From the Mueller Investigation. Chairman nadler will be our first guest tonight with his reaction to that new legal filing by the Justice Department. Also tonight, donald trump lost a big round in court today on the emoluments case against him, which has now cleared legal hurdles to move forward. Well take a look at last nights debate and show you why you can ignore almost everything in the policy details that the candidates argued about last night. Cal perry will join us with a new mustsee investigation into the potential dangers of the practice of flaring natural gas in texas. We begin tonight with the breaking news, the Trump Justice Department headed by the trump attorney general, william barr, told a federal court in washington tonight that the House Judiciary Committee should be denied any access to grand jury material from the Mueller Investigation because impeachment is not a judicial proceeding according to the Justice Department. The Justice Department filing in court notes that grand jury material can be released in connection with a judicial proceeding. The Justice Department then insists, quote, impeachment proceedings in congress, including hypothetical removal proceedings in the senate, are not judicial proceedings under the plain and ordinary meaning of that term. Judicial proceedings are Legal Proceedings governed by law that take place in a judicial form before a judge or magistrate, proceedings that occur outside the judicial setting are not judicial proceedings, even if they are called a trial and include some of the procedures familiar from a courtroom such as sworn testimony or lawyerled questioning of witnesses. The committee for its part offers no explanation for how rule reference to judicial proceedings authorizes access to grand jury materials for congressional proceedings administered by members of Congress Rather than Legal Proceedings overseen by judges. Yesterday the House Judiciary Committee on a Party Line Vote voted for a resolution for investigative procedures offered by chairman gerald nadler. That resolution describes in detail investigative procedures the committee will use in what it calls the committees investigation to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment with respect to president donald j. Trump. Leading our discussion tonight, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, jerry nadler. Represents new yorks 10th Congressional District. Chairman, the Justice Department seems to be making two cases here. First of all, that this is not a judicial proceeding in your committee, therefore, you do have a right to this. Second, even if it was a judicial proceeding, interpreted that way, you still dont have a right to it, even if it went to trial, even if it went to a senate trial, you dont have have a right to any of this material. Theyre first of all saying, though, that you arent even having an impeachment investigation, there isnt, they insist, there is no impeachment investigation in the house. Well, let me deal with that in reverse order. Weve been very clear for the last several months in court filings, in public statements, and in proceedings in the committee that we are, in fact, conducting an investigation, preparing to decide whether to recommend articles of impeachment to the house. Now, you can call that an impeachment investigation, impeachment inquiry, those terms have no legal meaning. But thats exactly what were doing. Were involved in an investigation to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment to the house. We will determine that at the conclusion of this investigation. Now, i know the republicans and the Justice Department is acting as an arm of the republican party. They have argued that this cannot be a reel impeachment investigation because the house didnt vote and didnt have the authority to do it. Most impeachments done since the reorganization act of 1946 have begun in the Judiciary Committee have not had house authorizations at all. The nixon impeachment had a house authorization six months after the investigation started in the Judiciary Committee, and that was done as was the Clinton House authorization in order to give the committee the right to do certain kinds of subpoenas and depositions. The house rules changed, we have that Authority Without specific resolution of the house. So theres no question that we are doing an investigation toward determining whether to recommend articles of impeachment. The second argument they make is that that doesnt qualify as a judicial proceeding, therefore, were not entitled to grand jury information. Ill simply say, this is another instance of the Trump Administration trying to cover up and hide from congress and from the American People, in this case from congress because the American People wouldnt see the grand jury information, all kinds of information. The president said he would defy all subpoenas, which they have done. That was article 3 of the nixon impeachment to find subpoenas. The law says that upon request by the chairman of the ways and means committee, the department, the irs shall give tax returns for any individual. They have refused to do so. They have said they havent shown adequate purpose. Thats none of their business. And so theyre justifying all the law in order to hide everything from congress and the American People. Now, their excuse here that this is not a judicial proceeding, there is judicial precedent for calling for considering impeachment proceeding either judicial proceeding or preparatory judicial proceeding but ill let the details go to the legal to the reply brief that will be filed this week. The judge in the nixon case ordered grand jury materials handed over to your committee. Thats one of the precedents youre relying on. They say that precedent isnt relevant. I want to go to Something Else in here. They use what in courtroom terms would be called extrajudicial comment, meaning they use statements that Speaker Pelosi has made when talking to reporters or trying to explain situation to the American Public. They use that in these filings to say to try to say there isnt an official proceeding going on. The speaker says the speaker of the house is emphatic. Impeachment proceeding on the same day the house adopted the resolution that the committee claims authorized this suit, the speaker told a reporter the House Democratic caucus was not even close to an impeachment inquiry. That was back in june. The House Democratic caucus doesnt do an impeachment inquiry. Second of all, the speaker has been very supportive of every step weve taken in initiating this impeachment investigation. Every court filing, every statement, official statement in the committee was okayed by her at the time. The House Counsel who prepares, makes all the legal filings on behalf of the Judiciary Committee reports to the speaker, not to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Shes been fully supportive of every statement we have made and of the initiation. And continuation of the steps were taking for the investigation. Even the procedures that the committee voted, which included in the preamble a history of how this investigation started, and of the resolution passed by the house back in june authorizing certain subpoenas and other things, and the accompanying report which says, among other things, in order to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment to the house, all of that was done with the speakers approval and direct involvement. The Justice Department filing says that the committee does not know whether its going to have articles of impeachment or vote on articles of impeachment of the president. The committee might end up with just a censure or not take action. Therefore you dont deserve any of this material. Thats like saying you shouldnt show evidence to the jury because the jury hasnt made up its mind at the beginning of the trial. Of course we havent determined yet whether to recommend articles of impeachment. Thats why were having this investigation to determine whether the evidence is sufficient and important enough to justify the rather extraordinary step of voting articles of impeachment. One can have ones personal opinions as to the quality of that evidence, but you dont announce the conclusion at the beginning of the trial or proceeding. The judge ordered the grand jury material handed over to the committee before the Judiciary Committee decided that it was going to vote on articles of impeachment. And also the committee didnt necessarily know whether the vote on articles of impeachment would pass. Well, of course not. A proper investigation, a proper proceeding to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment, whether by the Judiciary Committee in 1973 and 74 with respect to nixon or now, you dont start off with a conclusion. You may have personal opinions. But you dont start of with an official conclusion. You examine the evidence and you make a conclusion. Now, i think personally the evidence is very strong, but thats my personal opinion at the moment. We are going to have a very aggressive series of hearings starting next tuesday to bring out the witnesses. And were going to go well beyond the parameters of the mueller report. Its not just the question of collusion with the russians in the election and the question of obstruction of justice, which i think is very clearly indicated in the mueller report. But the question of selfdealing and selfenrichment that american taxpayer money is going directly to the pocket of the president that apparently saudi money is going directly to the pockets of the president because all of this in direct violation of the emoluments clause of the constitution because of the very corrupt actions where you direct the air force to use the trump hotel or foreign governments seeking to influence United States government have their delegations stay at trump hotels, which he hasnt divested himself of an interest in, which means money directly into his pocket. We have to take a look at his failure to defend. I mean theres plenty of evidence that mueller testified to this, senator coates, former head of the director of national intelligence, that were under attack now by the russians in terms of our election and we expect them to intervene next year. Has the president done anything to carry out his oath to protect and defend the constitution, to see that the laws against election interference are faithfully computed . I think not. That is another grounds for impeachment. The fact that he has defied all congressional subpoenas is an obstruction of the work of congress. The central purpose of impeachment is not to punish crimes. The central purpose as described by the federalist papers et cetera is to preventive aggrandizement of power by the president , to protect liberty, the separation of powers, to prevent the president from assuming power over the congress and over the judicial branch. His complete subversion of this by refusing all information to congress and even this brief could be read as part of that, that was article 3 in the nixon impeachment, and nixon didnt go so far as to say he would oppose all subpoenas as this president has and said he would do and has done. I think theres very, very serious reasons. Some people say, by the way, why should we impeach the president , the senate would never convict anyway. I think its very important that this kind of conduct, if you can prove it, be called out, that the constitution must be vindicated, and that a president and the next president and the one after him or her has to know you cant do this sort of thing. You have to protect the institutions of government so that powers arent centralized so you dont get to a dictatorship. Is Stormy Daniels going to be a witness in front of your committee . I dont know if she will be, but the misuse or the payments to the women, to Stormy Daniels and i forget the name of the other woman, to prevent that information from coming out in order to influence election is certainly something were going to look at. Chairman nadler, really appreciate you coming in. Thank you very much. When we come back, President Trumps big defeat in court today. The executive director of the citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington which is suing donald trump for violating the emoluments clause will join us next. Later, well get an important update on Maria Isabel Buesos situation from her representative in congress. On august 13th, she received a letter that said she had 33 days to leave the country. Today is day 32. These days were horn honking i hear you, sister. Thats why im partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual checkup. And be open with your doctor about anything you feel. Physically, and emotionally. Body and mind. Ever since you brought me home, that day. Ive been plotting to destroy you. Sizing you up. Calculating your every move. You think this is love . This is a billion years of tiger dna just ready to pounce. And if you have the wrong Home Insurance coverage, you could be coughing up the cash for this. So get allstate and be better protected from mayhem, like meow. Today President Trump lost a big round in one of the emoluments cases filed against him in federal court and Appeals Court in new york ruled that a lawsuit against the president brought under the emoluments clause of the constitution can proceed. A federal trial court had dismissed that case with the federal judge there saying the case appeared to be politically motivated. Today the Appeals Court said while it is certainly possible that these lawsuits are fueled in part by political motivations, we do not understand the significance of that fact. Whether a lawsuit has political motivations is irrelevant to these determinative issues. While the existence of a political motivation for a lawsuit does not supply standing, nor does it defeat standing. Joining us now is noah book bidener, executive director in washington which is suing President Trump for violating the emoluments clause. This is one of your cases. Noah, this is one of your cases. Your reaction to how the court ruled today . Were thrilled with how the court ruled today. Were obviously not happy that two and a half years on, were in a place where this lawsuit is not only as important as it was the day we brought it, the president s first day in the oval office, but so much more important. We were worried when we brought this lawsuit that the president in holding onto ownership of his businesses would be using the presidency, not just to enrich himself but to create conflicts of interest where those who were seeking to influence him could patronize his businesses and then you wouldnt know whether he was acting in the interest of the country or in his own business and financial interests. And that has come true in spades. Weve seen that more and more brazenly lately, so its even more important that these cases be able to go forward in the courts, and were glad that the Second Circuit court of appeals that is just below the Supreme Court said that could happen today. It should be noted youre working in novel legal territory. Its not like we have a bumbling of case law on president s violating the emoluments clause. Thats absolutely right. There are three cases currently pending against the president for this, the one that c. R. E. W. , joined by Business Owners who compete with the president s hotels but obviously cant offer access and influence over the president , theres the ones that theres that case that was decided today. Theres a case that the District Of Columbia and the state of maryland brought and the case that members of congress brought. But prior to this, you didnt have any federal courts considering this issue of the emoluments clauses of the constitution. This is really new territory, and its really important that the abuses stop. We had 44 president s with none of them running businesses trying to make money off the federal government. Thats right. The emoluments clause to the constitution were not household names. It was not something most people knew about because president s just followed them. President s didnt try to keep global businesses going while they were serving. They didnt take money from the federal government and the states and foreign governments while in office. They just followed the law. President obama went through a lot of deliberations to figure out whether or not he could accept the nobel prize and whether that would violate the emoluments clause. President trump just blew through that. We at c. R. E. W. Put out a report just weeks ago finding that there have been now been 2,300 conflicts of interest between the president s businesses, the presidency and those trying to influence it. This is something thats happening every day and that he has no qualms about violating but seems intent to use the presidency to advance his businesses on a daily basis. A big win for Noah Bookbinder today. Thank you so much for joining us today. We appreciate it. Thank you so much for having me. When we come back, the Trump Administration told Maria Isabel Bueso that she has to leave the country by tomorrow or face deportations. The man who represents her Congressional District where she lives in california, he will join us. He has been fighting to save isabel. He will join us next. Eed. I love you only pay for what you need. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. man hey. N banjo . Go home. woman banjo sorry, it wont happen again. Come on, lets go home. After 10 years, weve covered a lot of miles. Good thing i got a subaru. man looks like you got out again, huh, banjo. avo love is out there. Find it in a subaru crosstrek. Back then, we checked. Zero times a day. Times change. Eyes havent. Thats why theres ocuvite. Screen light. Sunlight. Longer hours. Eyes today are stressed but ocuvite has vital nutrients. That help protect them. Ocuvite. Eye nutrition for today. You wanna see something thatamazing . Ing. Go to hilton instead of a travel site and youll experience a whole new range of emotions like. The relaxing feeling of knowing youre getting the best price. Thesell work. The utter delight of free wifi. Oh man this is the best part. Isnt that you . Yeah. And the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone. I can read minds too. Really . Book at hilton. Com. If you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25 off that stay. Expect better. Expect hilton. Liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. Exactly. So you only pay for what you need. Nice. But, uh. Whats up with your. Partner . Not again. Limu thats your reflection. Only pay for what you need. Liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty im asking congress to come together and right the wrong of this changing policy. This is not a partisan issue. This is a humanitarian issue, and our lives depend on it. Thank you so much. That was Maria Isabel Bueso testifying for her life on wednesday in congress. The Trump Administration sent her and other patients suffering with deadly illnesses letters telling them they had to leave the country by tomorrow or be deported. This was an unannounced change in policy by the Trump Administration for people who are in this country to receive lifesaving medical care. After isabels story went public, the Trump Administration sent letters to isabel and other patients telling them that their cases were being reopened, but the letters did not explain what reopened means and the letters didnt explain what would happen next. Joining us now by phone is Democratic Congressman Mark Desaulnier who represents the california Congressional District where she lives with her family and where shes been participating in medical studies that have helped save and extend the lives of americans who suffer from the rare disease that isabel has been struggling with all of her 24 years. Congressman, we are certain that isabel is not going to be deported tomorrow, but do we know anything else about what happens next . Not really. We have a sixhour hearing, lawrence, as you know. Thanks for inviting me and all your reporting on this. The administration were having trouble with the congressmans telephone connection to us. Im not sure if we have him. I just want to read a memo thats been discovered by politico reporting on it today. People have been wondering where did this policy come from, who started this policy. And there is a memo that was used in a meeting last week about this policy that politico published today. It is from the policy and strategy chief Kathy Nuebel Kovarik on the citizenship and immigration services. And she wrote in that memo that her department and she strongly believes that the exercise of deferred actions is subject to abuse and she said if we continue to accept such requests even with narrow medical criteria, we will be creating a de facto program of criteria hed be proud of us. Protect your family, your business and everyone who counts on you. See how lincoln can help. Your business and everyone who counts on you. I mean, if you havent thought abfrankly, youre missing out. Uh. The mobile app makes it easy to manage your policy, even way out here. Your marshmallows. Get digital id cards, emergency roadside service, even file a. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa oops, that cheeky little thing got away from me. My bad. Geico. Its easy to manage your policy whenever, wherever. Can i trouble you for another marshmallow . This reminds everybody of what they cannot stand about washington, scoring points against each other, poking each other and telling each other my plan, your plan. Look we all thats called a democratic primary. The immutable law of president ial campaign debates is the more you know about government and policy, the less satisfying the debate is. Many of the lines that get the biggest reaction in president ial debates are declarations of hope on matters that are completely under the control of congress. The most stirring line in last nights debate was one of those. In odessa, i met the mother of a 15yearold who was shot by an ar15. That mother watched her bleed to death over the course of an hour because so many people were shot by that ar15, there werent enough ambulances to get to them in time hell yes, were going to take your ar15, your ak47. Were not going to allow it to be used against our fellow americans anymore. As usual, the Health Care Section of the debate was the longest and most contentious part of the debate as it veered out of control with confusing policy points and interruptions and insults. Senator Kamala Harris said the most important thing, that voters have to know about Health Care Policy right now in america. Everybody on this stage i do sblooef well intentioned and want that all americans have coverage and recognizes that right now 30 million americans dont have coverage but at least five people have talked some repeatedly on this subject, and not once have we talked about donald trump. So lets talk about the fact that donald trump came into office and spent almost the entire first year of his term trying to get rid of the Affordable Care act. We all fought against it, and then the late great john mccain at that moment at 2 00 in the morning killed his attempt to take health care from millions of people in this country. Fast forward to today and what is happening . Donald trumps department of justice is trying to get rid of the Affordable Care act. Donald Trumps Administration is trying to get rid of the ban that we placed on denying people who have preexisting conditions coverage. Donald trump is trying to say our kids up to the age of 26 can no longer be on our plans. And, frankly, i think this discussion is giving the American Public a headache. What they want to know is theyre going to have health care and costs will not be a barrier to getting it. But lets focus on the end goal. If we do not get donald trump out of office, hes going to get rid of all of it. 15 seconds. 15 seconds. And yes, a republican senator, john mccain, got applause right there in the middle of the Democrats Health care debate. You can ignore Everything Else that the candidates say about Health Care Policy in the debates because Everything Else they say is entirely under the control of congress. As president , each one of them will sign whatever democrats in congress manage to pass. In 2008, Hillary Clinton and barack obama argued endlessly about Health Care Policy, the chief difference that Hillary Clinton was in favor of an individual mandate and barack obama was opposed. In the end president obama signed the Affordable Care act with an individual mandate, proving that barack obama and Hillary Clintons disagreements about health care were completely ignorable. Each of them was going to sign whatever version Congress Managed to pass. No one on that stage last night knows what congress is capable of passing on health care. And the moderators didnt ask. The only power the president has in relation is to sign or veto it. So the relevant question, that could shorten that section of the debate, you could ask for a show of hands on the question of will you sign whatever Health Care Bill a Democratic House and Democratic Senate manages to pass . And the real answer is, every one of them will sign whatever a Democratic Congress can pass. If thats medicare for all, joe bidens going to sign it. If its strengthening the Affordable Care act, president Bernie Sanders is going to sign it. Here is the right way, the right way to ask a president ial candidate a question. Theres been the debate around reparations for descendants of african slaves. If you are elected president , sheila jackson, member of congress, has a bill calling for a commission to study reparations. If that bill were to pass and come to your desk, would you sign it . If the house and Senate Passed it, of course i would sign. It if the house and Senate Passed that bill, of course i would sign it. What other answer is there . Al sharptons question forced a rare moment in a president ial campaign, a candidate admitting that legislating is really up to the house and senate. Heres a sample of the candidates remembering who they are really running against. You know, when i first got into this race, i remember President Trump scoffed and said hed like to see me making a deal with xi jinping. Id like to see him making a deal with xi jinping. We have a guy there that is literally running our country like a game show. We have a white supremacist in the white house, and he poses a mortal threat to people of color all across this country. We must and will defeat trump, the most dangerous president in the history of this country. Theres enormous, enormous opportunities once we get rid of donald trump. And now President Trump, you can go back to watching fox news. [ cheers and applause ] joining our debate about the debate now is marie kumar, president and ceo of voto latino. She was at the debate in houston last night. And ej deyoung from the washington post, visiting professor at harvard university. He is the coauthor of one nation after trump. Maria teresa, you were there. I wish you had been too, lawrence. You missed everything. What were the parts of the debate that you focused on the most . When they started talking about gun control and gun safety, and how every single president ial candidate gave a hat tip to beto orourke and recognized his leadership and recognized that he was able to step up and how he took it graciously. And i think at first he was quite surprised but he started owning it, and then he started talking that famous line that im going to confiscate all your guns, and the room went bananas, he understands the game, and he needs to ensure that white suburban moms stay with the Democratic Party. They dont want to go back to school and buy bulletproof backpacks. They want their kids to be safe, and he needs to grow the electoral base. The folks in that hall yesterday were people of color. We were at a historically black college. They understand what gun violence means intimately. Here in texas where you have 2. 5 million unregistered latinos whom he wants in his camp, he really understand it. What i also found a lot of affection was for amy klobuchar. She was able to stand her ground and talk about im the person in the middle. If you want someone from the midwest. Lawrence, when we start looking at the electoral map, the democrats need to look at seven states in order to really win. And the sensibilities that will touch the southwest, whether its texas, georgia, arizona, and when youre talking about wisconsin, minnesota, those are the individuals that we need to move. And i think she did a really strong job. Something thats been a little bit under the radar was the fact that when andrew yang was asking for folks saying, hey, if you put in your name and collect names, ill give you 1,000, what folks didnt realize is it must be because hes losing money. That was one of the easiest ways on a National Stage to collect names and transfer that to donations. We may not see him on stage next time. Im imagining you as a little boy in fall river, massachusetts, watching the very first televised president ial debate in 1960. Im assuming youve seen every one of them in the history of televised debates. What did you make of last night . First of all, i would like you to be a debate questioner and ask that. Right . Me too. Because thats exactly right. And i was struck, in fact, by the contentiousness yet again over single payer versus expanding obamacare. And the democrats are going to the waste a lot of time with this argument, when, in fact, something will get to the president s desk that will, if theyre lucky, that will be a combination of these things that are a little short of these things. I think thats important. The second thing that really struck me was that tableau you had just before we went on the air. More than the other two debates, democrats were finally saying, hey, wait a minute, our opponent is donald trump. They remembered that the opponent was donald trump in a way they didnt in the earlier debates. I thought that actually sent a much more powerful message. I dont think any 8yearold kid would stay up and watch that whole thing last night, a threehour debate was a terrible ordeal for everybody. But the last thing is, its going to this debate did not really move the president ial race at all. I think biden did well enough. He was strong at the beginning, got a little weaker at the end. He had that appeal to hipsters by talking about record players. Arent they into vinyl these days . People arent giving him credit for what he had in mind there. But, you know, and i think Elizabeth Warren almost played as a frontrunner. She knows she is really within reach of iowa and new hampshire. But it may have changed on issues. I think youre probably going to see people pulling back from Health Care Like you suggest. And beto really pushed the gun issue to a different place, and i think thats important. Lets listen to something Elizabeth Warren said. And ej, its one of those moments where she brought up president obama. President obama made quite a comeback in this debate last night. But she also added a point, which is similar to what senator harris said, indicating that they basically all agree on health care and on the need to improve access, coverage and try to get to universal coverage. Lets listen to that. We all owe a huge debt to president obama who fundamentally transformed health care in america and committed this country to health care for every human being. [ applause ] now the question is, how best can we improve on it . And i believe the best way we can do that is we make sure that everybody gets covered by health care at the lowest possible cost. Maria teresa, thats the basic argument, the generic position. Everybody gets covered at the lowest possible cost. Once they get beyond that, into the details, its not up to them,st up for the Senate Finance committee. The house ways and means committee. If its a republican chairman of the Senate Finance committee, zero is going to happen. Thats exactly right. They have to stick to that. I think what a lot of americans are looking for is that not only is it important to defeat donald trump, but what is your vision for unifying america . Where are we going to go . This idea of having lofty ideas for the American Public moving forward, people want to hear that, but fundamentally youre absolutely right, who decides what legislation gets passed, that is congress. Whats important in the debate is having this conversation of if youre going to run for office, are you going to make sure that you will not only hold on to the house, but is there a chance at the senate or white house. The more they can talk about a vision is very important. Yesterday one of the things that resonated was Julian Castro when he started talking about el paso and the el paso shooting. He brought it home saying, look, he was trying to kill someone like me who was inspired by the words of the president. And he spoke specifically about how this president is talking about racism and doesnt want to take responsibility. And this is a very real issue in the latino community. For the first time he gave a voice and he gave it structure. My hope is that as the candidates talk about the issues, they Start Talking about the latino experience here in america, not just around immigration, but what it is to be an american latino under this presidency where just in the month of august after this terrible shooting and the largest raids in our countrys history that also brought in a lot of u. S. Citizens unfortunately, he has looked directly at dismantling 13 different programs that disproportionately impact the latino community. Were going to squeeze in a break here and well be right back. The way it works best for you, ill take that. Wait honey, no. When you want it. You get a delivery experience you can always count on. You get your perfect find at a price to match, on your own schedule. You get fast and Free Shipping on the things that make your home feel like you. Thats what you get when youve got wayfair. So shop now so chantix can help you quit slow turkey. Rkey. Along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. With chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, youll 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 lifethreatening allergic and skin reactions. Decrease alcohol use. Use caution driving or operating machinery. Tell your doctor if youve had Mental Health problems. The most common side effect is nausea. Talk to your doctor about chantix. Know what more shrimp ith steak and shrimp . And you know what goes great with that shrimp . Steak and unlimited shrimp and this year, with two freshly made sides, youll get more than you imagined. Hurry into outback now for our steak and unlimited shrimp. Outback steakhouse. I have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Now, theres skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved. 90 clearer skin at 4 months. After just 2 doses. Skyrizi may increase your risk of infections. And lower your ability to fight them. Before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. Tell your doctor if you have an infection. Or symptoms such as fevers,. Sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs. Or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. I feel free to bare my skin. Visit skyrizi. Com. That one . no what about that . no what about now . no that do it . [ buffer stops ] still not working how bout now . no i just dont know. I mean, i dont know who labeled this thing. Yeah . no yeah . to the wait did frowe just winners. Prouders everyone uses their phone differently. Thats why Xfinity Mobile lets you design your own data. Now you can share it between lines. Mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. Its a different kind of Wireless Network designed to save you money. Save up to 400 a year on your wireless bill. Plus get 250 back when you buy a new samsung note. Click, call or visit a store today. I want to commend beto for how well hes spoken to the passion and frustration and the sadness of what happened in his hometown of el paso. Hes gone don a great job with that. By the way the way beto, excuse me for saying beto. Thats all right. Thats good. The way he handled what happened in his hometown is meaningful. To look in the eyes of those people, to see those kids, to understand those parents, to understand the heart ache. But this is the problem. We are ready to do this. Mr. President , thank you. Were back with maria tiste kumar. What did it feel like in texas . You were down there for that moment because that was clearly a moment where everyone was not just reaching out to beto orourke, but to texas and what texas has suffered in these mass murders. There was a delegation from el paso of individuals who had been part of the shooting. I had a chance to talk to them and they were just they were grateful to be there, but more importantly the support they were receiving from the country. And theres real conversations in texas for the first time of making sure were talking about stand your ground, gun reform in a substantive way. When Elizabeth Warren was talking about gun reform, in a state that is historically a red state, that is opening its ideas of making sure that they have more gun safety, really should speak to the democrats. Theres an Incredible Opportunity to make sure that that state turns blue. But that means meeting people where they are, making sure theyre recognizing that texas is more on the conservative, moderate side of the Democratic Party, and being there for them. The fact that you have so many texans right now that are so aware that the gun issue, whether its el paso or odessa, that its a real problem, that it has to stop. It was uplifting to have had the debate there because people felt they were being heard, they were being recognized. And texans really tuned in. Ej, the thing i said earlier about how these things are up to congress, im not suggesting in these debates that the candidates should not say aspirational things that arent currently possible within the congressional dynamics that we live with now. And this is a clear example of it. Whats also fascinating about it is its very unlikely that theres anyone else on that stage who actually agrees with beto orourke or would be willing to publicly agree with beto orourke about a buyback of these assault weapons to just take all these assault weapons out of private hands. And yet, none of them felt compelled to rush into an argument about it and disagree on the very specific policy details that could have been brought up on that. First of all, at their heart of hearts, i think they do agree with beto orourke, and they just worry still about the politics. But joe biden made an important point when he went back to the gun reform bill that was fairly narrow that got 54 votes in the senate, which was a majority, but lost in the filibuster. He noted how much this issue has changed over time. Voters who voted on the gun issue in the 2018 election voted 70 democratic in the house races. He referenced the students after the Stoneman Douglas high school shooting. There has been a real sea change on the gun issue that you saw reflected in that debate last night. Related to that, the other point made that was very important, Elizabeth Warren was the one person who stood up and said we have to end the filibuster in the senate because if the democrats do win the senate, which is still going to be tough, theyre not going to have a big majority. If there is a brief period where the democratic president , Democratic Senate, and Democratic House, theyre going to want to get a lot done. If there is a filibuster, a lot of what they want to get done will not get done. Once again, thats something that isnt up to the president. They dont all agree on that. I mean, Bernie Sanders is pretty reluctant. And the truth is, most senators are pretty reluctant about getting rid of the filibuster because theyve lived on the beneficiary side of the filibuster. Quick last word, maria teresa. The fact that the yesterday it was the debate yesterday held in texas. It was incredibly meaningful for the people there. And it was a relief to see people talking on stage that reflected america. We had three women, an asian, an africanamerican, we had what america really is, and that is what resonated most. You could see young people and children tuning in and saying this is a country i can identify with. That alone says what the Democratic Party is and the progressive movement. Maria teresa kumar gets the last word tonight. E. J. Dionne, thank you for joining us. That is tonights last word. The 11th hour with Brian Williams starts now. Tonight, the Justice Department claiming House Democrats shouldnt get access to secret mueller grand jury materials in part because they cant say whether what theyre now doing is actual impeachment or not. Andrew mccabe asking his former employer if indeed a grand jury failed to indict him. And so far the doj is not talking about that. And in his search for a Fourth National security adviser, how is the business of national security, and how does the world view the american president these days . As the 11th hour gets underway on a friday night. Good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters he i