Going nowhere in the senate. My guest this morning, democratic congresswoman terri sewell of alabama, who sits on the house Intelligence Committee, and republican congressman and deputy whip tom cole of oklahoma. Plus, with exactly one year to go before the 2020 election, we have a brandnew nbc news wall street journal poll on impeachment, general election matchups and a country now more divided than it has been in generations. Also, how is andrew yang outlasted so many better known contenders. It stands for make america think harder. My interview this morning with president ial candidate andrew yang. Joining me for insight and analysis are helene cooper, pentagon correspondent for the new york times. Rich lowry, editor of national review. Anna palmer, coauthor of playbook, politicos daily newsletter, and john harwood of cnbc. Welcome to sunday. Its meet the press. From nbc news in washington, the longest running show in television history. This is meet the press with chuck todd. Good sunday morning. Believe it or not, it is exactly one year until election day. That happened fast, didnt it. On a week when House Democrats voted nearly unanimously to endorse a impeachment inquiry, we have new evidence that the country is just as divided outside of the beltway as it is inside. In our brandnew poll, 49 of adults surveyed would like to see President Trump impeached and removed from office. While 46 oppose. 49 plurality is a significant change from a few weeks ago. A ninepoint net swing in favor of impeachment. The increase comes from independents and especially from democrats, while republican support for impeachment has dropped into the single digits. Now, a lot hasnt changed, though. In headtohead matchups, joe biden leads President Trump 50 to 41. While Elizabeth Warren leads 50 to 42. And President Trumps Approval Rating remains where it has been for 18 months, somewhere between 43 and 46 with this poll having it at 45 approving of his job, 53 disapproving. But then theres this. 34 of registered voters tell us theyre certain to vote for mr. Trump, while a whopping 46 say theyre already certain to oppose him. With just 17 saying it depends on the democratic nominee. Those are some very tough numbers for a sitting president. And interest, by the way, in next years election right now is at a week before election day levels and were a year out. Thats another rough sign for any incumbent, especially this one. The adds up to this, a president who may will survive impeachment, but may not survive the election. There is an assault on our democracy coming right out of the white house. The word impeachment to me, its a dirty word. After a starkly partisan vote to begin an impeachment inquiry. Those in favor, please say aye. We will go on record and say that the president did nothing inappropriate . Very clear yes. Democrats are grappling with how to make a compelling public case on impeachment to a divided country. Frankly, impeachment is drowning out Everything Else. And im concerned at how dividing it is. While 89 of democrats approve of the impeachment inquiry, just 9 of republicans do. And while 58 of independents do support the inquiry, only 43 of independents believe the president should be removed from office. Also, the calendar presents an additional messaging challenge, with just three months before primary voting begins. The impeachment process is based on a constitutional standard and needs to run its course accordingly. I will say that there would be a lot of benefit to trump and trumpism getting a resounding thumping defeat at the ballot box because that will be what is required for Congressional Republicans to be reacquainted with their consciences. A consistent set of facts has emerged, of a president who withheld military aid to ukraine until its president agreed publicly to investigate 2020 political opponent joe biden. Lieutenant colonel alex vindman on the National Security council, testified this week he was told by John Eisenberg not to discuss his grave concerns about the president s phone call with anyone outside the white house. And he said eisenberg ordered the transcript of the call placed in a highly classified server. The president argues the phone call with zelensky was perfect, even joking about it at a rally on friday. Gee. I guess theres only one way. Lets call up ukraine for help. But with mounting evidence, republicans are struggling to defend the president. And some Senate Republicans are arguing for a shift in strategy. Acknowledging the quid pro quo but insisting it is not an impeachable offense. I dont care if you have a Million People listening on the phone call, ill make my own mind up. The president did nothing wrong. And joining me now is democrat terri sewell of alabama. A member of the house Intelligence Committee, been in there for most of these depositi depositions. Welcome to meet the press. Thanks. We start with, we know you passed the sort of next steps for the impeachment inquiry. Speaker pelosi said she expects public hearings to start this month. What are we going to see at the public hearings and how much of it is essentially going to be the best of what you have been seeing behind the scenes . Chuck, this is a sobering moment in americas history, and those of us who have been reluctant participants, i represent a blred state, and frankly, i think what really got me on the side of going to this inquiry was the fact that this president is interfering in our elections. He withheld important military assistance. He did so openly, in his own admission. And i think that the American People deserve to hear the facts. And we need to follow the facts where they lead us. We need to be able to apply the law, and more importantly, we need transparency. And thats exactly what the vote was this past week, for transparency. Have you heard enough in your mind that the president essentially should be indicted for this . I mean, thats what an article of impeachment is, an indictment . It is, but i can tell you the evidence is mounting. I think that i think that the American People should hear the testimony of ambassador taylor. We just heard from a war hero, mr. Vinnerman, recently, and i think its important we get to the bottom of this. To me, i have seen my republican colleagues twist themselves into a pretzel in order to defend the indefensible. I think this is about right and wrong. And i think the American People understand right and wrong. I think its important that we give to them, let them hear for themselves the testimony, and i think that we have already been presented with a lot of testimony that has been leaked or the Opening Statements have been presented, that it has a very damning case against the president. What role should Public Opinion play here . Public opinion is everything. Speaker pelosi often quotes thomas jefferson, all about public sentiment. Having said that, i think its really important that we present in a deliberate fashion, which is what were doing. When you think about it, we have only been doing this for, what, two weeks and we have already done 13 we already had 13 witnesses come before us. Were working all throughout the district work period, which is why im here in washington. I think its really important that we do so in a deliberative fashion, but we do so expediently because i think the American People need to know were still working on their behalf when it comes to legislating. Its interesting you say Public Opinion is everything here. Do you feel as if you have two challenges . You can lay out the case in perhaps a court of law with 12 jurors. You can win your case. But there is, to me, a second bar you have to meet, which is is what he did egregious enough that he shouldnt be allowed to be on the ballot in 2020 . Is that a separate bar . Well, i think that its all connected, is what i think. Its i think its important that the American People get to choose for themselves but i also think its important that we do so, we present the evidence to them in a way that they can understand it and hear it. You know does that mean the senate trial is irrelevant to you. Your job is to present the evidence and the public is going to react. If they react harshly enough, the senate may react or maybe its november. Is that sort of where you are . Where i am is i think its important that we make sure this is not just about process. The republicans have been able to focus on process. Thats because they cant really defend the truth of the evidence thats being presented in these investigations. And whats really, to me, damning is the fact that over 40 republicans get to participate in the scif, like i do. Over 40 of them get to participate in this. So i think that the vote last week was to remove the process argument. And really focus on the truth. We should be able to present the truth in a way that the American People can understand it, and i think that i hope that the American People will understand that this is about abuse of power. You know, my district, the alabama seventh congressional districts, people fought and died for the right to vote. To me, this is really about the soul of our democracy. Its about whether or not our president can ask a foreign power to actually investigate his political rivals. And to withhold assistance. Its about National Security. I think this is really an important moment in american history. Its a somber moment, and we want to make sure the American People understand the gravity and they get to choose for themselves, but its important that we present it in a way they can understand it. I want to play for you something Speaker Pelosi said on friday about additional charges that could get filed. Take a listen. There were 11 obstruction of justice provisions in the Mueller Report. Perhaps some of them will be part of this, but again, that will be part of the inquiry. So would you prefer this to be focused solely on ukraine, or do you think broadening it out to include some of the obstruction charges that were in the Mueller Report is something that is worthy . Well, i think that the most egregious charge to me is the National Security. And thats what i think we should focus on. Thats how the Intelligence Committee got involved in this. I would narrow it. Having said that, i think that the fact that the Mueller Report did outline obstruction of just sxs we see in plain view this administration is doing everything to make sure that witnesses dont get a chance to come and be heard, and why are they hiding it . If they really have firm grund to stand on, why are they so afraid to let witnesses come before us and tell their side . Speaking of witnesses, John Eisenberg, do you expect him to actually testify monday or will that get blocked . I dont know. I hope he will testify. Were all here ready for his testimony to be presented tomorrow. This administration has done everything it can to hide the ball. And it begs the question, what are they trying to hide . I think its prornt that we stay focused on presenting the facts and applying the law, and realizing this is about our constitution. This is about our constitutional responsibility. Depositions, are they getting released this week, the transcripts of these depositions . Theres been some thought they could get released this week. Should we expect that . You can expect as the speaker said it will be released some time in november. Before the public hearings . I would expect it would be before the public hearings but im not sure. Its not about the timeline. Its about getting it right, making sure were presenting the facts to the American People. One quick political question. There is a roaring debate in the Democratic Party between medicare for all or taking obamacare and expanding it. Which side of the aisle are you on . I think we should take the Affordable Care act and expand it. I represent alabama, where i have a lot of access issues. Theres so Many Americans in my district that dont have any health care insurance. So medicare for all. Its about making sure we have access, universal access for all americans. Do you think medicare for all is too big of a step and start with obamacare . Is that the reason . I can tell you many of my constituents want to keep their if they have Health Insurance, they want to keep the Health Insurance they have. We have 10 million americans that dont have any coverage. We should be focused on that. Terri sewell, democrat from alabama, thanks for coming on. In our poll, we asked people why they thought congress should or should not impeach President Trump. Among the 49 who say congress should impeach, check it out, the most common answers were that President Trump was dishonest, unfit for office, selfcentered, and had abused his power. Among the 46 who say congress should not impeach, people say President Trump did nothing wrong, is doing a good job, that theres no evidence of wrongdoing, and the process itself is politically motivated. Its more proof that the country is listening to two different narratives of the same presidency. Joining me now is congressman tom cole of oklahoma, the Top Republican on the house rules committee. You saw him a lot during the impeachment vote. Good to be with you. Let me start with a simple question here. Do you believe there was a quid pro quo . No. Not at all, because there is some question, some people believe there was and it doesnt rise to impeachment. You dont believe there was a quid pro quo . The things we know are this. We know the president says there was no quid pro quo. Kwee know president zelensky said he didnt feel any pressure. We know theres no ukraine investigation. And we know the military aid got there. Those are things we know. So no, i dont think there was a quid pro quo. Interesting way you put it. We have seen five witnesses just this week that have testified to a quid pro quo. That military aid was being held up over these investigations. And we had Rudy Giuliani somehow playing a private role here. Does any of that stuff, to you, any of that a concern to you . Well, concern is different than rising to the level of impeachment. But again, i look at it this way. The aid is there. And the investigations didnt happen. So if there was a quid pro quo, it certainly wasnt a very effective one. So why shouldnt the president be held accountable for this . You can hold any president accountable. You should probably do it through an oversight hearing to make your point. Instead, were going willynilly into impeachment. Were doing it in a process thats unacceptable to most republicans. Were doing exactly what Speaker Pelosi said we shouldnt do. That is were proceeding in a partisan impeachment without a consensus in the country. You know, frankly, i think Democratic Caucus just got the bit between its teeth and decided it wanted to beat this guy one way or another. Let me go back to the quid pro quo because youre taking the president at his word, and these witnesses youre not taking at their word. To be fair, i havent heard the witnesses. But i look at it this way, chuck. Ive got 40odd republicans as my friend before me said, that have been sitting in the hearings. They dont think this rises to the level of impeach nl offense and they dont think we should have proceeded in the manner we did this year. Again, i have the transcript which i have read, i have media reports which i have paid attention to, and i have colleagues who have been sitting in the room, none of whom think this rises to the level of impeachment. So you know, its pretty easy for me givien those things to sy were off on a track thats going to divide the country and we cant resolve in congress. I want to play for you an array of responses defending the president by fellow republicans of yours. Because that array seems to be sending a mixed message. Take a listen. A whistleblower complaint is heresy here. The whistleblower was not on the phone call. It seems like a fair bit of heresy. No firsthand knowledge. No quid pro quo. There was no quid pro quo. No quid pro quo. We do that all the time with foreign policy. The president has had questions about foreign aid across the board. Whether its in central america, afghanistan, or other places. So it wasnt unique necessarily to ukraine. No impeachable problem. I dont see that rising to the level of an impeachable defense. I think bill cassidy said it was possible it was a lapse of judgment. The reason i present all that to you is what is the public supposed to absorb from this . The Republican Party said no, this didnt happen. All right, maybe it did, but its not this. Do you see why some are skeptical of what the republican opinion is. The best thing for the public to do is read the transcript. Its the closest thing we have to a record, and you make a judgment as to whether or not you think what happened there is worth putting the country through an incredibly divisive experience thats stopping Everything Else from happening, and that we know how the story is going to end. Theres very little likelihood that the president will be removed. We made a political decision to put everything