution? should it go the way of the third amendment, which nobody knows what the third amendment is. well, people do, but that's quartering soldiers in private homes. >> right. >> you know, i think that is a real problem. that's why we need to see, in my opinion, not only bolton, but mulvaney and pompeo as well. >> so, nancy pelosi -- we'll go to bolton in a second, but nancy pelosi has said that she's not going to wait on the courts to force mulvaney and bolton to testify. do you think strategically that makes sense? >> you know, as a prosecutor, when i'm investigating and prosecuting a conspiracy, i want to hold all of the co-conspirators responsible. ordinari ordinarily, fbi would be doing the work that congress is doing. bill barr is sort of famously not interested in prosecuting anything or anyone that would work to the detriment of president trump. i think it might be a mistake.
8:14 am
i'm loathed to say that. but if we move forward with the status quo and we suffer party-line votes, that bribery conspiracy will remain intact, and it will remain intact to the detriment of the american people. >> let's talk about john bolton for a second. he tweeted. he sent a couple of tweets this morning. the first one is the most fun. it says "glad to be back on twitter after more than two months. for the backstory, stay tuned." and then he tweeted that "we have now liberated the twitter account previously suppressed unfairly in the aftermath of my resignation as national security adviser. more to come." juicy deliciousness, glenn kirschner. what do you think he means? >> i think it's pretty sad the way john bolton is going about sort of putting these things in the public square. i mean, plus one point for bolton for telling dr. fiona hill, go report this to the nsc lawyers because i'm not going to be part of the sondland/mulvaney
8:15 am
drug deal, that is the illegal bribery scheme that was headed up by donald trump. so, plus one point there. now, minus two points for, one, not walking down yourself. we don't know if he did it. not walking down yourself and reporting it to the nsc lawyers. but even worse than that, for him to kind of throw out these teasers, rather than, i'd like to use the term manning up, but i think after we've seen dr. hill and marie yovanovitch, i think the more appropriate word is woman up, and get in front of congress, get in front of the american people and testify. >> well, is there something to his argument that i'm waiting to see if i can? in other words, can he -- is there a different choice john bolton can make? he seems to have a lot to say. the cynical view is that he's going to say it in a book and make money off of it. can he just throw caution to the wind? what does he do? does his lawyer call up nancy pelosi and say, "i want to talk," or is it a press conference? what does he do? >> he does exactly what dr. fiona hill does.
8:16 am
he invokes executive privilege when it's appropriate to do it, but he ignores this ridiculous claim that there is absolute immunity preventing him from testifying. the court the one time addressed it, john bates in 2008, and he said, there is no such thing under the constitution. he needs to woman up. he needs to get in there, invoke executive privilege when it's appropriate, just like dr. hill did, but come on, testify and tell the american people what in the world was going on with this drug deal. >> glenn, good to see you, my friend. glenn kirschner is an msnbc legal analyst and former federal prosecutor. coming up, the republican game plan. i'm going it talk to a reporter who has new information about that meeting between the president and his allies in the senate. their strategy, their agreement as this impeachment moves forward. plus, president trump has declared republican congresswoman elise stefanik the star of the impeachment hearings. we're going to take you to her district in new york to see what her constituents think. e what her constituents think look like? it looks like jill heading off on an adventure.
8:17 am
jill has entresto, a heart failure medicine that helps her heart so she can keep on doing what she loves. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. it helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto, for heart failure. where to next? entrust your heart to entresto. could another come aroundot, the corner. or could it play out differently?
8:18 am
i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot. almost 98% of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling numbness or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily. and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planed medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be your moment. ask your doctor about eliquis.
8:19 am
is your business still settling for slow internet? well time is money. switch to comcast business now and get a great deal when you get fast, reliable internet. with a 30-day money-back guarantee, installation when it works for you, and 24/7 customer support. so what are you waiting for? get this great deal when you sign up for fast, reliable internet. call 1-800-501-6000 today. comcast business. beyond fast.
8:20 am
all right, once the house wraps up its work on impeachment, if lawmakers vote yes, that moves to the senate, where the president has far more allies. and according to a senior white house official, some of those allies met with the trump administration officials on thursday to talk strategy. david drucker's a senior political correspondent for "the washington examiner." he's got new reporting on what that strategy is going to look like. david, thank you for being with us. tell me what the options were to start with and what that strategy could look like.
8:21 am
>> well, look, i think we have to understand what's possible technically but what's actually possible politically, right? so, technically, if senate republicans can cobble together 51 votes, they can do almost anything with a senate impeachment trial, as long as they at least call it to order. that would include moving for an early dismissal without much of a trial at all. there are not going to be 51 votes for that, and what the white house was telling some key republicans yesterday from the senate is that they're okay with that, and at the very least, the signal was the president's not going to hammer them over the head for a quick dismissal, that they, in fact, see some benefits to holding a trial where they can lay out some of the facts and have senate republicans who control the chamber help them in the calling of witnesses that they might want to see testify. that might include someone like hunter biden, who i know the president and his allies are eager to hear from. that doesn't mean it's going to happen. but to me, the key here is that
8:22 am
instead of having the president go on twitter and call for an immediate dismissal -- >> right. >> -- something republicans would not have the vote to do, at the onset of the gop primary season, the beginning of 2020, which is when this trial would be head, they're all on the same page in terms of having a trial that lasts about a couple of weeks where republicans can lay out some of the facts that they want, and they'll be willing to deal with obviously the things that democrats would be laying out from the perspective of trying to remove the president from office. >> but if the white house's fundamental argument is, david, that there was nothing, no effort, no meaningful effort to investigate hunter biden, what does bringing hunter biden before the senate do for either republicans in the senate or the white house? does that not scratch a scab and risk opening it? >> well, it would, except i don't think it's clear that the president is not embracing the idea of investigating the bidens. i mean, here you have lindsey graham saying he's going to call
8:23 am
some of these witnesses in the senate judiciary committee. this is clearly something that house republicans on the intelligence committee, where the impeachment hearings are being held, have been raising time and time again. they wanted to hear from hunter biden. so i don't think the white house is embracing that whole theory. i think that what they've tried to do was say that what the president was doing was legitimate. clearly, there's a big difference of opinion there. i mean, he is in some very hot water, at least from the standpoint of the transcript of the call and what democrats think about what the president tried to do because he tried to investigate his political rivals and use military aid as, you know, a condition for that. so, you know, that is a double-edged sword here. it's something that has caused them a problem, but the president and his team have decided to embrace this as a legitimate move, and i think that as long as this is going to trial, they're happy to try and muddy the water, muddy joe biden, who tends to poll the best against him in a hypothetical 2020 matchup, and see what they can make of it.
8:24 am
>> david, good to talk to you. thank you for being with us. david drucker, senior political correspondent at "the washington examiner." coming up, will the impeachment inquiry help or hurt republicans in 2020? the gop is already trying to capitalize on it. >> now it's crystal clear, their partisan impeachment is a politically motivated charade. thankfully, congresswoman elise stefanik believes the voters should be the ones deciding elections. >> up next, we'll go live to the district of congresswoman elise stefanik. the president just dubbed her a star. what do her constituents think? star what do her constituen ttshink when did you see the sign? when i needed to create a better visitor experience. improve our workflow. attract new customers. that's when fastsigns recommended fleet graphics. yeah, now business is rolling in. get started at fastsigns.com. yeah, now business wayfair's biggestling in. black fridis now on. ever yes! score unbelievable savings.
8:25 am
like living room up to 70% off. storage solutions from $9.99. and area rugs up to 80% off. plus, tons of limited-time mystery flash deals. and free shipping on everything when you shop from thanksgiving through cyber monday. and we're just getting warmed up. our black friday blowout is happening now through december first. shop the event of the season, only at wayfair.com.
8:26 am
mornings were made for better things than rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis. when considering another treatment, ask about xeljanz xr, a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. it can reduce pain, swelling, and significantly improve physical function. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections like tb; don't start xeljanz if you have an infection. taking a higher than recommended dose of xeljanz for ra can increase risk of death. serious, sometimes fatal infections,
8:27 am
cancers including lymphoma, and blood clots have happened. as have tears in the stomach or intestines, serious allergic reactions, and changes in lab results. tell your doctor if you've been somewhere fungal infections are common, or if you've had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. don't let another morning go by without asking your doctor about xeljanz xr. ♪ that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath.r abou[ sigh ]z xr. not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please. [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets
8:28 am
and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. call... for a free kohler® nightlight toilet seat with in-home quote or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info. the impeachment hearing was dominated by democrats, but some republicans on the intelligence committee managed to capture some attention. congresswoman elise stefanik represents new york's 21st congressional district. her performance at the hearings have quickly raised her profile among conservatives. >> yield to you, ms. stefanik. >> thank you, mr. nunes. ambassador yovanovitch, thank you for being -- >> gentle woman will suspend. >> what is the interruption for this time? it is our time -- >> the gentlewoman will suspend. you're not recognized. >> so, to have our democratic
8:29 am
colleagues say these untruthful statements just wreaks of political desperation in their continued obsession to manipulate mainstream media coverage. >> all right, we sent reporters across the country to get voters' reaction to the prospect of impeachment. nbc's trymaine lee criss-crossed new york's 21st district, speaking with voters. he is in watertown, new york, this morning. trymaine, this is a district that voted for obama, trump last time around. stefanik won handily in there. her profile is rising. what do voters in the district feel about either her or the impeachment process? >> reporter: i'll tell you what, ali, first of all, the 21st congressional district is a huge district that includes about 40% of the state, going all the way from the east near vermont, north towards canada. and they see themselves here, democrats and republicans, as fiercely independent. and while the district is largely red with patches of purple, folks here say, you know, they're really wanting to
8:30 am
get a clear picture of whoever it is representing them in congress, and they say that depending on who you speak to, that representative stefanik's role during the hearings was either effective or afacing. now, let's hear in their own words exactly what voters had to say. >> i mean, really, elise stefanik, she was behaving like the outraged mother of a third grade bully, saying, my son donnie did not steal the lunch money because the teacher came in and took the gun away from him. >> elise stefanik represents the 21st congressional district, where we are right now. >> she does. >> she does. >> and she is taking donald trump's side on every issue. she is following his agenda. and this point, i think she is making a tremendous mistake by saying that he is not guilty without hearing all the testimony. >> reporter: what's been really
8:31 am
interesting, ali, is the response from elise stefanik's performance. some people on the right are applauding her, calling her this rising star, and she's seen donations surge. but on the opposite side, her main political rival here in the 21st congressional district, cobb, has also seen a bolstered campaign effort. over just the course of two or three days, she saw $1 million come in, not just from the district, but outside the district, in smaller donations. so, there's clearly been a response, and we're beginning to see the ripple effect here in the district. >> in the 2018 election, tedra cobb ran against elise stefanik. it was 56 for stefanik, 42 to tedra cobb. so this raising $1 million is significant. given the history of that district, is it expected to be competitive in the next election cycle or is stefanik comfortably the leader there? >> reporter: you know, folks doubt that it will be really competitive. it's too, you know, far out to
8:32 am
see at this point. but those who support tedra cobb are seeing the opportunity here to actually gain some support, because again, there are a lot of independents in this district, there are a lot of republicans who are not necessarily totally aligned behind donald trump. so folks are hoping from that performance of elise stefanik, which many people saw as showboating, and kind of just grandstanding -- they're hoping folks will see that, and on the other side, see tedra cobb and an opportunity to grow her base here. >> to see you, trymaine lee. we invited congresswoman stefanik on for an interview. she has declined our offer so far, but the invitation stands. can democrats capitalize on the president's impeachment in the 2020 congressional elections? i want to bring in someone who knows the strategy of targeting congressional districts better than most, former democratic congressman from new york, steve israel. he used to run the democratic congressional campaign committee. he's now the director of the cornell university institute for
8:33 am
politics and global affairs. congressman, good to see you again. you know this district fairly well. >> good morning. >> this is actually closer to my hometown than yours. it's near canada. it's got a military presence, and it has -- it has swung between democrat and republican in the last several elections. what do you make of this and what do you make of donald trump coming out and announcing that elaine stefanik is a star? he says he knows what a star is like and he sees one in her. >> ali, this is a -- this district is like a laboratory experiment of how an impeachment climate affects a quintessential swing district. you're right, i know this district. you could take the chairman out of the dccc, but you cannot take the dccc out of the chairman. and we were focused on this thing. this was -- this district was flipped from republican to democrat in the house in 2009 in a special election. a democrat was re-elected in the tea party surge of 2012, elected
8:34 am
again in 2014 -- sorry, 2010 was the tea party year. 2012 that democrat held on. 2014, he decided not to run and elise stefanik ran as a moderate republican. this is what she is testing. she is testing the theory that in a swing district like that, you can double down on your base without losing those moderate swing voters. and of all the districts throughout this country, that's the one that i am most fascinated with. that's the one that will tell us, really, what will happen as a result of this impeachment environment. >> what do you make of her performance on the committee? congressman schiff had told you that he felt -- and people had really observed this -- that elise stefanik was meaning to come across as a moderate. that's sort of how she is. like will hurd, she may have been one of those people who was sort of open to hearing what the testimony was, but in the end, she came out swinging for donald trump. >> yeah, there was a presumption
8:35 am
that the congresswoman was going to adopt a fairly moderate stance. she wasn't going to be out there like devin nunes and jim jordan and others. and that presumption was based on several things. number one, she co-chairs the tuesday group in congress, which is a group of several dodd moderate republicans. number two, there has actually been an increase in democratic enrollment in her district over the last several years, although president trump won it by 14 points. so, there was this assumption that she was not going to be out there really, you know, fanning the flames on impeachment. but here's what happened, and it really surprised many, republicans and democrats alike -- in march, she was one of the republicans who signed a letter to chairman schiff demanding that he resign as chairman of the house intelligence committee. and that did surprise a lot of people. by the way, will hurd cosigned that letter as well. and so, i think -- i mean, i would never try and guess the motives of my former colleagues, but my guess is that she understands that donald trump remains popular in that district
8:36 am
and that she can kind of walk a line. she's been -- she's attacked the process, ali, but she has not defended the president's behavior. and this will test whether she can continue to walk that line over the next several months. >> but that's been the thing, right, attack the process, then stop short of defending the president's behavior, if you can. that strategy may run out of steam. >> it very well may run out of steam. and you know, the people who will decide whether it has oxygen or runs out of steam are those moderate voters, the people in that district who voted for barack obama twice, then voted for donald trump, who voted for a democratic member of the house named bill owens, then voted for elise stefanik. those are the people who will be at the center of this battleground, and you know, she's going to continue to try and walk that line with those folks while at the same time making sure that her base doesn't erode, a base that is very important in a district like that one. >> congressman, good to see you, as always. steve israel, former congressman
8:37 am
from new york. >> thanks. >> former chairman of the democratic congressional campaign committee. all right, coming up, a new study found hundreds of thousands of potential voters who could swing key states in 2020. you want to talk to the leader of the group that did the study about how she says democrats can reach those voters. what does help for heart failure look like? ♪the beat goes on it looks like emily cooking dinner for ten. ♪the beat goes on it looks like jonathan on a date with his wife. ♪la-di-la-di-di entresto is a heart failure medicine that helps your heart, so you can keep on doing what you love. entresto helped people stay alive and out of the hospital. heart failure can change the structure of your heart, so it may not work as well. entresto helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema,
8:38 am
low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ♪the beat goes on ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure yeah! entrust your heart to entresto. ♪the beat goes on - [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. shark iq robot deep-cleans and empties itself into a base you can empty once a month. and unlike standard robots that bounce around, it cleans row by row. if it's not a shark, it's just a robot.
8:39 am
itso chantix can help you quit slow turkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix.
8:40 am
when we were looking he wanted someone super quiet. yeah, and he wanted someone to help out with chores. so, we got jean-pierre. but one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with renters insurance. ♪ yeah, geico did make it easy to switch and save. ♪ oh no. there's a wall there now. that's too bad. visit geico.com and see how easy saving on renters insurance can be. an election victory for democrats in 2020 will come down to winning key battleground states or flipping red states to blue, and the candidates are already eyeing these states,
8:41 am
like georgia, made it pretty clear, by the way, at this week's debate in atlanta. >> right here in this great state of georgia, it was the voter suppression, particularly of african-american communities, that prevented us from having a governor stacey abrams right now. >> yes, if we had a system like this and we did something about gerrymandering, stacey abrams would be governor of this state right now. >> the next president of the united states is going to have to do two things -- defeat donald trump -- that's number one -- and number two, they're going to have to be able to go into states like georgia and north carolina and other places and get a senate majority. >> all right, now a new study from the progressive group new american leaders highlights one way democrats could capture states like georgia, arizona, and michigan, and it boils down to mobilizing hundreds of thousands of new american citizens. in these key states, they outnumbered voters who separated
8:42 am
trump from clinton in 2016 by a lot. i want to bring in the founder and president of new american leaders, the organization behind this study. she served as new york's first commissioner of immigrant affairs. saya, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> i'm trying to figure out what problem you think needs to be solved -- getting new american citizens to turn out in greater numbers or getting them to support democrats? what's the thing you're trying to solve for? >> well, i'll say, look, we are in the most important election cycle of modern history, so we can't afford to leave any votes on the table. when i say we, i mean american democracy. >> right. >> but of course, we understand that there is a racist misogynist in the white house and that democrats have an obligation to engage as many voters as possible so that we can change the outcome of the election. and our study shows that the path to victory for 2020 can be forged through immigrant communities in the states that you mentioned. >> to what degree do you -- what
8:43 am
you're saying about donald trump -- you called him a racist misogynist president -- to what degree do you believe that motivates new american citizens who are eligible to vote? >> look, many of us, many of our communities, immigrant communities, feel under attack, both implicitly and explicitly. and so, there is an opportunity to mobilize not just new citizens, but other members of their families who can turn out and change -- we are voting not just for the president, but for the kind of america that we want to be. >> let's look at the battleground states that we're talking about, that you are suggesting, that new citizens can swing. in georgia, 440,000 potential votes. donald trump took that state by 211,000 votes in 2016. in arizona, 300,000 potential voters. donald trump took it by 91,000 votes in 2016. in michigan, 64,000 potential voters -- when i say potential voters, we're talking about new
8:44 am
american citizen voters versus donald trump winning it by 11,000 votes. so, you're suggesting that a concerted effort on the part of democrats could erase those donald trump gains if nothing changed? >> absolutely. i mean, the reality is that this population of voters -- latinos, asian americans, black immigrants, often get short-tripped. we talk about the rust belt, we talk about the sun belt. we don't talk about this great potential that there is in untapped waters. in 2016, a study showed that asian american registered voters, only 30% of them had been contacted by either party. so you have this huge untapped potential. and there are three ways that i think democrats can work to engage these voters. one is to invest in field organizing with organizers who understand these communities and have mobilized them for other issues. two is to engage trusted ambassadors in these communities. there are already plenty of state and local active officials who look like these communities, who understand them. and thirdly, i think the democratic presidential candidates have an opportunity
8:45 am
to endorse down-ballot candidates who reflect the new american majority, because they're doing two things when they do that. they're supporting these candidates. these are the candidates who are going to knock on their doors, but they're also saying, this is the america that we believe in, an america that looks like people like us. >> so, obviously, there's more chance of getting your door knocked on by a down-ballot candidate than a presidential candidate. so you feel that presidential candidates need to take advantage of an increased number of, as you call them, trusted ambassadors. some of those people are elected officials. some of them are -- >> community leaders. >> yeah. >> leaders of non-profit organizations who have an obligation to, if they're working with immigrant communities, they're non-partisan, but they have an obligation to turn out voters as part of the election. >> so, if they're doing that in a non-partisan way, if they're getting voters to, you know, register and show up and even doing things like getting to the polls, do you believe that most of those votes go to democrats as opposed to republicans? >> absolutely. and you know, we saw that in virginia two weeks ago. we saw that the mobilization of
8:46 am
voters of color, and particularly, the new asian american voters, flipped those legislatures. so we know that it's possible. we've seen it happen in other states, but we most recently saw it in virginia. >> sayu, thank you for being with us. founder and president of new american leaders. all right, up next, after a marathon of public impeachment hearings, it's a challenge just to keep the witnesses straight. i'll talk to two reporters who sat in that hearing room about what you may have missed and what didn't translate on tv. wha. wayfair's biggest black friday blowout ever is now on. yes! score unbelievable savings. like living room up to 70% off. storage solutions from $9.99. and area rugs up to 80% off. plus, tons of limited-time mystery flash deals. and free shipping on everything when you shop from thanksgiving through cyber monday. and we're just getting warmed up. our black friday blowout is happening now through december first. shop the event of the season, only at wayfair.com. i'm a regular in my neighborhood.
8:47 am
i'm a regular at my local coffee shop and my local barber shop. when you shop small you help support your community - from after school programs to the arts! so become a regular, more regularly. because for every dollar you spend at a small business, an average of 67 cents stays in the community. join me and american express on small business saturday, november 30th, and see how shopping small adds up. i didn't have to shout out for i didn't have to get you a lift. and i didn't have to call your wife to meet you at the doctor. because you didn't have another dvt. not today. we discussed how having one blood clot puts you at risk of having another,... ...so we chose xarelto®, to help keep you protected. xarelto®, is proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt or pe blood clots from happening again. in clinical trials, almost 98% of people did not have another dvt or pe. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor,...
8:48 am
as this may increase your risk of blood clots. while taking, a spinal injection increases the risk of blood clots, which may cause paralysis - the inability to move. you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve... ...or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. enjoy every moment - and help protect yourself... ...from an unexpected one, like another dvt or pe. are you doing enough? ask your doctor about xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com. in so many ways. which cage free eggs taste fresher and more delicious? only eggland's best. which organic eggs have more vitamins and less saturated fat? only eggland's best. better taste, better nutrition, better eggs.
8:49 am
doctor bob, what should i take for back pain? before you take anything, i recommend applying topical relievers first. salonpas lidocaine patch blocks pain receptors for effective, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu.
8:50 am
right now, republicans and democrats are weighing their next steps in the impeachment inquiry, but after 12 witnesses, two weeks of public hearings and hours -- hundreds -- of testimony, it's the sentiment of everyday americans that will ultimately drive this process, and most are likely still trying to digest what they've heard. so i want to bring in two reporters who have been in the thick of the impeachment hearings on capitol hill to help us make sense of everything and clue us in to what happens next. lisa des jarreden was in hearin for all 12 witnesses, and old friend of mine. and paul cain is a correspondent with the "washington post" who was inside washington post" whon the room on wednesday and thursday, the most explosive days to some people. welcome to both of you. lisa, for thoeks who either watched it, went in and out, watched a lot of it, are not sure what to make of it, how
8:51 am
would you encapsulate this? >> you're giving a good challenge for a tv reporter here. i think it comes down to the democrats' central message that they had witnesses say over and over again that they believe there was a policy coming out of the white house that essentially said if ukraine -- only if ukraine mounted investigations that were personally of interest and personally beneficial to the president could ukraine get the things it wanted, including a white house meeting and military aid money. i think it's an abuse of power, potentially a bribery argument. i think what these hearings were doing, what the democrats were doing was trying to bring witnesses who either had firsthand knowledge or were right next to those witnesses with firsthand knowledge dealing with the policy to show this was a problem in terms of abuse of power and in terms of national security. republicans, on the other hand, spent the entire time saying, but wait a minute, what exactly did the president say, and
8:52 am
pointing out that very little evidence actually included the president's words himself. the biggest evidence of the president's words of course were the july 25th phone call which is were all this started, the phone call between presidents zelensky and trump. >> and to that extent, paul, how did it work? because i kind of think it depends on how your ear was tuned, what you heard. republicans have spent the last 24 hours vilifying, for instance, fiona hill and many democrats and people who aren't partisan have sat there and said, that was some of the most compelling testimony they've ever heard. >> first of all, hats off to lisa for braving the cold weather in that hearing room for all those hours. >> it's true. >> your viewers may have noticed in the backdrop some people wearing scarves. >> it was very air-conditioned. >> it was cold. in terms of the hearing and what the democrats got out of it, they were able from the very opening, acting ambassador bill taylor said at the very end of his presentation, he says, look,
8:53 am
i also have this new information about a phone call that my staffer at ukrainian embassy heard from the president making a call to gordon sondland and the final person testifying yesterday was in fact that staffer, david holmes, who was able to directly put trump talking to eu ambassador sondland about investigations and biden. and you get direct words essentially from the president with a lot of interest in these investigations. so the democrats were able to try and rebut some of those, oh, this is hearsay, this is secondhand. and that was what they got the most out of these hearings. there were new revelations happening in at least two or three of the hearings that we weren't expecting in the media based off of the closed-door testimony. so they were able to advance the ball and keep a little bit of the news going, and also just trying to rebut some of that gop
8:54 am
pushback that this is all secondhand hearsay. >> so lisa, there was congressman turner who, you know, sort of tried to paint a picture of the fact that no one has come up with any new information, there are various ideas floated over the course of the last few days, that it didn't work, it didn't really happen, trump wasn't really directing it. then you have this issue of both volker and sondland who both changed their testimony over time. it comes down to a "they said" and "these guys didn't initially say but subsequently said." it muddies the republican response as to what does success for republicans look like, coming out of these hearings. >> it's an interesting question. as republicans bring up the fact that not all witnesses they wanted were called, that includes hunter biden and the whistle-blower themselves, the problem for them is that of course many of the witnesses that many of us would like to hear from that are pivotal in
8:55 am
this case are white house staffers, high level staffers and the secretary of state, the acting chief of staff, those witnesses are not testifying, because the white house has blocked them and told them not to do so. so republicans, as they're saying, hey, wait a minute, it's not fair, we don't get to speak to our witnesses, on the other hand, it is republicans who are blocking witnesses at the same time. so that's another conflict for them. ali, i think you nailed it at the top of this segment. it's going to come down to the voters. in the end, we are going to spend the next two, three months, who knows how long, obsessed with this impeachment investigation. it is going to drown out many other important stories. but in the end, for democrats like house speaker pelosi, they know it is unlikely that the senate will convict and that in the end, the end game is still the election. so the question is what do these hearings to how voters see the president. that will be the key decision. and that's what democrats really were focusing on this week, trying to thread a needle of just enough testimony but not
8:56 am
too much to overload voters, just to raise the case that this is a president who is abusing his power, risking national security. i don't know if they made that case or not. but i will tell you something that stood out to me in that hearing room. the crowd was a different crowd. this was not protesters, this was not interns. these were people seriously paying attention. >> thank you to both of you for paying attention and covering it for us and providing your analysis. lisa is a pbs news hour correspondent and paul kane is "the washington post" senior correspondent. coming up, where the state department goes from here. he ste department goes from here. ♪then entresto is a heart failure pill that helped keep people alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. ♪la-di-la-di-di don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium.
8:57 am
ask your doctor about entresto. ♪the beat goes on yeah! could another come aroundot, the corner. or could it play out differently? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot. almost 98% of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling numbness or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily. and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planed medical or dental procedures.
8:58 am
what's around the corner could be your moment. ask your doctor about eliquis. janie, come here. check this out. let me see. she looks... kind of like me. yeah. that's because it's your grandma when she was your age. oh wow. that's...that's amazing. oh and she was on the debate team. yeah, that's probably why you're the debate queen. - mmhmm. - i'll take that.
8:59 am
look at that smile. i have the same dimples as her. yeah. the same placements and everything. unbelievable. the same placements and everything. is your business still settling for slow internet? well time is money. switch to comcast business now and get a great deal when you get fast, reliable internet. with a 30-day money-back guarantee, installation when it works for you, and 24/7 customer support. so what are you waiting for? get this great deal when you sign up for fast, reliable internet. call 1-800-501-6000 today.
9:00 am
comcast business. beyond fast. that wraps up this hour of "msnbc live." i will see you back here at 3:00 p.m. eastern and 10:00 p.m. eastern tonight. right now andrea mitchell starts. >> thanks so much. right now on "andrea mitchell reports," errand boys. public hearings end with star witnesses detailing a campaign to withhold a white house meeting and vital military aid from ukraine in exchange for political dirt on the president's opponents. led by rudy giuliani and a big trump donor awarded an ambassadorship. >> he was being involved in a domestic political errand. and we were being involved in national security foreign policy. and those two things had just diverged. fast track. republican senators talk to the white house about a possible strategy to

78 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on