i'm hallie jackson in washington, in for chuck todd tonight. welcome to "mtp daily." you want a taste of what 2019 is going to be like in washington? you got it because right now democratic leaders appear hellbent on inflicting maximum pain on the president after he so publicly declared, i will proudly take the mantle on a shutdown. the white house appears hellbent on finding a way to blame nancy pelosi and drive a wedge through her party. and the president appears hellbent on making maximum threats, maybe to play to his base. today multiple times on twitter promising a different kind of shutdown, shutting down the southern border entirely if he does not get the money for his wall that he wants. now, the white house has backed off that initial number, that dollar amount it wants for the wall. it's not $5 billion anymore. but to some democrats, it kind of doesn't matter. $5 billion, $5, 5 gazillion dollars, it's all the same because the answer is no.
no deal. that's essentially what the incoming assistant speaker of the house said on this show yesterday. is there a dream list on your agenda that you might want to get done if you're going to have to trade something to get this shutdown done? >> look, i'm not open to giving a penny to president trump for this ridiculous wall of his. >> then today, nancy pelosi's office put out this statement. democrats are united against the president's immoral, ineffective, and expensive wall. the wall that he specifically promised that mexico would pay for. remember, chuck schumer had said okay to $1.6 billion in wall funding to keep the government open. now the democratic strategy appears to be focused on making the president eat his words on owning a shutdown. and the shutdown strategy from the white house has gone from demanding money to fully fund the wall and proudly owning a shutdown to asking for a check that is not nearly enough to pay for the wall and pointing the finger at pelosi.
>> she's unwilling to actually do anything until she gets her speakership. she's more willing to protect that than she is to protect our borders and protect american lives. >> she does not have the votes, and if she cuts a deal with the president of any sort before her election on january 3rd, she's at risk of losing her speakership. so we're in this for the long haul. >> so bottom line, the $5 billion question remains, how does this all end, and who pays literally and figuratively? our panel is going to answer that question. jake sherman, senior writer with politico, and co-author of plit co-playbook, yamiche alcindor, and white house correspondent for pbs news hour. and hughhewitt. thank you for all being here on this special set on this holiday friday. jake, let me start with you. answer the question if you can. who pays for this politically and actually? >> actually the u.s. government
is going to pay for it clearly because congress appropriates money and that -- >> because mexico is not going to? >> mexico is not going to pay for it. the trade deal that the president says will pay for the wall has not been passed through congress, so that's not going to pay for it either. who's going to pay for this? the president continues each day, according to republicans and democrats, not in my view, he continues to lose leverage because in six days from now, nancy pelosi will be speaker. >> right. >> and she will control the chamber of congress, which democrats don't have right now. so it's tough for me to see how the president gets out of this box canyon that he's put himself in, but it's going to include not getting $5 billion for this wall. >> yet in my day job over at the white house, yamiche, i've talked to officials who say, we think the pressure is actually building on democrats. we think the longer this goes on and when people get back from the holiday week and start to feel the pain, the calculus will change. does that hold water? >> i think that's hopeful thinking, and hopefully they're thinking that they want nancy pelosi to possibly bear the burden because she's going to most likely be the speaker of the house. but when you say who's going to
pay for it, the question is what is even it? >> yeah. >> because pay for a wall that's probably -- republicans and democrats likely agree and mostly agree, the sources that i talked to, that there probably isn't going to be a wall because, one, president trump can't pay for it, and, two, he's already started to adjust his language, talking about steel slats, about a fence that higher than the fence you have now. so i think president trump was the one that was here over the holidays alone in washington, having his family and his son flown back from florida to cut their vacation short. nancy pelosi, chuck schumer, mitch mcconnell, paul ryan, they were all gone. so as much as the president wants this to be nancy pelosi's problem, it's increasingly his problem because as jake said, democrats are going to have more power, not less in 2019. >> so there's two parts to that, hugh. jump in here because there's a question of what it actually is, right, what this deal actually is. is it a wall? is it some fence with a steel thing in it? and then there's the political price with this new reuters
ipsos poll that says more people would blame the president than would blame democrats for this. >> see, i think it's a jump ball politically. when the president took the mantle -- >> he said it, right? he literally said, i take the mantle. i will own it. >> so he owned it, but then he gave it back to chuck schumer by saying, we have $4 trillion in federal outlays a year, and you won't spend -- on border security. there was testimony in front of ron desantis by brandon judd, who is the head of the border patrol front line agents. they want about 300 miles of fences, primarily secondary fences on fences that already exist. there is a coherent fencing strategy. the wall rhetoric is what is dividing them. i was just telling jake before we got starts, i think this is over in a week or isn't over for months. >>. i hear the same thing. i spoke with one member of congress earlier today who said, yeah, definitely weeks, plural. is that the sense you got? >> yeah. i don't think a deal will be cut in january. it could be but it's not likely.
nancy pelosi will most likely win the speakership and will have a lot of things on her agenda that is not cutting a deal with donald trump. i don't think many of the members who were elected in 2018 got elected to cut an immigration deal with donald trump. that's not what i heard on the campaign trail in 2018 from democrats looking to win the house. the idea that pelosi is not cutting a deal because she doesn't have the votes to be speaker is not realistic. >> it's not grounded in fact-based -- >> no. and mick mulvaney was in the house for a while and tried to overthrow the speaker, vote against the speaker. he didn't get all the way there, so i understand the confusion in counting votes in this situation. but nancy pelosi according to all democrats. >> okay, kirchhai. >> so there's a couple of pivot points here. there's a potential game changing pivot point potentially thursday. that's the next date we're looking to when the new congress comes in. there's another on january 11th.
monday, coast guard members don't get their checks. but on january 11th, a whole lot of people do not get the money they were expecting to see. >> i think we have to remember what the president said just recently. he said most of the people who aren't going to get paid are democrats. the president said that, and i think we also have to remember this is a president who is politically thinking about what's best for him. he wants to be able to argue, i tried my best. i doubled down on $5 billion. yes, it's going to be harder and harder because we're going to start seeing human interest stories, stories about mothers taking on second jobs to get their paychecks. the problem is if the president fundamentally thinks all these people are democrats as he said, then maybe he might not care. >> here's the thing, hugh, because he's coming out this morning. he is in washington. he did stay home. for better, for worse, whatever you think, he did not go to mar-a-lago just like he said he wouldn't do, wouldn't travel to
florida if there was a shutdown to this point. he's tweeting a bunch, and he's now saying i'm going to shut down the southern border altogether, which to most people sounds like a heck of an empty threat. >> i think it's almost impossible to do given the economic realities. i think he just needs some leverage point and he's trying to keep the focus on the fact that the debate is about the border. and he does have the bully pulpit here. >> but isn't fake leverage no leverage? >> not here, not when you've got people writing stories about -- this is the first time a republican president has managed a shutdown. president obama was artful in getting those stories generated. there will be repercussions, the employees who are not getting checks are actually going to experience significant discomfort, and i think they'll be calling the congress. the president is the most oblivious to pressure person i have seen in that office in a
long time. >> mick mulvaney was talking about this whole shutdown threat, not just the government shutdown but the idea of what's going on at the border. here's what he said earlier this morning when he was over at the white house talking about this. >> yeah, he absolutely is. all options are on the table. listen, it's the only way we can get the democrats' attention. >> jake? >> i think we also have to keep in mind here that if the president is able to do that, is able to shut the southern border as the chief of staff is indicating, that is going to result in not a day, not a week, but like a month of hearings on capitol hill. >> yeah. and a big economic blow to the country. >> huge economic blow, but also remember, democrats are going to have a say in all legislating come january, which means they are going to be able to put stipulations and strings on funding, on processes, on laws. i think the president and the white house are going to have to become accustomed to that new reality.
>> i've been looking at my phone not because i'm rude to you, but because we are now able to confirm that according to a couple sources familiar with these negotiations, the offer that has been rejected was for $2.5 billion. i've been told by somebody, our teams, if it was in that range, the president would accept it. that is now poof, gone. i don't know what your reporting is on that front, but it seems like we are now in a -- we, meaning like the american people, human taxpayers, right, are in just as bad as a position as we were in a week ago. nothing has changed since then given -- >> does anyone you know feel any pain? speaker pelosi is in hawaii. everyone else flew out of town. i know one person who is not getting flood insurance issued by fema because fema is shuttered. i don't think pain is generalized yet, and i don't think it's -- >> we interviewed a woman named nicole lauer whose husband is in the coast guard. she has savings to get through this, so the issue is long term. the long term effects won't start to be felt yet.
but we should probably be careful sitting in washington around a table whether people are feeling pain. there is the uncertainty factor. >> i can say as someone who lived in washington where there are a lot of federal workers, there are people worried about being furloughed today. most of the people i'm talking to are department of homeland security employees. they're like, what are we going to do? maybe i should go to a port and see if i can get a paycheck that way. >> there is a "washington post" story today. it's fascinating on the number of americans who live paycheck to paycheck who are in upper middle class circumstances but because of debt, because of tuition, because of house payments, it's a paycheck to paycheck deal. i do think there will be ramifications. i just think trump is in a much better position than the republicans were under presidents obama and clinton to fight the p.r. war because he can focus the spotlight. >> but that offer doesn't indicate that the white house is serious in any way, shape, or form. >> true. >> because republicans and democrats have agreed right now on two numbers.
$1.6 billion. >> right. >> and $1.3 billion. so how do they think the $2.5 billion is a legitimate offer when republicans on capitol hill have passed and have agreed to funding at levels of $1.6 billion and $1.3 billion? so why is the white house offering 2.5? that's not a compromise with anybody but itself. >> so the argument it would be a compromise from what the house already passed, which is $5.7. >> but senate republicans have said that's not a deal we could take. >> because they need ten democrats, whatever number it is, to get on board with this plan. >> i also have been talking to people who aren't political analysts, who are just kind of bargain shopper, teachers, lawyers, other people that are just out in the world that are not fully involved. those people are like, why don't they split is in half? i had a friend tell me, why don't they split the difference? why don't they do $2.5 billion? democrats are like, no, we're not doing that. i'm just saying for americans, they're like, this is your one job. your one job is to keep the
government functioning, so if you can do it by half. >> literally the only job. let me pull back for a second because there is strategically thinking from 30,000 feet, both parties have bases who sort of want to see what they're doing right now. the president has a base that likes the fact he's holding firm. democrats have a base that are like, no way, no how give him any money for that wall. do you think the president is thinking strategically, perhaps trying to build up some good will for 2019 when he knows he's going to have to spend a little of that capital? >> checking boxes, but the key to me is watch what leader mcconnell does this week and next with regards to the judiciary committee. and possibly a rules change not on the legislative filibuster but on the length of time any nominee can be slow walked because most of the trump nominees have been slow walked. they may force through the reid rule. that's base playing. i don't think the border wall is
that big of a deal actually to his re-election. >> that's an interesting point. >> i just don't. >> out on the campaign trail, they like the judges and i take your point on that. but immigration is something that does fire up because remember, the vice president was out on a limb based on our reporting, indicating to members of the senate that, yes, the president would get behind this clean version that you're doing short term. and then you had the rushes, and the laura ingrahams and the members of his base that were really starting to -- >> you also had the president saying he's going to attend a groundbreaking for the wall before the state of the union, making that up out of thin air because i think he understands as a salesman, he needs to be standing next to something that looks like a wall to take some pictures. >> the president has two bases, his voting base and members of congress. members of congress want this wall. they've been fighting for this wall. mark meadows and jim jordan have told their voters they're going to get it.
that's why this is the view for every other full-size pickup. and this year, it's déjà vu all over again 'cuz only the ford f-150 gives you best-in-class torque, best-in-class payload and you got it, baby... best-in-class towing. this is the big dog! this is the ford f-150. it doesn't just raise the bar, pal. it is the bar. hurry! 0% financing for 72 months on ford f-150 ends january 2nd.
see your ford dealer today. ondiscover card.ds january 2nd. i justis this for real?match, yep. we match all the cash back new cardmembers earn at the end of their first year, automatically. whoo! i got my money! hard to contain yourself, isn't it? uh huh! let it go! whoo! get a dollar-for-dollar match at the end of your first year. only from discover. welcome back. you know how they say no news is good news? in the case of the shutdown, no news is really just no news. no votes scheduled at the capitol. no negotiations happening. no urgency. no nothing. the white house says the president was at work earlier today meeting with staff, making
some calls. we here at nbc news have learned that offer of $2.5 billion went nowhere. the president's incoming acting chief of staff blasting democrats for not coming to the table. >> they came back at walking away from the table. the democrats have simply shut down the discussions. they did not even counter us. we went back to them after their second $1.3 billion and picked a number less than five. so we actually came off of our $5 billion slightly. instead of coming up from their $1.3 billion, they left town. i think that's speaks a lot about what's happening in washington, d.c. >> so one of the few how maumant is that man, steny hoyer, currently the house minority whip. thank you for joining us. >> you bet. >> let me start with mick mulvaney's comments. is he right? have democratic leadership walked away from the table? >> no, not at ul. as a matter of fact, we've offered the senate compromise three times on the floor, and we
were not recognized for that motion. that was the senate bill which was passed over to the house, which included the seven republican bills. these are not our bills. we've already compromised. these are the republican -- they're in the majority -- their bills and we're willing to vote to fund them at the senate pass bill levels. >> but the president -- >> can i just say? >> yeah. >> paul ryan refused to put it on the floor. interestingly enough, mick mulvaney was just on television talking about us walking away. he voted not to open up government. he voted to shut it down. 16 days later, not withstanding boehner, who was the republican speaker saying, look, we need to get government open, paul ryan voted no to open government. mark meadows voted no. scalise voted no. and mick mulvaney voted no. so they've got a history of using the shutdown of government as a strategy to get what they want. we are fully prepared to support the bill that came over from the
senate. >> right. >> we've offered it three times, and paul ryan won't put it on the floor. if he did, it would pass. >> but it would not get signed by the president, right? that is the clutch -- so at this point, what are democrats going to do? are you willing to budge at all in any way, in any direction, one dollar over $1.6 billion? >> hallie, i think we certainly are prepared to make sure that our borders are secure. and, yes, we would i think discuss inkraeding border security. i think senator schumer has said that. nancy pelosi has said it. i've said it. we're prepared to do that. we don't think the wall is the way to go. clearly mexico is not going to pay for it. that was the president's representation to the american people. it was a representation that all of us knew was not true, but he kept making it anyway. they're not going to pay for the wall. and very frankly, a bill to fund the wall did not get to the
house floor until december 20th. in other words, 11 1/2 months after the president asked for it. and why didn't it? because it didn't have the votes on the floor of the house of representatives that the republicans controlled and had the overwhelming majority of. so the wall, we don't -- we think that's a non-starter, but we are certainly in favor of border security that works. >> does border -- >> that secures america and protect us. >> and does that include in your view, if not a wall, some kind of a fence or steel slats perhaps? >> look, we have a fence. we have fences along that border as you know. and if they need to be enhanced, i think we could -- we'll have to look at the specific proposal. but we want to make sure that border is secure. and so i think that's open for discussion. but the president said it's a wall or nothing. he told the senate, yes, i'll support the bill you passed unanimously, and then 24 hours later changed his mind.
>> right. >> because he got hyped by some of the right-wing base that he has. and so he had a tantrum and said, okay, i'm not going to support it, and government shut down. shutting down government is stupid. it's costly. it undermines morale and undermines the confidence of the economy. it undermines the confidence of the international community and america as a stable leader. >> i want to talk about some of the tweets but two factual points. when was the last time there was outreach to house democratic leadership, to you, to nancy pelosi, from the white house directly? >> hallie, unfortunately i don't know the answer to that for others. there's been no outreach to me. now, again, it's the four corners as we call them. >> right. >> mcconnell and ryan and schumer and pelosi who are the ones negotiating now, so i'm not surprised that i haven't been reached out to. but there hasn't really been -- i talked to speaker pelosi
yesterday. that conversation indicated she had not heard from the president. that may not be accurate, so i want to make it clear that i'm not sure of that. but she did not mention the fact that she had talked to the president. >> this $2.5 billion offer that was apparently extended on saturday and rejected, does that number sound like it was about right to you based on your understanding? >> based upon what mr. mulvaney said. i'll rely on his veracity in y saying that's what the figure was. >> is there any daylight? the white house is employing a divide and conquer strategy saying senator schumer was ready to make a deal, but pelosi blocked it. >> i don't think so. i think they both have the same perspective, that the wall funding does not make sense. we think the majority of the congress does not think it makes sense. and in that context, i think we
are prepared to negotiate for good border security that works to keep america secure and safe and lets us know who's coming into the country and people who aren't authorized to come in don't come in. i think we all want to accomplish that objective, but we think the wall is a waste of money frankly. >> in the daca for wall deal comes back on the table, is that something the democratic caucus is prepared to support? >> i don't think the daca -- we tried to make a deal on daca. i met at the white house with senator durbin and 23 other members of the senate and house. you may have seen that on television. it was another one of those meetings we thought was going to be private that the president left open for the press to cover. and the president said at the end of that meeting, you send me a bill, and i will sign it, and i will take the heat. here he's not taking any heat because his base or the right wing of the republican party got on his case, and he took no
heat. he buckled so that hopefully we want to make sure that government gets open. we're going to offer a bill on the 3rd of january that we hope the senate can pass. and we ought to send it to the president. we're a co-equal branch of government. we don't do the president's bidding, nor does he do our bid ig. but we are the policy makers and the lawmakers, and we should send a bill to the president. >> i got 15 seconds for two quick questions. how long is the shutdown going to last, then? till hell freezes over or sooner than that. >> i hope it's sooner than that. i hope we come to an agreement with the president hopefully next week. >> secondly, there's some news here related to this congressional seat in north carolina, and i understand that you have a new statement out related to this. can you fill us in on what's going on? >> i simply said if mr. harris is not certified as the duly, fairly, legally elected member, we would certainly oppose his seating.
as i understand it, that verification has not come. in fact, republican leaders in north carolina have said that there is substantial question as to the validity of the outcome of the general election. that's in court now as you know. >> right. >> we'll see what the court does, but it is clear apparently from all sides that there was fraud committed by certain participants in the administration of the election. under those circumstances, we ought to have a new election for the general election, not the primary. the primary was not contested, but for the general election. >> congressman steny hoyer, thanks for coming on the show on this friday evening. appreciate it. >> you bet. just ahead, today's blue light special. one you will not find at kmart. i'm alex trebek here to tell you
about the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month.
i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you, too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the number one most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed, and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. and with this plan, you can pick your payment date, so you can time your premium due date to work with your budget. so call now for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, and it's yours just for calling. so call now.
yeah, i've had some prettyeer. prestigious jobs over the years. news producer, executive transport manager, and a beverage distribution supervisor. now i'm a director at a security software firm. wow, you've been at it a long time. thing is, i like working. what if my retirement plan is i don't want to retire? then let's not create a retirement plan. let's create a plan for what's next. i like that. get a plan that's right for you. td ameritrade. ♪ so we improved everything. we used 50% fewer ingredients added one handed pumps and beat the top safety standards the new johnson's® choose gentle
welcome back. so in other news -- >> overnight, the new york city sky lit up in a supernatural shade of blue. >> mysterious blue illumination. >> bizarre blue light. >> unusual blue hue. >> the glowing blue hue. >> the eerie blue glow. >> the night sky turned like an electric blue. >> it sure did. last night new york city found itself bathed in the glow of apom lip tick flashes of blue light from queens. nobody was hurt but laguardia airport had to ground flights.
con edison said the flashes came from a brief electrical fire. >> something is happening. some shape is rising out of the pit. they've got a small beam of light against a mirror. >> the nypd says there is no evidence of extra tress tree all activity, but this can't just be a fluke, right? it has to be a sign, but of what? could this be the blue wave democrats are actually talking about? also the con ed logo is blue. that's a little strange, right? and if you rearrange the letters in con edison, it spells out neon disco. y we may never know the truth because even though we've all seen the light, we are still totally in the dark.
kayla: our dad was in the hospital. josh: because of smoking. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. kayla: do you know how hard it is to smoke in a hospital? by the time we could, we were like... what are we doing? kayla: it was time for nicodermcq. the nicodermcq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. and doubles your chances of quitting. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how.
we are just a few days away now from the new year and maybe, just maybe a few months away from big news in the special counsel investigation. nbc news has reported robert mueller may submit his report to the attorney general as early as february. it comes after a year that saw the first charges against russians for hacking the democrats, the conviction of president trump's campaign chairman, and the sentencing of the president's former attorney for crimes including covering up dirty deeds to name a few. as for when the report will be finished, that's only one of the questions to ask heading into 2019. there's, of course, what's in the mueller report. will the public ever see it? will there be more criminal charges? and the biggest one of all, can the trump presidency survive whatever this report finds? joining us now, barbara mcquade, a former u.s. attorney, and current msnbc contributor. our panel is also back. barbara, thanks for joining the conversation. i pose those questions to you. i know you never want to make
predictions when it comes to robert mueller and what he may or may not find. but will the public ever see this? will there be more criminal charges, and what does it mean for the trump presidency? >> as for the report, that really is a matter that gets controlled by the attorney general, which is why that position is so important. the regs say that the special counsel should submit his report to the attorney general, and then it's the attorney general who decides whether to make that report public. and so at the moment, that's matthew whitaker. if nominee william barr gets through by then, he'll be the decision maker. but that person in that position becomes critically important because they hold the keys to whether that sees the light of day. so that's one matter. then as to other indictments, i think we will see more. most certainly we will see an indictment against jerome corsi, the conservative author who disclosed his own plea agreement that was offered to him just a couple of months ago. no prosecutor really offers a plea deal unless he's prepared to back it up with charges.
so i think most certainly he will be charged. his charges will false statements relating to his conversations with roger stone about wikileaks, and so it could also be that we see charges against roger stone in the near future. and then of course, down the road there's certainly lots that he knows that has not yet been revealed publicly. we have seen in the documents involving michael flynn and michael cohen that they've both shared information core to the investigation. so i think that that could either yield more indictments or information contained in that report. >> tom dupree, somebody who our viewers here at msnbc as well as fox news know pretty well, had something interesting to say this morning on this network, and i want to play it. >> i think 2019 is going to bring a whole host of new legal battles for this administration. we obviously know the mueller investigation is moving ahead. we know that there are different pieces of this, the cohen piece and other pieces. of course we know that the white house is going to be fending off
numerous subpoenas from the new democratic-controlled house of representatives. so i think the white house has probably had enough of these legal battles but unfortunately from their perspective, it ain't going away in 2019. >> and that's just true, yamiche. >> that's just true. i think that president trump maybe it's starting to sink in how different is life is going to be in 2019. nancy pelosi, not only is she going to be speaker of the house, but you have all these new young democrats who were elected because essentially people are angry at donald trump and wanted a check on his presidency. and democrats, and i think even some republicans maybe even off the record will tell you they're ready to see what legally this president has dealt with. >> one of the dramas setting up is the confirmation hearing for the once and future attorney general william barr. democrats are going to try to get him to commit to recuse himself from mueller. he's made it abundantly clear he does not believe it's possible for the president to obstruct justice by firing james comey. therefore, democrats are going to hammer, hammer hammer on that report as barbara talked about, on his willing to recuse.
i think you'll see republicans jam him through in record time. so if mr. mueller has anything, it's going to have to be a blockbuster i believe rather than an obstruction because i think this attorney general will tell him he may not bring that obstruction charge. >> at least in its old configuration, senators have said they would not confirm someone as attorney general unless they pledged to protect the mueller investigation. i don't know. obviously there are more senate republicans this time around. i don't know if that holds. but i do think there will be some skepticism from people if bill barr says that publicly, says, i think the whole thing's a sham. i back up my memo that basically said what you laid out. i kind of wonder how that goes in the senate. >> how can he back off it? he wrote it, recently? >> he could say i wrote it as a private citizen. >> you were talking about the base earlier. if he desseerts the president, e base revolts. i think attorney general barr is very, very well respected legal
scholar. the brukds thing is the only thing i'm talking about. he's just not going to give in on that. >> the special counsel investigation is not the only investigation, barbara, that the president -- that donald trump, donald trump's family is facing, right? we put together this graphic a couple weeks ago showing all the different pieces at play here. but do you believe the special counsel investigation is the biggest threat to donald trump? >> you know, i'm not so sure. if robert mueller can put the pieces together and show that there was coordination between trump and russia to throw the election, that's huge, and i think that probably is the biggest threat. but there are other threats that seem to be much more like low-hanging fruit. you know, this trump foundation investigation in the state of new york, for example. very similar to a case we investigated in detroit involving the former mayor, who was using a foundation for his own purposes. that is really a fairly easy case to put together because you see money comes in under the guise of one purpose and then
going out under another. that is something that a prosecutor can often prove just on paper, black and white, and that's very easy to prove. so that could be just as significant a threat just because, you know, there's sort of risk and likelihood. the risk may be greater with mueller, but the likelihood of conviction in the trump foundation case is much higher. >> hugh, you made the point about this report and what you think has to -- what threshold it has to meet for the rest of us to see it. adam schiff was talking about this weekend. here's what he had to say. >> i'm prepared to make sure we do everything possible so that the public has the advantage of as much of the information as it can. >> that sounds like a yes. >> well, that pretty much is a yes from my point of view. we ought to make sure this report is public. >> talking about subpoenaing it, jake. >> yeah. >> the house in 2019 looks a lot different. >> and i think to your point, yes, it is up to the attorney general whether this is made public. but what adam schiff could do and elijah cummings could do is
say, you won't make it public. we're going to have bob mueller come and testify about everything he's learned about the president. they can testify in open session, and that would be akin to -- >> he can also subpoena pre-digspre-dig pre-decisional memoranda. >> i want to say two things. the first is when we talk about the mueller investigation, obviously a lot of it has to do with russia. there's also the financials. when i talk to sources, they say the problem with the mueller investigation for the president is to could reach into all the things like the foundation, into his finances, his tax returns. that could mean his friends and kids get indicted. when we look at what kind of trouble they could be in, we looking at it now might not have an idea of what it is. >> i want to pull back and put you a little on the spot, hugh. there's this op-ed out in the new york times by elizabeth drew, who covered water gate,
about republicans and donald trump, writing, it always seemed to me that mr. trump's turbulent presidency was unsustainable and that key republicans would eventually decide he had become too great a burden to the party or too great a danger to the country. that time may have arrived. in the end, the republicans will opt for their own political survival. what, if anything, would the mueller report have to contain for you to disavow this president? >> what barbara said. active, conclusive proof of coordination between team trump and the russians to attempt to influence the election. bob woodward was a guest on my radio show. he said he looked for that for years and could not find it. mr. mueller might have it. it's a very skilled team of investigators. but that would break people as the tapes broke nixon. i just don't see it happening. >> just to be clear, you mean any -- you think he should be impeached if anybody on his campaign -- >> no, no. if the president himself is directly involved in that. >> we're going to leave it there. barbara mcquade, thank you for
(boy) got it. (dad) it's slippery. (boy) nooooooo... (grandma) nooooooo... (dad) nooooooo... (dog) yessssss.... (vo) quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is two times more absorbent than the leading ordinary brand. (boy) hey look, i got it. bounty, the quicker picker upper. tonight in 2020 vision, santa may have come and gone, but we are still making our list and checking it twice. our list of potential candidates of course. history tells us the next few weeks may be a busy time for
presidential announcements. >> we can't wait for someone else to do this for us. there is just too much at stake. >> 12 years ago today, john edwards announced his presidential bid from new orleans, and the democratic primary field got crowded in a matter of weeks. joe biden got in on january 7th. chris dodd on january 11th. and hillary clinton on january 20th. >> so let the conversation begin. i have a feeling it's going to be very interesting. >> so who will be the first big-name democrat to take the plunge for 2020? it could be california senator kamala harris, who said she'd make her decision over the holidays, or it could be former hud secretary julian castro, who told chuck to expect a decision in about two weeks. >> on january 12th, i'm going to make an announcement about my plans. >> it is worth noting that joe biden made his announcement on the sunday edition of meet the
press. if you're a democrat, weighing a presidential run, i'm quite sure chuck will find some room for you in the rundown. we'll be right back with more "mtp daily" after this. ♪ ♪ the greatest wish of all is one that brings us together. the final days of wish list are here. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment. only at your lincoln dealer. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
the syrian children dying of chemical weapons. he will be impacted by the coverage of these two innocent young children. it's a difficult journey. parents should not bring children with them. we have an obligation to make sure that it's the best care. the president is going to respond to that. it's this desire for the border wall and border fence, border slats, if you will. we were talking about during the commercial break and it has been
weeks and nancy pelosi and donald trump talked directly. >> the white house is saying that pelosi is the impetment to the negotiations but they haven't spoken to her in three weeks now. if they do believe that, it would make sense to reach out to her and i think they're trying to dri a wedge between schumer and pelosi. that's the game they're trying to playwright now. >> i don't think there's daylight between those. >> there can't be and they worked over the last several years to make sure that there isn't and i always see schumer walking through pelosi's office through the back door. >> there's a lot made about nancy pelosi. people are on the vacations. the president is at home and the white house is like well the president stayed in washington. there are phones everywhere. people can talk. right? >> there are phones everywhere. there were republicans and democrats vacations with their democrats. >> there's not work to be done back at the capitol.
>> the president was the only one that stayed in d.c. the president wants to blame someone, republicans for awhile have worked on making nancy pelosi a boogie man. also they have political differences with her. i don't think this is going to work with her being the boogie man for this shutdown. >> three people are involved the president, the speaker, the incoming speaker and they have to find money for border security. they have to decide how to describe it. >> and how to define it. you have to figure out, are we getting into the semantics here. >> i don't think trump is missing the move. if they don't like the border, they're not securing it. he's winning that debate. >> i appreciate you guys coming on. it's my first time filling in for chuck and it's such a pleasure to have such a rock star panel. >> thank you. we'll be right back. in case you missed it. you we'll be right back. in case you missed it.
>> there's a special edition of meet the press this sunday focused on climate change. that will be over the weekend. we'll be back on monday. you can catch me tomorrow and all weekend long anchoring the "today" show and nightly news over on nbc news but first something we do not want you to miss. it is a very big job to put on this show every day. so we wanted to take a minute to acknowledge all the people behind the scenes that make mtpb daily happen. e mtpb
good evening. this is our last show before the new year and it is live and we have a lot to get into. we are, tonight, 7 days into this trump government shutdown and there's new information that shows trump may already be privately backing down. that's of course despite his public stance. nbc news reporting on saturday that vice president mike pence told chuck schumer that trump would cut his request for wall funding in half to $2.5 million but schumer not expecting that offer. dems waiting to hear trump publicly say what he will accept because they don't trust his word given through intermediaries or himself at all. it's not looking good for trump in terms of what the public thinks. as you may know plenty of people don't follow every piece of political news. they're not following the first hour of the shutdown but word is getting out