signed, sealed, undelivered. the house voted to impeach donald trump setting up an angry presidential response. >> you're declaring open war on american democracy. >> and now critical of the senate process, house democrats throw the president's trial into limbo. >> frankly, i don't care what the republicans say. >> a member of each party leadership, republican roy blunt and democratic senator dick durbin coming up. and ticket to ride. angling for a top finish in iowa, the 2020 democrats make their case by drawing contrasts. >> i have the experience of actually getting the things done that he talks about.

>> will it work? candidate amy klobuchar joins us next. plus strike a pose. candidates modern way of connecting with voters. >> selfies. >> how the art of the selfie is changing the way that presidential hopeful campaign. hello, i'm dana bash in for jake tapper in washington where the state of the union is at a stalemate. president trump impeached by the house of representatives for abuse of power and obstruction of justice -- of congress rather but the process is still at a standstill. congress went home for the holiday break and house speaker nancy pelosi is still holding the articles of impeachment until she sees what the rules will look lick. mitch mcconnell said no skin off my back and in no rush and

holding off senate democrats who are demanding a pretrial deal to call witnesses. as for the president, he is eager to mount a strong defense. assuming a senate trial does happen, the democratic senators also running for president will have to balance serving as impeachment jurors with appreciate time on the campaign trail. the iowa caucuses are around the corner. with me one of the senators working hard in iowa hoping her buzzing debate performance this week helps draw more support there. so amy klobuchar there is a democratic candidate for president and a member of the judiciary committee in the senate. and you said you and fellow democrats will do whatever it takes to push forti witnesses ia senate trial and mitch mcconnell isn't on ford. would you vote to start a senate trial without an agreement to call witnesses or is that a deal breaker? >> i think there will be an agreement and this trial will go

forward. i think what is shocking to me is that right now, despite the president claiming his innocence and claiming that he wants to present witnesses, he's the one blocking the witnesses, dana. he's the one -- he could have his acting chief of staff mick mulvaney testify. we just found out this weekend that someone who works for mulvaney michael duffy had sent an email 90 minutes after the president made that critical call to the ukraine president. this guy sent an email, i have it here and just found it. given the sensitive nature of the request i appreciate you keeping this information closely held and said don't release any of the funds. this man should testify and i will add one more thing, when richard nixon, when those hearings were held, richard nixon had all of the president's men testify. he had major people testify from his administration. and they're being blocked and don't be surprised, the polls

show 64% of republicans think the witnesses should testify. >> just to follow up quickly, you think there will be an agreement soon but it sounds like they'll probably be votes on whether these witnesses will be asked to come forward? >> you know, i don't know exactly how this will go down. i simply know that we have a constitutional duty to take on this very important case. >> okay. >> the president betrayed the trust of the american people and i have been even saying the same thing as i say in public behind closed doors, with our leadership in the senate, i'm in the leadership team and i mean very clear we should do whatever it takes and i could still run for the president. i'm a mom and i could do two things at once. >> let's talk about running tor president. at this week's debate one of the biggest moments was your criticism of mayor pete buttigieg over what you said was his lack of experience. listen to how he responded on cnn afterwards. >> well, i think the suggestion is that i don't understand the ways of washington.

as reality is i understand them, i just don't accept them. the american people are fed up with the way things are going in washington. and i think we need to bring change. might be a good idea for the change to come from outside of the beltway. >> so he's saying he's an outsider, you're an insider. you're response. >> my response is what i said on that stage, is that he basically had condemned the experience, he said a hundred years of experience on the stage in the previous debate and i pointed out to him that experience does matter. that is how we got the consumer financial protection bureau because of elizabeth or two people that weren't on the stage last time, cory booker's work on the first step act which is going to help get a lot of people out of prison that shouldn't have been there or kamala harris' work helping consumers in california. i think the fact that someone has experience can be a really good thing right now when we have a president who went in there with no experience and has

done nothing when it comes to helping regular people. what do i hear in iowa? i hear about people struggling to pay for insulin. people who are struggling to send kids to college. and when when he passed that tax bill, he could have helped regular bill instead he went down to mar-a-lago and went to his friends and said we just made you richer and none of the people from iowa were sitting in that room. >> and senator, also at the debate you were asked about your vote to confirm a trump-appointed federal judge who further dismantled obamacare this week. you acknowledged that there are quote, some of the judges that you think are are going to be okay and they aren't. so you've voted for dozens of trump nominated judges. was that a mistake? >> i have voted against dozens of those judges. >> it is about half and half. >> pretty good record. okay. you can, yes. but i'm somewhere in the middle of the caucus on the judge votes

and i think everyone tries to make their best determination. i think i pointed out that person that wrote that decision was a judge that had been supported by president obama and ted kennedy and bernie sanders and many other people including myself. so my point here is what is really so going on is the trump administration brought this case, they are trying to dismantle the affordable care act and some of my colleagues on that debate stage want to start over with medicare for all. like i said -- go ahead. >> just to button up, i want to ask the original question which is on the trump judges. yes, you voted against and you voted yay on 29 and 26 others were approved by voice vote so you gave tacit approval. do you regret that now? >> i would have to look at each of those judges. i don't carte blanche make a

decision based on whether or not trump nominated them. if it went by voice vote then every other ressal candidate up there in the senate voted for them as well. so you make your best judgment. i think the bigger case is as president i will be able to appoint the kind of judges that we see right now that i admire, like elena kagen and sonia sotomayor and justice breyer and justice ginsburg. my track record of recommending judges to barack obama and he took every recommendation i made have been some excellent judges. and i think that is what you look at as well as my experience. i'm the one that when justice kavanaugh, then nominee kavanaugh took me on at the judiciary committee i didn't back down and strongly opposed him and made a point to the american people. >> and we talked about the debate and what happened there. looking ahead to the debate in january, you say you've already qualified for that debate. so far only five white

candidates have qualified. why do you think that is? >> you have to look at each individual campaign. i'm hopeful that that won't be the end. my friend cory booker is out here in iowa campaigning as well. i know that andrew yang has qualified port way toward making that debate. so we will see what happens as this campaign keeps going. there is a lot of twists and turns. all i know is this, dana, we have a huge momentum going on right now. every one of the events in tiny, tiny towns, we've just done 15 counties with record crowds and raised over a million dollars from regular people at amyklobuchar.com after that debate and doubled our offices in iowa and new hampshire and added people in north carolina and south carolina and south carolina and nevada. we are working so hard. >> so you know what else you have. you have a doppelganger on snl.

if you watched it last night. take a look. >> yes. >> the only cave i ever go to is a man cave. i call it the senate. there are more of these classic zingers check out my standup special land of special telling laughs -- >> standup amy klobuchar special coming soon. >> that is pretty good. well, that was a fun part of the debate. when i appointed out that discussion had gone so long so i suggested that maybe we should go to the wind cave in south dakota which is a national park. and what you like to know, dana, is now i have a number of splunkers that are now really excited about my candidacy. so in a close primary like this. >> you never know. >> you have to keep reaching out. >> one constituency at a time. thank you. >> that is exactly how i'm going to win this. >> thank you for joining me.

appreciate it. and speaker nancy pelosi said she won't hand over the articles of impeachment until the senate outlined its plan for a trial. will that work? top republican senator roy blunt joins me next. and can you even be a true political junky if you don't post a selfie with your candidate? stay with us. ( ♪ )

at chevy, we're all about bringing families together. this time of year, that's really important. so we're making it easier than ever to become part of our family. that's why our chevy employee discount is now available to everyone. the chevy price you pay is what we pay. not a cent more. family is important to us. and we want you to be part of ours. so happy holidays. and welcome to the family. all: the chevy family! get the chevy employee discount for everyone today. every year, our analysts visit thousands of companies, in a multitude of countries, where we get to know the people that drive a company's growth and gain new perspectives. that's why we go beyond the numbers. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

that's why we go beyond the numbers. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby,

helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message.

welcome back to "state of the union," i'm dana bash. the senate is headed into the holidays in limbo over the president's impeachment trial as the parties square off over calling potential witnesses to testify. joining me now is a member of the republican leadership senator roy blunt. thank you so much for coming in this morning. you've been in congress a long time. >> i have. >> you have relationships across the aisle. so what is your sense? are you going to come up with a deal so that this trial is going to start early january? >> i think a deal is easy to come up with and we've even got the plan in place from what happened in the clinton impeachment. and i think that is ultimately where we wind up, where we start down this path. let both sides make their case, let the house impeachment

managers make their case, let the president, for what i would argue is the first time have a chance to make his case publicly for his defenders to do that and then see where we arement that is -- and that is what is happened with clinton and otherwise we sort of start down a path where 51 senators decide every issue as it comes up. i don't know that anybody wants to have that happen or take the time that would take on either side for us to get this out before the american people, both sides having a chance to present their case. >> so as you well know the standoff now is that the speaker is holding the articles of impeachment at the house until the parameters of the trial are done. the washington street journal editorial board said the senate could and should hold a trial even if you don't get the articles. is that possible. did you look into that. >> i don't know that is

possible. i don't think that is likely. i don't think the speaker has the right or the power to do this. the speaker has a lot of power but once the house is spoken, the speaker doesn't get the decision as to whether or not she transmits that decision to the senate in my view. i think we'll have this all handled by the time we get back in january. i'm sure everybody is beginning to figure out how to present their case. frankly, i think it is a mistake on the speaker's part. i think it is pretty political any way. and this is sort of the icing on the political cake. where at the end the speaker still can't let go of this as an issue to try to wring the last vestage of politicals out of it. the outcome here is virtually certain as i've been saying dfo weeks. a partisan vote in the house would certainly result in a partisan vote in the senate so that the outcome is certain. trying to get the last thing out of it rather than move on as the

speaker appeared to want to do one day last week and then suddenly she decides to involve herself in what the senate should do. >> so you say the outcome is almost certain. i want you to listen to what a couple of your republican colleagues have said. >> i'm not an impartial juror. this is a political process. there is not anything judicial about it. impeachment is a political decision. >> i am trying to give a pretty clear signal i've made up my mind. >> have you made up your mind? >> well based on what i know right now, i don't think they made the case. i don't think they came close to making the case. and this is called a trial because there is really in the constitution i think, no better thing to call it. but it is a very political process. five of the so-called jurors running for president, not a single republican in the house convinced they should vote for either the articles of impeachment and a couple of democrats convinced they shouldn't vote for the articles

of impeachment. so it is not a classic -- i was talking to a federal judge one day this week, dana, and you said how you could call this a trial. he's a federal judge for a decade or more where half of the jurors would overrule what the judge decides ought to happen next. it is not a trial in any classic sense. it is a political decision to do it. and at the end of the day every single member of the senate has considerations that are pretty obvious. >> so you don't think that the house made its case but let's talk about some -- one of the basic things which is the president asking a foreign country, the leader of a foreign country to investigate a man who is a political rival of his. is that appropriate? >> well at the same time you had the attorney general asking leaders of other countries to help them look into the 2016 elections. >> which is the -- which is to benefit the united states. this is a specific act,

specifically about his political opponent. so do you feel that is appropriate. >> the president and the secretary of state and the -- the retired lieutenant general who is a foreign policy adviser all feel like that call was within -- >> what do you think? what does roy blunt think? >> i think i've never been very happy with any of the ukraine decisions since the russians invaded crimea. we told president obama in december of 2015 to provide lethal aid, which he never did. i'm never been happy with the way any of this has been handled regarding ukraine so we're trying to do what we can now to be helpful. >> so your colleagues, ben sasse called it very troubling, the call, asking for -- to help dig up dirt on joe biden. lamar alexander said it was inappropriate. marco rubio said he shouldn't have done it and the list goes on. >> any other president would have said i'll have the attorney general call you about what we are looking into and this one

didn't. >> did he make a mistake. >> the president makes mistakes and i don't know if this call is a mistake but i think there are plenty of mistakes made by president obama and president trump dealing with ukraine and dealing with the russia aggression in ukraine and just like dealing with the russian aggressions in our elections. >> so let's talk about potential witnesses in the senate trial. some key figures like former national security adviser john bolton haven't testified. bolton's lawyer said that bolton was involved in, quote, many relevant meetings and conversations that have not yet been discussed in the testimonies thus far. as a juror, don't you want to hear from him? >> as a senator, ands as a person who believes the constitution is there for a purpose, i think it is the job of the house to make the case. only a majority of the house can send a case over to the senate for 180 years we only one time touch with the idea of

presidential impeachment. here, now three times in 46 years, the congress has moved through the process of impeaching a president. i don't think you want to make that so easy that the house -- that the house is of a different party could send over the vaguest set of charges and expect the senate then to do the house's job. i think they should have gone to court, just like the house did with clinton, just like the house did with nixon. it would have taken some time. but that's -- they've had plenty of time. >> so it was the house's job and you will not vote to hear from any witnesses? if that comes up. >> let's let them present their case and see if we need to hear from witnesses. that is the way it was done in 20 -- in 1999 and that is the way we should do it -- >> and i want to ask you about a article from the editor of christianity today and he called for the president's removal from

office and wrote none of the president's positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character, going on to say that he should be removed, we believe, it is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the creator of the ten commandments. so he's saying that he can't reconcile his christian faith and values, kindness, generosity, integrity with the president's immoral actions and business relationships with women and habitual string of mischaracterization and lies and sand -- slanders. and i know your christianity is important to you and your constituents are christians, is this familiar, do you wrestle with this? >> i think that person looking at the president versus what the president has done as president is got to be an outlier in everything i hear from the christian and faith-based community generally is very

supportive of this president because he's been very supportive of them. what the president has done to allow faith-based institutions to get back as one of the potential options in adoptions, something i care a lot about. what the president has done to try to assert religious freedom all over the world. >> what about you, roy blunt, do you struggle personally -- >> if roy blunt looks at the president's actions, no president in my lifetime has been aggressive in trying to achieve the goals that faith-based voters have set out than this one has. >> thank you so much. i appreciate you coming in. >> great to be with you. >> thank you. and the latest on democrats impeachment strategy. the number two senate democrat dick durbin joins me next. stra. things happen. and sometimes you can find yourself heading in a new direction. but at fidelity, we help you prepare for the unexpected

with retirement planning and advice for what you need today and tomorrow. because when you're with fidelity, a partner who makes sure every step is clear, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. a partner who makes sure every step is clear, 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. the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile. and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network.

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! here, it all starts withello! hi!... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! wifi up there? uhh.

sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your local xfinity store today.

welcome back to "state of the union." the stalemate over impeachment raises a key question for democrats. with republicans in control of the senate, can democrats accomplish anything by holding on to the articles of impeachment in the house and potentially delay a senate trial. joining me now is the number two senate democrat dick durbin who was there 21 years ago during the impeachment trial of bill clinton. thank you so much for joining me this morning. several of your fellow democrats, elizabeth warren, kamala harris, bernie sanders, have said based on the evidence that they have seen they would vote to convict president trump. will you? >> well, i'm going to take an oath of office when this comes to the impeachment tlofloor of senate as i did 21 years ago with clinton and in that i claim impartial justice so help me god and i want to stick by that. i want to hear the evidence,

read the documents and make a decision right for america. >> so is it a miss take on both sides of the aisle to say how they're going to vote before the trial starts. >> i think it is. i think they've gone too far. how could they hold their hands up and say i swear impartial justice and would like to sit at the table with the president's team. they can't do that. >> democrats have done it too. >> well they shouldn't. as far as i'm concerned they could tell which way they are leaning or how they feel in terms of the possibility but when it comes to saying i mind up my mind it is all over, for goodness sakes that is not what the constitution envisioned. hamilton said we give this job to the senate because they are independent and dignified for goodness sake let's do our best to meet those standards. >> senator, speaker nancy pelosi is waiting to send the articles until she's confident there is a fair trial, and you heard mitch

mcconnell saying it doesn't matter, he doesn't need to have a trial any way. so what leverage do you and fellow democrats have by holding the articles in the house. >> i went to the floor of the senate and i was the only member of the senate sitting on the floor and listened carefully to what senator mcconnell said the other day and it is clear he made up his mind and he is not interested in the evidence and wants to get this over with and move on to the appointment of more federal judges. that is a serious problem. i think the american people expect us to carefully consider the evidence not conceal the evidence. they're looking for a fair trial not a fake trial and a real trial involves documents and witnesses. >> but do you think that by keeping the articles of impeachment in the house that's going to really help your case? >> i think it is a fair question from speaker pelosi and that is what she's asked for.

i know senator schumer sat down with senator mcconnell and this didn't go far very and senator schumer said to mcconnell, i'll let you think this over over the holidays and come back to this as soon as we can. i understand speaker pelosi is not unreasonable. >> do you think she and you and democrats have leverage here because what mcconnell is saying, you so you don't send me the articles of impeachment, so what i'll move on and do more judges. >> our hope is four republican senators will stand up as 20 years ago we saw in the impeachment of bill clinton and say this is much bigger than our current political squabbles. this is the third time in history a president has been impeached. the constitution is very clear that we have an awesome responsibility. and let's live up to it on a bipartisan basis before republican senators step up, it could make a big difference. >> you talk to a lot of republican senators across the

aisle. do you -- have you identified four who will do that? >> no. i've never -- twisted their arms or asked their questions. i've spoken to a few of them. they tell me the political circumstances in the republican caucus are really extreme in terms of this loyalty to the president no matter what. >> so, senator, during president clinton's impeachment trial you remember all 100 senators, including yourself, agreed to delay a -- questions about witnesses until after both sides made their case. that is exactly what mitch mcconnell said he wants to do again. take the template from 21 years ago, use it now. what is wrong with that? >> well, the difference is at that point we had an extensive investigation by kenneth starr with sworn testimony and grand jury testimony. this was a big record for us to deal with in terms of the trial of bill clinton. we don't have that in this situation. we have the actions of some 14

different witnesses who appeared before the house of representatives and of course other evidence that's been brought together. what we're looking for is a signal from mitch mcconnell that he hasn't ruled out the documents and witnesses and asked for very obvious witnesses. mick mulvaney, for goodness sakes, we believe was not only party to the conversation that is at hand here, but as acting head of omb, he had had something to do with the decision to withhold this military aid to ukraine. >> so should house democrats have waited and gone to the courts to try to compel the testimony from people like mick mulvaney? >> well, the president's defense team knew exactly if that is the strategy they followed we would never finish this in a timely fashion. as this wound its way through court from one level to another. so they went forward with what i thought were compelling testimonies from these witnesses. we saw them all. in fact, at one point, and i want to make this point, dana, they invited the house judiciary

committee and the president and his attorney to sit at the dais and ask questions and they turned them down and didn't want to be there and ask the questions. so at this point i think they move forward as best they could to present the case. >> you were talking about republicans who may join you in some of the votes. you're the whip. let me ask you about some democrats. there are a number of moderate democrats, would they potentially vote against either article of impeachment. >> dana, i've been a whip for a while and when it comes to whipping, there are some we don't touch and this is one of them. this is a question of con science. it goes beyond any party line position. and chuck schumer has made it clear, each member will make their decision based on the facts and their constitutional responsibility. >> senator dick durbin, thank you for your time this morning. have a happy holidays. >> thank you, dana, happy

holidays. and six weeks until voters weigh in and the democrats are throwing around their elbows so if you are down in your wine cave you mie want to come out and hear the latest. stay tuned. if your gums bleed when you brush, you may have gingivitis. and the clock could be ticking towards bad breath,

receding gums, and possibly... tooth loss. help turn back the clock on gingivitis with parodontax. leave bleeding gums behind. parodontax. that will makeout washington insiders very uncomfortable: term limits. you and i both know we need term limits, that congress shouldn't be a lifetime appointment. but members of congress, and the corporations who've bought our democracy hate term limits. too bad. i'm tom steyer and i approve this message

because the only way we get universal healthcare, address climate change and make our economy more fair is to change business as usual in washington.

billionaires in wine caves should not pick the next president of the united states. >> mr. mayor, your response?

>> you know, according to forbes magazine i'm the literally only person on this stage who is not a millionaire or a billionaire. so it is -- this is important. this is the problem with issuing purity tests you cannot yourself pass. >> shimmering feud between senator elizabeth warren and mayor pete buttigieg spills over on to the debate stage. let's discuss. i'll start with the democrats here. mayor gill um, how is your perspective of the fighting and elbowing was? >> well the important point is to say we have to change the way money impacts politics. that is the broad theme of it all. the problem is that senator warren has already raised money in a similar fashion. maybe not in a wine cave but certainly with wealthy donors. she has piloted in this race for president the idea that small

money put together could actually power forward a campaign. and that is a good thing. but i wouldn't draw the conclusion that wealthy people who give contributions to candidates are bad or sinister or are corrupt. and the people who receive them, i wouldn't draw that conclusion either. and this will have resonance because most of us have not been in a wine cave and that there is something illusive about that and i think it will continue to be an attack. >> i agree but this is a disaster for both of them. >> why? >> having come through the dean gephart suicide impact and where the two co-front-runners got into this battle and it never works in a candidate field. they're hurting each other and others will benefit from that, particularly amy klobuchar and maybe joe biden. >> you're the only one to win an iowa caucus -- >> i agree with joe. i think fighting about an issue

that most people don't care about and being nasty about it doesn't help either one of these people. i think pete has seen his day. i think i've seen this in so many races where you sort of peak a little too early and -- not saying that he's a bad candidate but the flaws of his candidacy are being shown. i think the person who did well in that debate and you heard it in your afterwards in your focus groups and someone who i think is poised because everybody likes her and i was there in iowa. and i was low in the polls. everybody liked me but no one would vote for me? why? because i couldn't win, poll numbers are low. and everybody likes amy and her polls are coming up and as buttigieg goes down and amy will come up and some will go to joe biden and she'll get some votes and all of a sudden, hey, i like her and she can win. that is what you have to look for. >> but you know what was

fascinating about that debate is just a couple of months ago we were talking about how left-wing the democratic party has been. they're all tacking to the center, including elizabeth warren. and i aagree with rick on this. i think amy klobuchar did well but clearly joe biden benefits as well. >> i'm glad you brought that up. because let's listen to part of the debate that made people say exactly what you're both saying. >> as you've noticed, the first number of debates i'm the guy with the target on my back from every single person on the stage and i was able to be able to just state my position clearly and move on. my whole purpose in the beginning is to make the case not why other people aren't qualified but why i'm the most qualified person to defeat donald trump. >> that is obviously not joe biden at debate but assessing his own performance. >> he did very well in the

debate. probably the best debate he's had throughout. and so when you look at what the dynamics of this race are right now, he's been resilient. i thought he was -- been much stronger than what a lot of people were giving him credit for from the very beginning. and now as people in iowa focus on the field, what happens is the doubts they have about the people they're with, so if they are doubts about mayor pete or have doubts about warren and doubts about biden, it is the person who actually is moving at the time, who had a really good debate performance or has stayed out of that fray as amy klobuchar has that benefits and that is why i think getting into the fight with mayor pete and going after each other. >> she got into a fight with the mayor also. >> she did too. but she's below the fray -- as rick said, she's sort of not in

the front-runner top tier right now and she could move and benefit. i think joe biden will benefit as well. >> but her engaging was important for her to set herself apart. she knows that some of the reasons why she's not doing as well is frankly because pete has taken away a good deal of that support. she needed engage them. and this is all about adults and politics and i don't have as problem so long as they stay out of the personal attack range. largely i thought this did that. >> what about biden? >> i thought biden did a solid job. the truth is that he actually didn't have to do a great deal to walk away from that debate having kind of the glowing reviews that he has. why? because he is the front-runner without a doubt. there is a little bit of in expectations thing and for me what a lot of folks on the democratic side want is they want to choose a winner. someone who could go up against donald trump and win. and some of what has created the

ability por rise for some of the other candidates is doubts about whether joe could be consistently steady. he showed steadiness and direct and short and made his points. i think he had the fifth lowest talking time. so he benefited and that is a good thing. >> joe benefited from the fact that the prior performances were not very good at all and so this by comparison looks good. that is the perception. he was so much crisper and -- >> and perception is everything. >> and perception is everything. and he did a good job. if peek wa-- if people want to step back and see if he could take on donald trump -- >> so i want to talk about the article that came out in the evangelical magazine where the editor called for the president's removal from office. and it said in part, trump tweeted back to it and he said, i get the magazine christianity today is looking for elizabeth warren, bernie sanders or those of the socialist communist bent to guard their religion.

how about sleepy joe. the fact no president has ever done what i have for evangelicals or religion itself. and you heard roy blunt say exactly that here and not talk about what the editor said was that the president offends his christian sensibilities. >> that is the problem that i have. i agree with a lot of what president trump has done. i'm a conservative. i'm still a republican. but he is an immoral man. and the fact that you will not ever hear republicans -- during this whole house impeachment debate when will hurd came to the floor and gave his speech, the worst thing he could say is that foreign policy he could not say that it was wrong. that what the president did was wrong. and the fact that no republicans seem to be able to get out there and make that distinction. >> first, a lot of republicans

have. you quoted three or four of them who did. i said. a lot of republicans have said it. a lot of republicans say publicly and privately they don't like a lot of things this president says and that they are d they're problematic. the bottom line is what he's doing? what's he doing for the even jell cal chr evangelical christian world. >> if that's not a question in your heart. >> there's no perfect candidate. there's no perfect politician. you've got to take the bad with the good. >> this is a marriage of convenience. this is about the courts. we had the video from access hollywood. we had his going after people with disabilities. this is his character. this is who he is. i'm surprised it's taken this long to call it out. >> it matters. it does. >> thank you for this interesting discussion. happy holidays. >> happy holidays.

up next, voters do it for instagram. elizabeth warren does it for votes. how the selfie is a defining feature of the 2020 campaign. investment opportunities firsthand, like biotech. because your investments deserve the full story. t. rowe price invest with confidence. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby, helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco,

helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. ♪ ♪ ♪ everything your trip needs for everyone you love. expedia. for everyone you love. at chevy, we're all about bringing families together. this time of year, that's really important. so we're making it easier than ever to become part of our family. man: that's why our chevy employee discount is now available to everyone. the chevy price you pay is what we pay. not a cent more. family is important to us. and we'd like you to be part of ours.

so happy holidays. and welcome to the family. the chevy family! get the chevy employee discount for everyone today. there's a reason 1 serum is sold every minute. revitalift hyaluronic acid serum. with our highest concentration of hyaluronic acid. visibly replumps skin. and reduces wrinkles. revitalift hyaluronic acid serum from l'oréal.

(thud) (crash) (grunting) (whistle) play it cool and escape heartburn fast with tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tu-tu-tum tums

on the campaign trail autographs are out. selfies are in. >> i love that you have a tattoo. let's do a selfie. >> it's a critical stop on elizabeth warren's campaign trail. her selfie line. hundreds of thousands of photos with her supporters. >> we get to the most important part of democracy, and that is selfies. >> i'm coming in on 100,000

selfies. >> her update on selfies was enough to get an opponent. >> you're not the only one to do selfies. >> it's more memorable than an autograph and a key way for can candidates to build connection. >> a woman said i've been in the rain for hours. can i have a selfie. my people said no, i said absolutely. >> ta parody twitter account shows a selfie is when you're holding the camera as well as posing for the camera. writing there's an industry of fact checkers letting elizabeth warren get away with calling these selfies, and i won't stand for it. classic selfie or not, these snaps are here to stay. >> i'm going to keep doing town halls and selfie lines. >> thanks so much for watching.

fareed zakaria gps starts next. '. with every attempt to free itself, it only becomes more entangled. unaware that an exhilarating escape is just within reach. defy the laws of human nature. at the season of audi sales event.

the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile. and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network. nyquil severe gives you powerful relief for your worst cold and flu symptoms, on sunday night and every night. nyquil severe. the nightime, sniffling, sneezing, coughing, aching, stuffy head,

best sleep with a cold, medicine.

this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. today on the show. >> i think we have a vote coming. >> a remarkable day in america. >> article one is adopted. >> for only the third time in history, a president of the united states is impeached. how does this one differ