Second. Shes here. But mika had a horrible night last night. I was sitting in front of my tv set like a 5yearold. He loves it. We are reviewing puffington katty, the bbc really needs you. Its a little slow. Oh my god. It appears they took this history making story and just i dont know, killed it. I was watching and i dont know whats wrong with me, it litter it was like the greatest thing ever. No. I turned to the bbc and i just sat mikas like what are you doing . Its like the first tv that ever existed. Well, lets go right now to it was wonderful. You know what difficult position youre putting me in right now . How awkward are you making my morning. Lets talk about this. Okay. Its first of all history, nothing like this since 87. The worst dominice drubing sinc you couldnt help but watch those returns come in, especially in the labor north, the red wall, red over there of course labor, that red wall in the midlands up north. A party that darted way too far left and going conservative for the first time, well, in manchester the first time ever. And a lot of seats First Time Since world war i. It was its like you wore looking at, you know, where steel mills used to be in pennsylvania. So, look, colossal defeat for the labor party. Some lessons to be learned here but some that are particular to that election in the uk. Jeremy corbyn moouhugely unpopu. He had likability ratings of minus 44. I dont know how thats possible. Doorstep after doorstep are hearing we cannot elect this party with Jeremy Corbyn we just dont like him. The antisemitism charges that he never really managed to dispel didnt help him at all. Brexit overshadowed this election and made it unique, made it different. So when we start to look at parallels between what happened in the uk and what might happen in the Democratic Party here in the u. S. , it is worth putting this in the context of brexit. The people who voted all their lives for labor and switched last night to the conservative party, many of them did so because of the conservative partys position on the European Union and because they wanted to get out of the European Union and they voted to leave the European Union. Thats that isnt a factor here. But theres something in politics in the uk and u. S. And perhaps globally. How traditional left wing parties lost the right to be the champions of workingclass men and women . Its unbelievable. Is this now an election, an electoral period in which its parties on the right, parties that are more nationalist, more keen to put up restrictions on immigration, for example, that can now claim the mantel of supporting work class men and sfwhen that women . Thats the bigger shift that were in. This was retweeted last night, alan johnson is going after some of corbyns people and he looks apple at him like now why dont you go back to your student politics and little left wing affairs. That is the attitude of workingclass, proworking labor people who believe that, like Many Democrats, believe their party has been taken over by the twitter mob. That does not reflect workingclass people. That certainly was the takeaway last night. Well get to all of that and much more. So we certainly are going to be talking to katty more on south and north. Exactly. I was i was just going to say, you were there. I ran the euro of the economist once in my life. Yes. Also for the new york times, peter baker and cofounder and ceo of axios, jim vandehei joins us. Lets bring in nbc News White House correspondent gef benneof bennett and talk about what happened in the United States. Why did jerry nadler recess last night . What happened . Heres the deal, mika. Democrats say that republicans told them that they intended to wrap things up last night by 5 00 p. M. But what happened was during the hearing, and you saw this, democrats made mention of the fact that republicans wanted to go to that planned White House Christmas reception that started at 7 00 p. M. And so as a little bit of retribution, republicans offered a bunch of aemmendments and jamd up the process. So when it became clear that this panel was poised to vote on these articles of impeachment at midnight, potentially even 1 00 a. M. , nadler tabled it and made the point that this is too important of a thing to have this vote in the dead of night. So he recessed and called a voice vote that will set up this Committee Vote on the two articles of impeachment at 10 00 a. M. So what do we expect today, jeff . So we expect that this committee will vote these articles of impeachment from the committee to the house floor. It will be a 2317 split. It would normally be a 2417 split but youve got congressman ted li ted lieu. On tuesday you have the house set to vote on the funding measure. Wednesday theyll vote on impeachment and thursday nafta 2. 0. Thats done by design. House speaker and leadership wanted policy to be the last thing that this congress does at the end of the year, not impeachment. All right. Thank you so much, geoff, we grately apprecia greatly appreciate it. Peter baker, personal plus fhue action b humiliation, political benefit. This is a personal we saw it yesterday with over a hundred tweets there is something thats really, really upsetting him on a personal level, despite his protests otherwise. Yeah. Thats exactly right. Of course, look, he can count on the senate, Republicancontrolled Senate to cold trial where he seems almost certain to be acquitted or at least have the charges dismissed in some fash shion. Mcconnell is talking about a trial that would end, you need a twothirds vote for conviction. But that doesnt mean he wont have the sting of the historical marker. It may be a partyline vote but it will be an impeachment. That will be part of his obituary, historical leg gase so inhis leg acy. Hes in a better place, hes excited republicans are finally defending him in the way he wants them to defend him like you saw yesterday through 14 hours of meetings. They werent saying, well, he did wrong but its not impeachable. What they were saying was he didnt do anything wrong, thats the kind of defense he wants. He didnt like the sort of equivocation he heard from some of the republicans early on. He kind of goes back and forth at this point. Youre right about the twitter. Look at what happened yesterday. 123 tweets. 123 tweets. That was hor than in one day. Who does that . More in one day than he had any full week in 2017. Hes already now at a weekly record and we have two more days to go as president. So, you know, hes clearly taking out his energy through tweets and so most of which are retweets of things that republicans are saying defending him. I think, again, likes the idea he has supporters and allies that will have his back, something he didnt feel like he had in september. 123 tweets in one day. Wow, youre president of the United States, which is a pretty busy job, think. Not for all of them. Less for him than for others. John, lets go with what we all know is going to happen, thats the house next week, assuming the vote takes place next week, will impeach the president of the United States and look at whats going to happen on the hill in the senate. If you are any doubt, and i dont think you do, that the democrats will vote to impeach the president. But sean hannity said there will be no difference between the president s position and our position in how to handle this. So theyre coordinating with the white house to ensure they get the vote theyre going to get. This is going to go and play out just the way most people thought it would. I think its right and proper for all of us to say lets let it play out and not be too firm and predictive. But the betting odds are that the president is going to get acquit. Theres drama around the question of will it leave these republicans in vulnerable seats, mcsallys and gardeners but they need 20 of them. Theres some drama around the question of because those seats matter so much, what will those republicans do . So we care about those outcomes because we care about controflt senate and those are important political decisions. I can tell you those senators are really weighing things with a fine grain they cant afford to have the same take as those house republicans. Or as the president. Or as the president. Cory gardner cant do it. Martha mcsally. Certainly Susan Collins cant do it. Even thom tillis has to be careful. Those are the wounds. And those are the ones who you think might vote against the president , theyre at the top of the list along with maybe mitt romney who might vote that way on principle. I watched a lot of the proceedings yesterday including late last night before the semi quasi weird procedural dramaing of them going at it over process. The last thing i heard yesterday before the network threw to impeachment coverage was you talking about your view that maybe it was a mistake to have only two articles of impeachment and to be so focused, democrats, focused on trying to do this quickly and trying to have these two kind of omnibus articles. And as the day played out yesterday, your comments which werent very specific thats why i wanted to ask you about them were ringing in my ear. Because republicans yesterday over the course of the day felt, i think, like the reason as peter baker said, the republicans the president s happy because the republicans are defending him on substance. The reason theyre defending him on substance was not that he didnt do anything wrong. But what they were able to seize on was democrats, if you thought you had a chargeable crime, you would have charged the president. You have included articles of impeachment on specific things like bribery, so on, so forth. Instead, abuse of power maybe an impeachable off but its not a crime. But im trying to ask you whether you think by doing with these omnibus articles in a way that kind of threw everything in and kind of general sense, whether the democrats might have made a political mistake and given republicans a stronger argument, or whether having enumerated four, five, six, seven, eight, would have been better for the democrats. Why . I think you have to be nimble and its hard to be nimble when youre hurting that many cats. Speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosis first concern has to be those moderate democrats that are in virginia, in california, all the people all the democrats that won republican seats by 1,000, 2,000, 4,000 votes. So i understand that. Yeah. But, as we move through this process and the republicans and the house acted in such an abhorrent way, its going to damage them in the long run, they were much better off to say, yes drer it b, he did it at a crime. This is why were not removing him. Theyre not doing that. Now some republicans cynically saying youre rushing this. Its just my nature to say, okay, im rushing this . You know what were going to do . Were stlopping the train. Lets stop the train. Hold on a second, oh, you dont have a crime . Oh, you mean like when the president s fixer and the president talked about illegally giving a hush payment to a porn star a couple of weeks before april election that wouan election that would havend lad any of you youre right. You know what were going to do . Were going to add that because thats a crime and that really upsets you that we have enumerated a specific crime that would have sent any of to us jail if we had done it in our house races, were going to do add that. You know what . The Russian Foreign minister was in the white house again. That reminds us, we have the president on record obstructing justice telling the and i would play it out. It would be chinese water torture over weeks and months. And donald trump, you know what id do . Id be like, george h. W. Bush in the 88 campaign against michael d were going to have stormds wy k daniels week. Going to bring Stormy Daniels in. Going to bring cohen out of jail. Youre in jail because you did what . Youre in jail because you helped the president in a conspiracy to violate a federal election law that would have landed him in jail. Oh, okay. So in is Stormy Daniels week. You know what next week is . Next week is Sergey Lavrov week. And i would just do it week after week after week. Now, i understand there would be some democrats oh, we cant do that. I understand that. But ill tell you what, not only would that be best for history, i think politically it would be best, call the republicans bluff. You know, if Donald Trumps selling out an american ally and selling out American National security is not enough for them, you know, then lets lets in the immortal words of w. D. Childers from the Redneck Riviera state senator, lets put the wheat where the goats can eat it. Thats the thing that drove me crazy about bill clintons impeachment. We are sitting there, he committed perjury, monica lewinsky, but there were so many other things that, you know, were more troubling than that. But, anyway, so, yeah, i would i would call the republicans bluff. I would drag this out. I would add i mean, hes committed crimes. Lets add it. The emoluments clause, id add it. Constitutionally, its in the u. S. Constitution, they should add it. I understand theyre doing it for brevity, get it through there to keep it as simple as possible, that hasnt worked. The republicans bad faith has reached new levels. But of course, jim vandehei, that wont happen because nancy pelosi wants to get this done and she is rightly concerned about her moderate democrats. Yeah, and think her calculation is that if she did what youre telling her to do, that you would still have the exact same outcome. That there arent any republicans that are persuadable. I think thats been the lesson of this presidency. You and peter had a little debate earlier about whether impeachment helps or hurts trump. The truth is, nothing really makes a difference. Hes kind of been locked at 42 regardless of news, regardless of developments now three years running. And i know the white house is out there, they did a briefing for reporters yesterday saying impeachment is awesome for them, theyre raising lots of money, its stirring republican enthusiasm. But the truth is, republican enthusiasm is kind of where it was before. Everythings been locked in. And what theyre trying to do is theyre saying, listen, we look at what happened over in britain and we think there is a path to victory. And that path is, were going to go to those little counties, those places that people arent paying attention to. Were going to the voters who arent really republicans, theyre more trumpers who sat out 2018. Were going to get them hopped and you target them on facebook and try to win a narrow victory because theyre looking at that wisconsin poll that youve been talking about on msnbc in the last hour that shows that bidens the only person leading donald trump in wisconsin, which is probably the most important swing state in politics right now. And theyre going to try to, like, do what theyre doing to be able to squeeze out a victory. And the hearing yesterday, like, god, the sad thing is, you listen to what republicans were talking about and theyre saying, listen, if biden wins we now have enough to impeach him. You hear republicans saying that. So now impeachment is like Government Shutdown. Its Like Supreme Court fights. We take these things that almost never happened and now were like, oh, just another tool in the weaponry of political warfare. And thats what republicans are saying they would do to biden. So its just another sort of another bad precedent for politics. Lets go around quickly. Willie im curious what you think. Do you think republicans or democrats should expand it or does it seem to make more sense for them to keep it tight . I think nancy pelosi thinks shes got what shes got, shes got an air tight case on the question of ukraine and shes worried about dragging it out longer. She has watched the polls that have showed its basically frozen in this country about impeachment. 50 50, maybe ticking a little under that for democrats on the question of impeachment. I think she thinks the more this drags on, perhaps, the more the country begins to tune out and roll its eyes a little bit at the process. She wants a vote and move on. Peter baker, what do you think . What do democrats think . I think willie has it right. Theyre trying to be strategic about this. All these things didnt stick over the last two or three years and they decided to not relitigate the mueller case, not relitigate russia, not get into the hoax versus witchhunt versus whatever thing, the emoluments and all that. To your point, joe, whats striking about it is this is of all the things that weve seen in these three years a narrow case. Its about one specific episode, not just a phone call, it was more than just one foppe calpho there was a series of events that many people think this president has done twrowrong an cross lines that hadnt been crossed. Theres the sense that if youre going to impeach him for historys sake, what are you telling history was wrong about this presidency . I think in many critics view is not just this one episode, its a broader case to be made. I think strategically the democrats decided its a loser, take what youve got, go ahead and push it, youre not going to win the trial anyway as jim said, so get what youve got. John heilemann, you do have crimes. Fascinating they didnt attach the crimes. I agree. Think nancy pelosi is in better touch with the specific politics of the specific members whose seats in jeopardy, will be in jeopardy next year, most hard fought, the ones she needs to keep if shes going tro taint speakership. I think she knows the politics of those districts better than the members her selves. I defer to her judge meament an the voters in those districts saw this thing dragging out in 2020 and strengthening the republicans hands. On the other argument, now its january or february, why are you trying we have an election in november, why are you taking this choice away from the American People . But i will say after feeling as though throughout this process nancy pelosi, adam schiff, as long as things in schiffs committee and pelosi and schiff were driving things, that democrats had the whip hand on this politically. Think when its shifted to the Judiciary Committee over the last few days, you can he soot difference