Latest Breaking News On - Back bone - Page 1 : vimarsana.com

Transcripts For CNNW CNN Tonight With Don Lemon 20170510 06:00:00

the fisher director who is the only person who is independently leading this moving forward when you don't have him doing that you need an outside group doing it. republicans should call for that shouldn't be a partisan thing. >> cnn live coverage of this breaking news is obviously going to be continuing all night. jake tapper along at 11:00 p.m. eastern with a special report. first don lemon and cnn tonight with the latest. >> anderson thank you very much our breaking news tonight, president trump bombshell firing of fbi director james comey. this is cnn tonight i'm don lemon let's put it as plainly as we can. the president of the united states has fired the man investigating his campaign's ties to russia. fired him. shocking confusion tonight on capitol hill. around the country and around the world. now questions being raised of whether there is a cover-up going on. this is definitely not politics as usual. we have said it before but it's look at this very brief letter the president sent to the fisher director hand tlifrd to the fbi late this afternoon, the second appraise of this letter perhaps says it all. let's take a look at it don. it says while i greatly appreciate you informing me on three separate occasions that i am not under investigation, i nevertheless concur with the judgment of the department of justice that you are not able to effective lead the bureau. now, all of in is coming -- the white house is explaining the firing because the director of the fisher had lost the confidence of the bureau. he said the deputy attorney general and the attorney general made this recommendation to the president. but in their memorandums and letters that they sent out here paul of them are talking about the clinton investigation, the 2016 campaign. they say director comey did not handle himself properly in that investigation. in the president's letter he does not mention the clinton controversy campaign one time. he brings up his own investigation, the russia investigation trying to make a point on that. don, this is not the end of the story. it seems it's the beginning of yet another chapter in washington, another controversy perhaps the biggest one yet with the trump administration. >> i think you're absolutely right as astonishing as that appraise in that letter is it's also astonishing to say they didn't perceive at the white house dana bash, weren't prepared for the reaction how about the reaction would be who is that naive in the white house that did not realize this would be a big story. >> it seems like that was a pervasive. naive is your word not mine but it's probably pretty appropriate here don given the fact that i was told by earlier tonight right when in news first broke that by a source familiar with discussions inside the white house, that they did not expect in to be the political explosion that it was. and it was hard for me to even believe that that was really the case. because it was so obvious. it doesn't take somebody like me or others here on the panel who are covered politics or you know have studied history to know that this is a really really big deal. but the way that it bore out as jeff has been reporting and taking pictures of the scramble that has been going on outside of the white house, in the dark, with white house officials trying to do damage control, and it's not as though this was an event that happened to them. this is an event that the white house did in and of itself. meaning, this is not like many, many times there is damage control that happens in washington because a force outside or an event outside occurs. this was something that was created by the president and the -- and the justice department. but you know the president himself is the one who said, you're fired, to jamestown comey, the fact that they were not prepared for the fallout. we're talking about fallout. we're talking about the fact that this has not happened in this way since richard nicken's administration. talking about the fact that republicans is who are loathe to criticize the president like the senate intelligence chair richard burr putting out a statement and issuing a tweet saying he is concerned about this. that kind of reaction they were clearly not expecting mindboggling that's the case. >> gloria i want to bring in dana you may not have it because you were just mentioning burr. but jeff lake a republican from >> gloria peting out i was food trying to find a acceptable rationale for the timing of the firing and i just can't do it. it's not just democrat it's republicans as well. >> it is republicans. remember you know jeff flake was not a donald trump republican. but richard burr was a donald trump republican. and i think right now you know the balance of power here is going to be really important. because we have to see how congress reacts to this. congress is going to want to investigate exactly what happened here. you don't fire your fbi director as he is investigating your campaign and russia hacking of the elections. just which willy nily. they're going to want to talk to comey i'm sure. they were going to want to talk to jeff sessions i'm sure and rod rosenstein who wrote the letter. let me say one thing rod rosenstein's long letter detailed a lot of complaints that a lot of democrats had about james comey, that he shouldn't have gone on on july 5th after he cheered hillary clinton and the email controversy and said, okay but she is reckless. and he shouldn't have sent that letter on october th and turned the election upside down maybe that's why dan an the white house wasn't expecting this to be a disaster. >> that's exactly right. >> for them. but you know rod rosenstein doesn't speak for the president who at the time these events occurred was applauding them. so, you know. >> is this a firing in search of a cause gloria. >> well i think it's a firing in search of a rationale, right. and -- and the rationale here was provided by the deputy attorney general. but -- and the deputy attorney general i'm sure believes it as do lots of other people in this country, democrat and republican. but i don't know that donald trump really believes what the attorney -- what the deputy attorney general wrote. because he was applauding comey when he said that hillary clinton was reckless. he would have liked to have seen her indicted, sure. but you know i don't recall him complaining about comey's words at the time. >> yeah. and the president-elect also as a candidate applauding james comey at the time as well. and also as president as well saying he has taken some heat got a strong back bone pamela here is the really important question. comey was overseeing the russia trump investigation, fired by the people he is investigating now. so who is in charge what does it mean for the investigation. >> that is part of what makes this so extraordinary, don. as of ton the former deputy director of the fbi the andy mccabe is the acting director of bureau and the investigation is still being overseen by the deputy attorney general we were just talking about rod rosenstein, the person that recommended the firing of james comey to the president according to this letter. you know career fisher agents and prosecutors are still working on this case, still moving forward. they are issuing subpoenas as we reported tonight. but of course something of this magnitude happening could have a chilling effect among the investigators as you know don there are frohhing calls particularly from exactic lawmakers for independent prosecutor to take over the investigation. and rosenstein has said previously during his senate confirmation hearing that he would indeed appoint a special prosecutor if -- if enact necessary. i wouldn't be surprised if you continue to see these calls. >> um-hum. pamela, you also have some reporting tonight. regarding grand jury subpoenas have been issued in this fbi russia investigation. what can you tell us about that. >> that's right we learned that just in the last couple of weeks federal prosecutorers have issued grand jury subpoenas to associates of former national security adviser michael flynn seeking business records as part of the ongoing probe of russian meddling in last year's election. the subpoenas represent the first sign of a significant escalation of activity in the fbi's broader investigation that began last july into possible ties between trump associates and russia. they were received by associates who worked with michael flynn on contracts after he was forced out as director of the defense intelligence agency in 2014. robert kjell ner an attorney for flynn he declined to comment as to the justice dp, the fbi and the u.s. attorney's office. but you know just looking at the circumstances here just in the last couple of weeks you had the subpoenas issued to associates of president trump's former national security adviser. en and it's remarkable to think the man overseeing this whole investigation james comey has now been fired by the president. >> so that -- that information that you're giving now is exclusive information that you're giving. groeria i want to go back to something that you -- we talked about let's go over the letter from rod rosenstein deputy to attorney general now and going to be acting director. in the memo he points to the press kerns that comey held back in 2016 during the campaign saying he wasn't recommending charges against hillary clinton. he is pointing to how the clinton investigation was handled. really. >>? why are they point pointing that out? >> you got me. look, i think it's something rod rosenstein probably believes it was mishandled as do lots of other prosecutors. >> that was july of 2016 though. >> right. and i -- and i think a lot of people believe that -- that was a mistake it's not a prosecutors job to tell people why i did not diet somebody for example. he also went after him for his testimony last week on -- on why his choice between conceal or speak. but -- but you have to put this in a wider context. we are talking about now president donald trump, who didn't find anything wrong back then with comey's behavior, more did he find anything wrong with the letter comey sent to congress, saying that he had to reopen the hillary clinton investigation. and so you have to wonder whether you know trump is saying -- donald trump is saying i want to fire this guy, give me -- give me the reasons here. >> yeah. i stand stsh shall have been stand by i want to bring somebody stand by you guys i want to bring in congressman elijah cummings. swal we chl congressman cummings start with you reaction to tonight events. >> well i'm not surprised. it seems as if when miss yates appeared yesterday i said to myself, we're going to have a new issue tomorrow. and we have constantly seen don this movement of hoke us poke us when something gets close to the russian investigation, the next thing we know we moved on to something -- another issue. but there is something that your guests don't seem to understand. one of the reasons why -- keep in mind comey came to our committee, oversight committee back in the summer and made the announcement how he thought hillary clinton was sloppy but he wasn't going to prosecute. i told him at that hearing. i said, they are coming after you. that is the republicans don't like what you're doing. and they are going to put you on trial. the thing that your guests don't know is that after that decision was made not to prosecute they basically -- the republicans on the oversight committee subpoenaed almost every single document in the fbi file. and i think that what happened with comey is that he came back later on closer to the election to make those announcements because i think he was contender that they would come after him. that's what i believe. but, again, i think the timing of this is -- is horrible. i think -- i mean if we look at it, don, he -- the president treated flynn far better than he treated the fbi director. i mean the fisher director doesn't -- didn't even flow he was being fired. >> yeah. >> and while flynn had 18 days after the president even knew that he had lied to the vice president we've got to get to the bottom of this. i think the fact that there is a grand jury and that questioning is now being opened up i think you're going to see a whole new escalation thereof case. >> i want to ask you going, congressman swal well i know both ever you congressmen have been privy to classified information and you know what's happening with the investigation. there is reporting tonight cnn and others as the "washington post" said reporting that the white house and the attorney general had pushed the fbi to pursue leaks rather than pushing them to pursue with the investigation was about and that was possible collusion from the trump campaign with russia. did you know anything about that congressman swalwell. >> well don i hope that's notes case. our country was attacked by russia. there is a sowers fbi investigation going on into whether any u.s. persons were involved. to make that a priority over protecting our democracy would be a serious misjudgment. as far as firing fbi director comey, to the average american this stinks. the united states is a democracy. the president can't fire the person who is investigating him. that violates bedrock principles of independence. elijah cummings and i also wrote legislation to have a independent commission that's the best way to get to the bottom of what happened to make sure we never find ourselves in a mess like this again. >> your colleague ranking intelligence committee member put pout a statement saying the decision by the president have under the investigation by the fbi fore collusion with russia to fire the man over the recommendation on the recommendation of the attorney general who has recused himsz from that investigation raise profound question base whether the white house is brazenly interfering in a criminal matter. congressman, do you see it that way and what is the recourse if so? >> jeff sessions should be noware near the firing ever director comey he was supposed to be recused remember he was supposed to be recused he was asked by the senate if he had any contacts with russia during the election. twice he said no we learned later because of press reporting he had. for him to be involved also raises questions on the judiciary committee where i serve i think we should have jeff sessions before us to explain just exactly why this was not -- just exactly why efts involved in this while he was supposed to be recused >> congressman cummings and go ahead, congressman. >> i'm just going to say i agree totally with congressman swalwell. i was shocked we had a letter coming from the attorney general with the workmen's. isume any any recommendation would be solely that of the deputy attorney general who i know quite well and i think the world of. he is -- he was our u.s. attorney here in maryland over ten years. rosenstein. but i think rosenstein now has a duty -- i think we're going to have to do two things. one i think we need to to have the independent commission as congressman swalwell and i put forward. but we also have to make sure that an independent counsel is appointed by rosenstein because some kind of way you basically have to have both one checking each other. >> i want to ask you dwresman about -- a little bit more about the deputy attorney general since i recommended in firing because of how comey handled the clinton investigation. pointing to comey's press conference on clinton pointing to the letter before the election. but i want to you listen to president trump when all that happened. then we'll discuss. >> i respect the fact that director comey was able to come back after what he did. it took guts for director comey do make the move he made in light of the kind of opposition he had where they're trying to protect her from criminal prosecution. >> he has become more famous than me. >> so congressman, the president -- the didn't mind how it was alanda then so what changed? >> i think whenever. >> what change was that director comey. >> congressman cummings. >> i think whenever things are going going the president's way it's finite with him when they're not going with him it's not fine with him it doesn't say a rocket scientist to see this. that's why we have moved from one issue to another we will see that over and over again. basically what we need in this whole process is integrity, transparency and if anything wants to see what transparency and integrity is all about, all we have to do is rewind the tape of sally yates and clapper yesterday. those are the type of public servants who make sure that we preserve this democracy and preserve our system of justice. >> congressman swalwell some republicans right now are saying well wait hold on a second director comey was disliked by democrats too nobody was happy with him what's your response to that. >> well with whether people were happy with him or not he came to congress in march and told congress and the american people that the president's campaign was under criminal and counterintelligence investigations. at that point unless director comey commit add crime he should have been untouchable that's the only way we could have an independent prosecution an independent search for the truth by the fbi credible. and make progress. and now the president has violated that principal of independence and i'm very concerned for our country. >> do you think we'll see a special prosecutor. >> don -- don one of the things we are missing here too is that it is not normal for one who is under investigation -- i practiced law over 20 years one who is under investigation or their associates under investigation to be doing things that stand in the way of that investigation. or saying things usually what i would tell my clients is we're going to cooperate with the authorities and move on. and not be constantly making comments. and i think that that's the way this should proceed. the president should not be involved in all of these tweets about how he doesn't think this is happening or that's wrong. let the process play itself out. >> yeah that was the opening to the show tonight that this is not normal for the person investigating this administration now fired by in administration and by in president. quick kwek do you think we'll see a special prosecutor congressman swalwell. >> i hope we do. i hope we have an independent commission a special prosecutor and that that person is able to find the truth and do it with independence so that anyone that worked with russia is held accountable because our democracy is counting on it. >> thank you congressman. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> and i want. >> my pleasure. >> any republican congressman anyone out wants to come you're welcome to come on even later on cnn we'll be live throughout the day throughout the evening i want to bring in cnn senior legal analyst, jeffrey toobin and laura coats. you have said -- you have been very outspoken about in jeffrey toobin. >> yeses. >> do you think there is a cover-up heres in just beyond the realm for you. >> you know, i don't know whether there's been a cover-up. what there has been is a travesty. i can't speak to the ultimate motivations of the president in why he did this. but the fact that he did this will disgrace his memory for as long as this presidency is remembered. there is only -- you know one- one day that will be remembered after january 20th so far in the trump presidency. and it's the day of the tuesday night massacre. in is the day that trump fired the head of the fbi. the only other time the head of the fbi has been fired was william sessions by bill clinton and that was politicly uncontroversial. so never in history have we had an fbi director fired by a president who was under investigation by the fbi. and it's just wrong. and it's obviously wrong. >> allen some are stay saying it a constitutional crisis for the president to fire the man investigating him do you grie with that. >> look i think there are four separate questions you have to ask. should comey be the director of the fbi? the answer to that is no. he shouldn't be the director. he should have resigned on show i called for him to resign. he lost his credibility. second question is should it be the president of the united states who makes the decision to fire him? not while he is under an investigation. third and where i disagree with my friend and former student jeffrey, is who he appoints next if he appoints a man or woman of great integrity in date will not go down and remembered in history because we will have been proved i don't think that it was some kind of a cover-up if he picks somebody who can pursue the investigation. fourth how about an independent existing not a peshl prosecutor there isn't probable cause but a independent investigation not done by congress but done by people appointed by congress. they can then decide whether to appoint a special prosecutor or recommend a preshl prosecutor i think to separate out the four separate questions. >> announcer: as a hypothetical if he payments one. >> who is to say he wouldn't fire them to a zblchlt preet bharara told he was going to stay, gone. james comey, gone. all three of whom had the potential to investigator -- and trouble the trump presidency. >> all three appointed by democrats all three appropriately replaced by a republican. but what we think. >> wait, wait. >> it was appropriately that james comey -- why do nef ten year terms. >> i think it's appropriate that he not be the director of the fbi. i think a lot of this is his fault. injury he should have resigned he should have looked in the mirror and said to himself "i" not trust the by democrats. i am not trusted by republicans. i am not trusted by the american public. and he should have resigned. >> yeah now he didn't and that's put the president. >> pick it back let's put the picture back up. the tlie people who are investigating this president are the administration fired. >> yates was a hold overshe was going to go only a question of which day she was going to go and be replaced. generally the u.s. attorney is replaced. and comey, is a unique situation. he really messed up. he may have changed the results of an election. >> yates. >> he could not -- he could not be the head of the fbi with credibility. >> yates wasn't investigating but he was the acting attorney general. do you find this -- do you find this fishy laura sfla arrive absolutely i do this is obviously a figure leaf the president was looking for a reason to fire james comey. james comey guy him a reason everyone is focuseding on the fact he had a testimony back last summer as one of the reasons he should have been fired by nonattorney general lynch but last week's testimony gave additional reasoning. remember he had the opportunity to say whether or not he was wrong for having done what he did and whether or not his motivation was in furtherance of the credibility of the department and of the fbi or whether it was some type of gratuitous task or journey for him personally. and the letter i saw today from the deputy attorney general i have to tell you a totally reading than we talked about my take is they were focusing on this particular point in time and comey's refusal to accept responsibility that he was in fact wrong don't get me wrong. this is still a pretextual reason but i walked right into the actual trap and grave guy are gave them the reason they needed. remember also he said my only choinss were either to speak or conceal. it showed a complete laps of judgment to recognize there was a very third obvious opportunity for him which was to follow the protocol of the department. and i have to say as a former prosecutor with the department of justice, he was wrong to usurp the role of the attorney general. and what he said was if you remember correctly he said i actually had the nerve to call the attorney general nonlynch and say, i'm going to have a press conference. but i'm not going to tell what you it's about. that was insubordination and he renewed and provided a different and more comprehensive reason for that last week. so he walked into it. i think it was a bit of brafd o and a bit of his lack of foresight to recognize that he had walked into a trap. >> i agree with everything you've just said. that is so rare but i agree with every single word you just said. >> i sure don't. >> go ahead. >> look, i think comey made mistake sns the hillary clinton investigation. i -- i agree on that point. but these were not -- it had nothing to do with his firing today. if he was going to be fired for his behavior with hillary clinton investigation he should have been fired on january 20th. plus there is currently an inspector general investigation of comey going on why didn't they wait for that? the only reason he is being fired is because he is investigating the president. the whole hillary clinton thing is just pro post-errously irrelevant backup does anyone really believe that donald trump fired james comey because he was too mean to hillary clinton? >> absolutely not i don't think that -- and i think the question itself assumes the hyperbowl that i have not given i don't believe the reason that james comey was fired was because of simply the fact he was abusing his power last year. i think the curious dates here are when did rosenstein take offers about 14 days ago when did comey testify before congress again and really have the audacity to talk about why he thought he was still justified and had to come forward. you know -- six days ago now i'm not saying -- it is relevant in terms of what i think they will come out as giving the comprehensive basis for why he was fired. that's what they're going to say. what i think actually happened was they were looking for a reason and he gave enemy one. because he was ignorant to the fact that he had not honored his initial role as no longer being a prosecutor and the final arbiter but as somebody who am paraphrasing him to put on the cape when he was capped off by miss furious and frustration with lor eta lynch on the tor mack he said that was what capped it off for me ffrmt what capped it him for him was the he still believed he had the right and authority to act the way did he. he did not. >> here is the question we don't know the answer to. rosenstein's letter on its own is absolutely correct. rosenstein absolutely believes that he should be fired because of the way he handled the clinton thing. remember rosenstein is nonpartisan. the question is did president trump ask rosenstein to come wup that letter or did rosenstein come with the letter on his own and president trump said, ah-ha i have an independent man of great integrity saying i should fire him. i want to fire him. and now i have the reason. i think that's the real question. what kim first the chicken are oh the egg. >> you know what his track record -- his track record here allen you make a good point. his track record here is somebody who has said when you talk about the travel ban and giuliani. i want tuesday something wrong figure it out a way to make it right and justifiable. now we have opportunity again i want to get rid of james comey give me a reason did he give you reason? that's the one we're going with. his track record makes this suspicious and justifiably so suspicious. >> he can eliminate the suspicion by appointing a terrific woman or man to be head of the fbi and agreeing to have an independent investigation. then what -- what jefferiry is speculating about although it may be true -- will be proved to be untrue by miss later axes. >> that's all after the fact though jeff. >> the timing is suspicious. >> my learned colleagues here my betters are overthinking this whole thing. >> i agree with you. >> is that you know they wanted to get rid of this guy and they got rid of him. and hillary -- sessions -- well i mean i don't know -- i am baffled by rosenstein's involvement. >> you poe him. >> i don't know him well but i interviewed him i heard nothing but good things about him. >> do you think rosenstein just at this point just came up said you know what i think he should be fired especially considering his testimony yesterday. >> i don't know. >> we can. >> i don't know what rosenstein's role in all of in is. but there has to be some person in the united states government who could just open their eyes and say, you know, you don't fire the fbi director when he is investigating you. you don't do this because the only other time there's been a comparable event in all of american history is october 20th, 1973, the saturday night massacre when president nixon fired archibald cox. that's the only comparable event somebody that that administration has to have said, you know, this is not going to look good. >> i think one of the most important things you said tonight jeffrey was sometimes the answer is the front in you the most obvious is answer is but sometimes more complex. >> sometimes but rarely. thank you all. president trump offering no further comment tonight after firing fbi director james comey but sending out. le counselor kellyanne conway who said this to anderson. >> the president himself -- skaus me is not the subject of investigation and most importantly are you talking about the folks who were involved in the campaign? >> yeah. >> okay well you said the people around the president. are you talking about people who were shall did dsh who were adviser. >> some of them may still be around the president. i don't know exactly who is being investigationed there is ongoing investigation by the fbi. >> but again you want this to be about russia when this is about quote restoring confidence and integrity at the fisher morrell is low. >> you wanted this to be about restoring confidence in fbi but i'm not sure -- many people believe this doesn't restore confidence in the fisher in fact a lot of people are raising questions saying it destroys people's confidence in the fisher about whoever the president may appoint is going to be in charge of an investigation into people who have been close to the president during the campaign. any potential collusion with russia. >> and today's actions had zero to do with that. >> i want to bring in a close confidante of president trump that's christopher rud ceo of news max news max testify zblap why tuning the president fired james comey. >> i think he made it pretty clear that he wanted to have someone he got a recommendation from a former clinton administration justice department official rod rosenstein saying what he did as fbi director was not inconsistent with the neutral of the bureau he decided to act and ask for termination i think if the president did anything wrong was waiting this long. i think when he was inaugurated he should have asked for comey's resignation. and the reason is he had lost the confidence of both democrats and republicans. not only the hillary clinton email press conference, which is the basis of the rosenstein letter, but a lot of democrats if you go back you look at the clips, don, you'll see that they were calling for comey to resign because of the investigation he launched into hillary in the closing days. >> you agree that the timing by him waiting as you say he should have done it day one is that right. >> veshd it have done it earlier but i don't think he is wrong. it would have been better served. >> doesn't you think the timing makes it look suspicious now. >> i don't think it's -- you keep making comparisons and other guests have on the show about watergate. that was the middle of a major investigation. >> i haven't made the watergate. >> but it's wg been going on throughout the night. and the truth is three times the director of the fbi told the president you're not -- there is no evidence. we know that director clapper has said there is no evidence. other officials disbelieved. >> testified of. >> collusion between the trump campaign and russias. >> that's the whole point of the investigation is not finished and also since you bring it up it was very strange thatted he said -- he would mention that in a letter that he sent out to the media and to the fbi. and actually to the fbi director notifying him of his. >> so everything we say is really have to be cleverly and carefully looked at one of the things you said earlier was that this was stopping the investigation. the president has not stopped any investigation -- fbi investigation. >> i never said any investigation was stopped. >> by firing you mentioned earlier. >> i asked where does this leave the investigation not that it stops the investigation. >> there is no investigation that's been stopped so he is not acting to thwart anything. why is there anything spish if he was saying to the fbi close down your russian investigation, i think that would raise serious concerns but he is not saying that. i think the proof of the pudding here is going to be who he picks as the successor. and i think he will pick someone very bipartisan and respected and when they do that i think any questions -- but look the house and senate committees are investigating this. there is an independent investigation going on out of the justice department on this. so i don't think we really have anything to worry about. >> who might the person be that he is going to appoint. >> my god i don't know i'm not in the legal law enforcement world i'm sure there is a number of highly qualified people. i'm sure with the scrutiny that's going to come with that. the president is going to -- if you look at all the choices the cabinet that he picked largely for the government these are not a people they're a-plus people. she has a number of people on the cabinet very independent of him have great experience. i think people are not -- we don't have anything to worry here and i think that people are making a lot more out of in than they should be. >> ask i ask you something because there is concern because we've been talking about the investigation where you say there is -- there is no evidence. you said there is no evidence thus far. >> correct. >> the investigation is still going on not that there is definitively no investigation until the investigation comes to a conclusion. there is also reporting tonight from cnn the "washington post" process l it says the white house and the attorney general have pushed the fbi to pursue leaks. the fbi did not want to pursue leaks. they thought the most important part of the story was the probe into russian collusion, possible collusion with the trump campaign. do you know anything about that? why would -- why would the president. >> we know at a. >> be pushing the fbi or any agency to turn their investigation one way or another. >> well the president i think is frustrated -- he has talked to me about this in the past and he said it very publicly, that they want to investigate everything relating to his administration or to mike flynn but when there is clear evidence of classified conversations he had with world leaders clear evidence of other classified discussion that is yates had with counsels office all of that stuff leaked is in the press it's illegal chl no one self the press saying let's investigate that. >> is there not a separate investigation from in investigation. >> hur it may be but why is the fbi and others not interested in pursuing those investigations? but there really hell bent. >> do they have a leonard -- i would not know i'm not with the fisher the media is not with the fbi. >> you look like an fbi agent. >> i've been told that before but i look very official. wouldn't be the fisher have a legitimate reason not to pursue leaks maybe they know something we don't or they don't think 80s viable investigation because leaks should not be investigated. >> well, they. >> without the leaks flynn would be there. without the leaks richard nixon. >> i think there's been a selective decision to only go after -- or look the other way at any leaks that are harmful to the trump administration and they're very focused on anything that a trump official may have done or somebody associatewood the campaign. there seems to be a lack ever fairness i think there is a lot of frustration the whole white house about how they're being treated here. i think the president made a good decision because there's been a cloud on the comey. you know if you go through all of cnn clips a lot of cnn people a lot of democrats were calling for his head. i actually thought it was inappropriate for him to come out a few days before the election and make a comment about an ongoing investigation of hillary's email. >> having said that that was part of the rationale that the -- we are told cnn is told they didn't believe that the white house would be this fallout because they thought democrats would be on award did he really not think there would be this much fallout. >> i can't dwo into the mind what they thought would happen there was a lot of criticism of come in a lot of criticism of his testimony. a lot of people weren't thinking he was acting neutral way like director sessions or. no one accused them of the same degree of partisanship where he would like to talk about open investigations the way he did hillary's emails seemed inappropriate and rosenstein laid that out. >> >> have you spoken to the president since he made the decision. >> i have not no. >> do you think the administration feels -- feels that they are above the raw? >> absolutely not. >> thank you. >> you can go on. >> well i don't think interests anything they have done they're willing to -- what they do feel that the enforcement of the law should be done on an equal basis if there is classified data being leaked out classified agencies including classified conversations with heads of state why drnt isn't that investigated by the bureau but something mike flynn said which i don't think was illegal that he talked about the trade sanctions with the russians -- i don't believe was a violation of federal law to begin with. >> i love having you hear but i have to go good questions for the bureau that i cannot answer because i'm not in the bureau please convey to the president. >> can i be nominate you zblool he is welcome to come on any time sit down with him anyway thung chris. >> definitely do that. >> tlaung i want to bring in karen finishy karen is senior adviser and senior spokesperson for hillary clinton ace campaign what did you make of what chris ruddy had to say. >> great spin. i think the thing we need to keep in mind we think how incompetent this has been how erratic this seems. the fbi director is involved in a lot more than just this investigation -- you know hillary clinton ace emails and the investigation into russia. think about counterterrorism think about any number of things. the fact that the white house did this without seeming to have someone or some candidate ready to go to replace him seems odd. it also seems odd that you know given the fact that we know that there is already an internal investigation by the inspector general at the fbi looking into this matter with comey, why not wait until the end of that investigation. so the timing i was -- i was joking with some colleagues in green room given how well sally yates did yesterday we should have expected this to -- something like this to come today. because i think it shows how far this president will go to change the headlines. it's very disturbing. >> this is rod rosenstein he sent the letter to the memo to attorney general jeff sessions who by the way announced efts going to rekeyes him from the russia investigation or anything to do with hillary clinton as well. as you and i discussed he says i cannot defend the director handling fortunate conclusion fortunate investigation of secretary clinton's emails the director was wrong to ewe turp the authority on july 25th 2016 and announced his conclusions that the case shb christed without prosecution what do you say to that karen. >> what i say is that certainly was not the position of donald j. trump during the campaign and when this initially happened. he was praising comey. if he had real concerns about his behavior i guess the question i would ask the president so therefore do you agree that it was inappropriate for director comey to send that letter to congress 11 days before the election? i mean he certainly had no problem with that. let me point out one other thing, don. i love the fact that within this document that roetsenants did he quotes and refrpss a document we put out from the campaign and he cites a former attorney general unthe bush administrationen a the fact that this -- that there were almost 10 oh other former officials. well that's a document that we actually put out from our campaign. so he is citing our campaign materials to make in argument. and again i think what we can't escape is the timing of this. we just can't you know underestimate what that means in terms of what was happening in the investigation. and the concerns that the white house may have had about you know who controls that investigation and i think you know think about just the chain of events here. so you know the assistant attorney general who sends this letter is the person who is in charge of the russia investigation. so he then sends a letter citing you know even campaign documents from the hillary clinton campaign to jeff sessions, who you know as apparently misled congress to then send that to donald trump. i mean there is so much in here that is so suspicious and so suspect. i think what the trump administration does not yet realize is that what they bought themselves is an independent counsel and having been part of an administration where that happen. i can't imagine that any credible republican would deny that the only way to restore any kind of integrity here would be to have an independent investigation. >> all right karen out of time thank you i appreciate you copping we have more on the breaking news tonight the white house confirming president trump will meet with russian foreign minister lavrov tomorrow and now i want to bring in cnn global officer. historian john meech nam and julia kai yam and kevin madden. you said something i think david very important to me about this decision. tonight by the president. what did you say about that? >> i don't understand the timing. i mean you just mentioned this meeting with laugh hoff tomorrow. it's sort of -- it's at least a political era if he is completely innocent. >> do you believe he will come to regret in decision. >> i think politicly yes he has relit the russia fire. again if he is completely innocent he is just -- gotten all the suspicion going. energized the democrats it's an unforced political error. >> listen the new thing we got now he is meeting with lavrov what do you think the foreign minister. >> they could wait, roll it out given comey notice. he is meeting tomorrow with the russian foreign minister. democrats don't trust donald trump maybe that's gnat fair to him but this is going to energize democrats raise suspicions. this is a huge issue there was a comment earlier about the leaks. process there was a story reuters wrote about a conversation between putin and trump details about nuclear accords trump didn't know embarrassing information. this is a investigation into colluding with a foreign country to change the outcome of a presidential election. so much more grave than embarrassing details about a president's phone call. >> john, i want to bring you in now. the president firing the fbi director. who was leading the federal investigation into possible collusion wean his campaign and russia. i mean how does this look? >> i don't think it looks particularly good. and i want to win the understatement cooky for the week. look, no president has ever done this in exactly in way. president clinton let judge sessions go 24 years ago on a an ethics question. you know this is the one and algae that has already been well chewed over fwu has the virtue of being true, is that of president nixon. president nixon fired archibald cox the special prosecutor in october of 1973. it was one of the most significant presidential assaults on the rule of law in our history. i think we're witnessing something akin to that. donald trump doesn't like -- he is a doory phrase here but important. divided sovereignty goes back to the greek city states the idea you have a rule of law and power is divided among different bodies so that you have a balance. balance is not what he wants. he wants control. and i think that's what we're seeing tonight. >> um-hum. i want to read something this was just tweeted by the president saying chuck schumer recently i do not have confidence in him james comey any longer then acts so indignant. >> kevin madden kefren what do you think of that? >> well i think that argument holds up for only a short period of time. i mean it is true that democrats on capitol hill have vested that they have lost confidence in james comey. but that only answers one question which is why didn't the president then do it when he first came into office. and i think the -- there will be continue to be questions about why the president took this action now. now you rod rossenants lay out a rather cogent argument in miss letter today. but there are still remaining questions. and to go back to what john said, whether you're a republican or a democrat if you are firing the -- the fbi director who is leading the investigation into your campaign, that is not a good look. and, against a back drop of that investigation they're going to continue to be more and more questions there will be more and more calls. i think as chaotic as tonight feels we are only at the very genesis of the chaos of the decision. there will be congressional hearings called. see congressional calls for a special prosecutor. they're going to have hearings for whoever the new fbi director will be. this is going to be a -- this is just the beginning. >> jason how could the white house know -- how could they not know that this would be a big story at the that the fallout would be what it is now. >> well i'm not sure if that report was entirely >> for sure the white house would have known there would be significant amount of blowback from democrats. they're the same folks who are calling for the -- for president obama to fire comey last year and so i think president trump is right when he's calling out senator schumer. the only thing i want to say to the president -- >> he didn't call out the other senator who had issues. >> nancy pelosi had lost confidence in him. we had liberal columnists wanting him fired. i mean, this is -- i mean, look, don, nobody tonight -- >> you can also think that it was -- >> nobody standing up saying james comey should still be in this job. people might have an issue with the timing and i think that's a debate. i agree with what kevin said. i would have done it on day one, and actually i think president obama should have fired comey last year. so there can be an argument about the timing. there is nobody standing up saying he should still be in that position. he lost the confidenced of v hi people. >> you would have been on cnn screaming to high heaven that this was some sort of political stunt by the obama administration. >> but look, the indecisive back and forth trying to -- director comey trying to rationalize what he was doing with the clinton investigation last year, he kplooed completely lost control of what he was doing and i think we need to get someone in there who's going to follow the rule of law, who is going to take the fub and go do what they need to be doing and i think for all the people freaking out tonight, talking about investigations, look, this is not going to change anything about the investigation. >> did you proximate cause comey when he came out and said we have some information about the investigation? >> if you stay around long enough he's going to find a way to make everyone in town mad. so i'm sure at a certain point i probably liked some of the things he was doing but this all adds up that he's out there trying to rationalize what he's doing. we need an fbi director who's going to enforce the rule of law. i'm actually going to agree. >> nothing has changed since then. he made the decision. all he's done is come out to explain the decision that he's made, so nothing has changed with his decision making. he did it, you praised him and now you're saying that he should go. there was plenty of criticism as well. senator graham hit the nail on the head when he said we need a fresh start in the fbi. but again, don, the point that i made when he came on board, nobody is standing up saying director comey should still be the director of the fbi. he should not be leading and i think that's why president trump removed him from this position. >> julia, go ahead. >> i will answer jason's question or -- about who will stand up. there are a lot of people who may have criticisms about how comey acted or behaved in the last come of months, both from the right and from the left. but there are very few people who find any justification at this present moment to fire director comey in the middle of an investigation. and just getting to the timing issue, to remind jason in the last 48 hours between the yates end of course clapper investigation,some murmurings from the senate that they wanted information about president trump's financial dealings and of course now cnn's reporting about the grand jury that's a whole lot of reckoning for the trump white house. >> that has nothing -- >> do not interrupt me tonight, please. this is serious and it is nonpartisan. there is an investigation going on about whether the russians, let's remember who the enemy is, actually were influencing our election. that investigation has now led to specific investigations about people around trump and we have reason to believe based on cnn's reporting that involves flynn. so that is what is going on here and the firing -- the idea that this firing is somehow not only justified, but that the timing is justified discounts almost all of the activity in the last three weeks that is heading toward serious allegations not against trump, but against his associates regarding either republican influence in the campaign or financial dealings with the republicans. so you cannot surround yourself now with some notion that because people from the right and left criticize comey that the firing of the person in charge of the investigation is justified. it does not hold. and so -- >> so julia, even you think -- >> i've got to go. thank you all. i appreciate it. jon i want you to stick around. i want to bring in john dean a former nixon white house counsel. also jon is going to stay with us as well. what's your reaction to the breaking news tonight? >> well, it certainly is not saturday massacre two. it doesn't quite rise to that level. it is clearly botched as well. the white house did not handle it well. they have acted in a way that raises the suspicions that you're hearing on your panel. they are widespread. i'm hearing them on the radio and some people are confused about history and think this was another saturday night live -- or saturday night massacre, it was not. that was a unique situation where the prosecutor, the special prosecutor was doing exactly what the president had instructed him. he did not want done. they were each testing the other, and the prosecutor lost and they shut down the special prosecution office. that was the massacre. >> yeah. jon, since you mentioned that, this is from the nixon library. president nixon never fired the director of the fbi but he did fire the attorney general and the deputy attorney genre signed. will there be further fallout from this as kevin says? >> that's a great question and i think one of the things we have to figure out is to what extent -- what was the impo tus for the events that led to today. there is the memo from the deputy attorney general, questions raised about when did that start, did someone in the white house ask for a pretext to get rid of director comey? if they did that, why did they do it in may and not in january. or at any point going back. and just a general point is there's going to be a lot of talk and there already is and the president just tweeted about this apparently about hypocrisy. hypocrisy is interesting but it's not dispositive in this case. the rule of law is dispositive and there are reasonable people asking very reasonable questions about whether the president of the united states has something to hide in terms of the -- his campaign and potential collusion with russia. he has dismissed that. he has called it a ruse. he's called it fake news and what he's used to is when he makes a declaration like that we're all like fourth graders, we chase the ball to the other side of the field. i think we have to do everything we can at this point to stay in position. >> i asked chris ruddy who is a friend of the president, if they feel that they are above the law. he said no. what do you say? >> well, you know, i don't think they are deliberately trying to flout the law here. there's always been a question to me with this president of a lack of experience, and not really understanding the job and not bringing in peopl works. this could have all been avoided, don. they certainly all -- all they had to do is look at history and see how easy it would be to replay what they're getting tonight, so things that might be going on. one is a possible sinister motive, but we don't know that. we don't have those facts. the other is incompetence, which is if there's not a sinister motive is the other alternative. >> are you troubled by this? >> very much so. >> am i troubled? >> jon? >> very much so. i think that it's -- i think they wanted a result and they found a pretext for it. and i think that we have a real question going forward about the separation of powers. and the rule of law. and i -- i haven't been someone who's, you know, thrown myself in with tauthoritarian narrativs but this is not a step in the right direction. >> a serious question that was -- quickly here, staff writer for the new yorker said where are comey's files right now? who controls them. that is important. >> it is indeed. what would happen in a circumstance like this is very much unlike what happened with

Transcripts For CNNW Inside Politics 20170405 16:00:00

huge meeting for the president in mar-a-lago, florida. he will meet with the president of china. and the united states nations a big day of breaking news. testing time for the commander in chief who has been on the job just 76 days, an apparent chemical weapons attack in syria, scores of children and others. pyongyang patience exhausted. pressure for the president on two big fronts, pressure to consider a much needed response. first at the united nations this morning, an emergency securities council session. >> when the united nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of state that we are compelled to take our own action. for the sake of the victims, i hope the rest of the council is finally willing to do the same. will be interesting to see how much in line he is with what she just laid out. >> is it would be pretty hard and cause a diplomatic dustup of its own if the president of the united states didn't back up what she just said? >> it would. but it wouldn't be unprecedented here. we've kind of seen different approaches from different members of the administration. ambassador haley is definitely owning this, not just what she said, but holding up the pictures from the victims with from the chemical weapons attacks would give the trump administration own decision. we'll wait to see what he says, trump, just the other day, you know, seemed to double-down on his sort of isolationist daen i tendencies. we haven't heard from secretary tillerson. >> and 75 days in when they're facing a lot of pressure. we'll get to north korea in a minute. and turmoil in the white house again, we're told that steve bannon the chief political strategist has a seat on the national security council. but we'll get to that in a minute. it's actually noted it has seemed at times, nikki haley a more tradition am hawkish establishment republican seems at times she's trying to pull the president along to be tougher against russia. to say things that are more traditional orthodoxcy in the republican party. it's a big moment for her. she just assumed the president of the security council. to michael's point we'll show you the images over the hour. they're heinous and horrible to see images of young children hurt in the attack. nikki haley decided as she made her plea to the united nations to be quite dramatic. let's watch. >> yesterday morning, we awoke to pictures to children, foaming at the mouth, suffering convulsions, being carried in the arms of desperate parents. we saw rows of lifeless bodies, some still in diapers, some with visible scars of a chemical weapons attack. look at those pictures. >> that's drawing a pretty sharp line. >> look at those pictures. >> so, there has always been this kind of natural strain of tension inside the trump administration between the kind of nationalistic threat and messaging, we've got to take care of our own first. and the idea of projecting strength in the contrast of obama who president trump would repeatedly say during his candidacy didn't show his strength and was weak. and that was a signal to world leaders. yesterday seems to have been a tipping point inside the trump administration. however he's going to go has yet to be determined. one of the real questions about how all of this comes together is that on president trump's initial approach towards russia, on president trump's initial approach towards the idea that we're not going to insert ourselves into what other countries do and on president trump's initial approach to human rights none of the policy has been tracking in this direction. so, if yesterday was indeed a turning point, it sets off a series of recalculations both inside the white house, the oval office and the national security council where we wille now see the kind of mcmaster/dina powell theory of how this will conduct itself playing out. we may be seeing that now. >> of the last ambassador giving us a speech saying this carnage here, a very direct, angry speech on what is happening in syria, now, a policy change. nikki haley gave a similar kind of speech. donald trump and barack obama neither one of them have taken aggressive action to remove assad. has that now changed? >> that's a fascinating question, let's be honest, the united states under the obama administration lost credibility. the united states drew a red line with president obama about chemical weapons attacks, but he did not knowdo anything with assad. a lot of inaction by the obama administration. i think what we heard from nikki haley i think the question is does the trump administration want to end up in the same box with having the word look at what the united states says it's just words. this is a decision that the president will make by listening what does it mean with steve bannon, eyebrows raised, from chief political strategist in the administration someone who thinks george w. bush made a mistake in iraq. who doesn't think that it is and should be worried about its economy. the white house says he was there to help former national security adviser michael flynn to organize the place, to send more power back to the pentagon, more power to the state department. they say mission accomplished, i would say that's spin. but you guys sitting at the table for the white house, what does this mean? >> well, part of this is say reshuffling of the white house and then settling in. i think think there's truth from the points about steve bannon. steve bannon likes to have his hands in almost every issue in the white house but the problems with flynn were early and often for them. and early and often within their own team and steve bannon and jared kushner were called in quite frequently to settle down the secretary of state or secretary of defense over how flynn was handling the nsa. and there's truth that bannon was on that council as reassurance to others, there's no question about steve's ambition and interests in wanting to be involved in those issues. we'll see how this plays out. i think we're seeing this on a couple of different levels. and that they're just now figuring out the staffing issues. >> but this is a white house also, more than any white house, where rules and titles are absolutely interchangeable and in many cases meaningless, you see secretary of state secretary of state as secretary of state and but jared kushner is essentially secretary of state. i don't think bannon has walk-privileges where he friend can call the president late night at and influence policy and means he won't be involved in decisions he wants to be involved in. >> look, my colleague this morning, a lot of the implications are still being borne out. but steve bannon retains the clearances and steve bannon reserves the ability to sit down in a national security meeting anytime he wants to. but if you have a storied military career and you want to set the policy, a couple of things happened, the bannon announcement happened as bau baustert was moved back in. >> i don't think that is, but in this case, people are now talking about foreign policy like nikki haley agree more with john mccain or marco rubio than the president himself. but the people who are speaking like nikki haley doll view the u.s. agency the leader of the free world, the more traditional world. and the more influence they gain and the diminishing influence on foreign policy say big story. and i think potentially means we're going in different directions with foreign policy. >> i think you're right. i think sometimes we overemphasize titles in washington. the president never served in the military. most of the senior staff never served in military. it is interesting to watch, plus what we know about this president, he's a loyaltyist. and ivanka trump, whether steve bannon, he likes people loyal to him. so they're his antenna to what's happening in the administration. >> and that was known for trump voters. they understand that dynamic. you're saying this is a guy without any political experience but he will put good people around him. >> we're waiting now. we're going to see the president of the united states, you saw him going into the white house with king abdallah of jordan. we're going to see tape of that in a moment. we'll play you that tape as soon as we can. this is someone who knows the neighborhood. a a traditional ally in about la. there are good choices here. there are no good choice for obama or president trump. when it comes to assad. they publicly said whether it was accepted knowledge in the obama administration, assad is not going anywhere in the short term especially if he gets economic and political help from pru russia, you heard political hawks this morning saying do something. take out command and control centers. pocket the air strips. crater them. take them out. is this a president of the united states who is also going to deal tomorrow with the chinese president and the possibility of provocation of north korea, is this a president who is prepared to do that with syria? >> well, you have a president who has two conflicting world views. he cares more about the projection of strength and about winning, even though that's a different way to apply to war. but he does not view his role the way president obama did or george w. bush did as exploiting democracy or american values abroad. you'll see this scum into sort of a stark conflict as he grapples with what to do in syria. >> he said i don't want to be president of the world. but the president said, i know you want to focus on the economy, guess what the world has a way of crossing your desk. we'll take you inside the white house with the president's meeting with the king of jordan. and also, for republicans, the mere mention of one former obama administration's name inspires big questions about the big spy novel playing out here in washington. getting ripped off. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures and before starting xarelto® about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. you've got to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from dvt and pe blood clots. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know. welcome back. just moments away from an inside look at the white house. president trump meeting this hour with king abdallah of jordan. an important conversation anyway, all the more urgent today because of the heinous apparent chemical weapons attack in syria yesterday. if you've seen the pictures, children among the scores of people killed and named in this attack. president trump's ambassador saying that the united states won't act but the united states might feel compelled to act. the president with a press conference in the next hour. stay with cnn. we'll bring you that live as the president himself has issued a paper statement, we have not heard from him at all. he will meet with king abdallah. he'll also have a press conference in the next hour. a line drawn thatting if the u.n. will not act she feels that united states might feel compelled to act. let's listen. thank you very much. hold it, hold it, hold it. i just wanted to thank our friends, our great friends, these are very troubled times in the middle east. and we see what happened just recently yesterday in syria, horrible, horrible thing. unspeakable. but i want to thank you both for being at the white house. and we're going to have some very interesting discussions. >> okay. thank you very much. >> syria attack of the chemical weapons, you say it's terrible, do you plan to take any action? >> i condemn it, it's terrible. you'll see. >> you'll see. the final words from the president of the united states there. reporters being ushered out of the oval office trying to ask will there be any action from the united states related to the attack in syria that the president was talking about. he called it horrible, he called it unspeakable. the king of jordan sitting silent. the first lady as well. horrible and unspeakable but he didn't give any clue whether he will embrace the words of his ambassador to the united nations. >> it's also a question whether or not the american people are -- how they're going to feel about this, right? these images remind me of the isis beheadings back in 2014 that focused americans for the first time on isis. but that still wasn't enough to get congress to vote on obama's request for military authorization. will this be any different? will the sort of rhetoric about these images resonate back home and convince the trump administration to take action? >> and convince the president that maybe understanding the mood in the country that sometimes a president has to look a country in the eye and say i know you don't want to do this, i know we've been in the middle east a long time, but i feel a moshl obligation to act. the other is to use tough words and yesterday he put the blame on the obama administration. >> on the one hand, president of the united states trump would be especially well positioned if he does choose to act. he could plausibly say to voters of the country, as you said, i know this is a hard choice. i was against the war in iraq. i'm very hesitant to go in. but you saw these images. this is something that we absolutely have to do. it's a question of what the president wants to do and if he has the will to do it. >> understanding anything he does do, the domino is, "a," a complication with assad is a complication with putin. >> yes, and the war and military action, and the political issue, or reality, which is the president's poll numbers, among americans, and how americans view him on issues like credibility. because part of everyone's resistance ties back to the war in iraq and the questions of wmds. unquestionable, we've seen what happened or the effects of yesterday. that part is undeniable. but what is going to be kind of the end game of any sort of military maneuver that one would undertake? you've seen republicans now today consistently saying we have to revert to the policy of assad must go. that has to still be the policy but then what? then what? >> but no disrespect intended it's also easy for people in congress to say things. they're not the commander in chief, they're not accountable. it will be interesting to see with the new national security team, with the president, whether that will play out in the hours ahead. let's shift gears for a minute, bring up the name susan rice, embrace for swift condemnation from the right. >> susan rice is the typhoid mary of the obama administration foreign policy. every time something went wrong, she seemed to turn up in the middle of it, whether it was the allegations of the improper unmasking and potential improper surveillance. >> she's back in the news because of what some republicans say should now be a critical piecing of the rush meddling investigation. allegations by team trump that the white house played loose with sensitive intelligence information. two weeks ago, rice was on pbs and said she knew nothing about such allegations, but she changed her story yesterday, still insisting she did nothing wrong. >> allegations that somehow obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes, that's absolutely false. there were occasions when i would receive a report in which a u.s. person was referred to. name not provided, just u.s. person. and sometimes, in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information as to who that u.s. official was. >> okay, but let me give the name of mike flynn. >> i leaked nothing to nobody, and never have and never would. >> she said she did her job. one complication said i knew nothing about this to judy two weeks ago saying there was another way to answer that question without saying that. democrats say the issue is what did russia do in the election? they think this is a bright shiny light. but if susan rice says that was a great sunrise or the sun sun rises in the east, republicans saying, no, it doesn't. >> she's the boogiewoman. saying i know nothing about it, that people will be able to point to it and say she lied down and also going back to benghazi and how that attack happened and it ended up not being true. she very well may be correct that she did nothing wrong in what she was doing in the routine sort of portions of her job. but the issue, as you said, is so polarized that the republicans are going to demonize it. >> so polarized that staffwise, republicans trying to make this about susan rice. listen to joaquin castro yesterday. democrats saying we need to get to the investigation, we think there's something there and then this. >> if somebody asked my impression, my impression is somebody will probably be charged and i think people will probably go to jail. >> i used to cover the cops, the cops and prosecutors have this interesting theory that we'll investigate first. they're getting way out ahead of themselves here, aren't they? >> well, yeah but -- but, let's go back for a second. this is to the question, which is entirely probable, there's at least an intense discussion about calling her in circumstances, the danger zone for the republican is if they call susan rice to testify on questions that inevitably will lead back to benghazi, seusan rice is going to attempt unmavnu unmasking with questions on what gets declassified. >> well, the president kol coul declassify this with a stroke of a pen. describing what she did whether right or wrong, she could be questioned on that, with respect to the president. next up, the president is betting on serve two terms. his poll numbers 75 days in, pretty horrible. we want american steel made in america. right? and you'll be hearing more about this in the very near future. but as time goes by, let's say over the next 7 3/4 years meaning 8 years -- >> that's an optimistic president trump yesterday. that was day 75 yesterday speaking to a labor did group here in washington. promising to keep his promises on the economy. and promising he'll be around for two terms. well, 76 days in, the poll numbers not so great for the president. he's defied the polls before, but his overall approval rating, just 35%. that's a bad enough. among republicans, 79% approved. that's a strong number down from a week ago or two weeks ago. white noncollege degree voters, they were critical to the president's coalition. here's the problem for president, big issues, character quality, his numbers are pretty bad. 51% of americans in the quinnipiac poll says the president is not on here. 57 said he lacks leadership skills. 66% say he's not level headed. 61%, he's not honest. here's an interesting one here, 62% of americans, more than half the americans feel excellent or good about the economy, that ties most approval ratings. even republican voters, all americans, think president obama still gets more credit on how the economy is doing than the president. as a matter of fact, his handling of the economy under water. more americans disapprove than prove. some of this has to do with the function in washington more than the economy. the president in that speech yesterday, promising even though he didn't get a win on health care. listen to the president here, when you talk to people in congress, they say, this is months away, the president talking big about his infrastructure plan. >> -- the back bone of america, with the talent in this room, we can build any city at anytime, and we can build it better than anyone. but we're going to do even better than that, together, we are going to rebuild our nation. >> now, we're not anywhere close to an an infrastructure plan. we'll come back to that in a minute. 76 days in, i applaud him trying to stay optimistic, i think you have to do that but this administration at the moment has zero big legislative wins because of disaster in health care. there's some efforts apparently to reboot that. when you look at those poll numbers 76 days in, again, this president has defied the rules of gravity many, many times but those numbers are pretty bad. >> in terms of re-election, the big stepup -- >> you jumped right to re-election -- >> that's interesting. everybody hates the other party. in 2020, his numbers might go up slightly because republicans will be in mode hating the democrats like in 2016. he won the presidency by being quite unpopular. for governing, this is really hard because no one feelings the need to support. you saw rubio earlier very strongly criticizing him. you have the freedom and moderates criticizing him. >> that's a key point to this administration. his approval rating. you jumped to 2020, i'll go with you, if the approval rating goes down let alone elizabeth warren. mike pence spent the last couple days on capitol hill meeting mostly with the freedom caucus and other members. just to see if they can pull a rabbit out of the hat, somehow to get to the 100 day mark. to get bair repealed and replaced. it was an embarrassment for the president. listen to the head of the freedom caucus saying they're making some progress -- if you want to take that at face, they're making some progress, saying maybe they can delay a congress 'recess if they get to the finish line. >> well, there's a concern on my part that if we're making real progress that going home sends the wrong message. and, you know, it is certainly important that if we're close to a deal, that we should, you know, work it out, over the next few days. to make sure that we get here, even if it means we have to cancel a few plans to get that done. >> congress likes that we're all laughing -- congress likes breaks, number one, number two, it's tough when you got nothing to sell. if you're saying if you're a republican, the last four sessions you're going to repeal and replace obamacare and now you didn't do it. to mark meadows point, he alsor. is there anybody at the table who thinks they're close enough to get a vote? >> paul ryan does not think they're close. he kind of counts. >> he counts. very much downplaying it saying, no, no, we have conceptual ideas that we're discussing and we'll be coming back to this. he's staying away from that smartly. >> and yet, the vice president comes back to the table here. saying is this not good for the president. there's huge philosophical differences among the republican party. walk away. why does he keep coming back? >> well, he has to keep coming back. mike pence is the one who is supposed to deliver the congress to donald trump. not the freedom caucus, maybe not the one group that he's most aligned with, but the congress. and i think that it's, you know, the -- excuse me, the point here is that he's a big influence here. meadows' sentiment is a correct one within a weekend of closing the deal, great. stick around the weekend. it's hard to imagine after eight years they're a weekend away. and it's hard to see where the next victory is here. if he gets that victory with the freedom caucus, i assume when that bill gets sent to mitch mcconnell and the senate he's laughing on the inside, not crying. >> exactly. you know, if you deem from one side the way it's worked, you're taking from another. so, i mean, that gain is also a net loss. it's basically a zero sum, as you pointed out. even within the house, not to mention the senate. going back to mike pence, there was earlier question will he be the shadow president or the one that understands legislation and gets get the house guys and get them on board. i think the answer is he is not. everyone likes him and wants him to be the president. and there's a question of how much he speaks for the president. if these guys aren't afraid of donald trump with all due respect, to mike pence, they're not afraid of him. >> if you accomplish two things going to whether the health care bill is still breathing, one is you could say on behalf the president, we kept trying. we promised to do this and we're trying. and number two, you have your ear to the ground on a number of other things around important know which is where does congress stand on the investigation. what to do about syria. is congress behind the president or not. all of that under the cover of working on hit care. it's not a bad deal. >> to the question about the polls, too, trump has got to worry about his base. the promise to voters is not that you're going to get sick of us trying. the promise is you're going to get sick of us winning and again, it's hard to see where these influences come from. >> can't do it if you never try it? >> i agree. up next, the blame game has begun. the nuclear option and the partisan fight over who's responsible for the state of dysfunction in washington, including the united states senate. your insurance company won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. welcome back. who do you blame for the latest partisan divide in congress that's likely shaped by your own political leanings. democrats say they stole a seat from president obama. republicans say democrats changed the rules for all federal judges a few years ago so changing the rules now to change it to confirm judge neil gorsuch. senator john mccain, don't like where this is heading. >> i'd like to meet that idiot, i'd like to meet that numskull that would say that. that after 200 years. at least 100 years of this tradition where the senate has functioned pretty well, they'd think it would be a good idea to blow it up. whoever says that is a stupid idiot. they've not been here and seen what i've been through and how we were able to to avoid that on several occasions. and they're stupid and deceived their voters because they're stupts stupid. >> i'm unclear what senator mccain falls on this. stupid. and it employs consensus which you don't hear about. it left a bad taste but he's going to vote for judge gorsuch. >> yeah, it's really a bad taste. and it also raises a concern of could they ever do away with the legislative filibuster. you remember when we first changed the rules, they said we're changing to get through president obama's lower level appointments we would never touch a supreme court filibuster. now they're about to go nuclear on the filibuster. they all behave like a bunch of mani maniacs, but the senate is easier to cover because they behave as rational adults even in this polarized era. >> mighty kind of you. >> i think what you're seeing happening, as these things sort of slip away, there's a concern especially that the senators could become like the house which everyone believes is good for no one. >> if you're watching anywhere in america, outside of washington and the suburbs, you think, here they go again, nuclear options, we use a language that didn't make sense. for those of you who actually go about your lives, you do a lot of things at once. the founders wanted the senate to go more slowly. the big question is if you take away the phfilibuster on suprem court justices, would you do it on others? mitch mcconnell, again, a traditional says, no, at least not yet. >> who would be the biggest beneficiary of that right now? it would be the majority, right? there's not a single senator in the majority who thinks we ought to change the legislative filibuster. not one. there's no sentiment to change the legislative filibuster. i think senator schumer said after being on one the sunday shows, we are were on back to back, i think he said no sentiment on that side either. there's no threat to legislative filibuster. >> again, the language doesn't make sense for a lot of people watching in the country. they probably thing this is boring, partisan, sometimes, children but actually this matters in terms of legislative fights to come and the attempts to run the senate. >> the point of the senate, like they kcould deliver a body is t encourage grow myself, right? so how much does power have. it encourages democrats and republicans and coalitions to fight. all of that -- by the way, mitch mcconnell has had a lot to do with that because the flip side of a filibuster, of the threat of a filibuster is they won't use it all the time. the threat of fill buster is a special thing that never got triggered. well up to mitch mcconnell's rise, he's threatening filibuster all the time. he helped push this button. and then democrats pushed back. who pushed first. this has been building for a long time what everyone is calling for right now to a large extent. >> it's not always been a good thing. filibuster was used to stop the recklessness of the '70s. i don't think it's always bringing people together. the case can be made that maybe the party that controls congress and voters can punish them by pushing them out of office, instead of what we have now which is in a constant gridlock. >> we're going to see where this one goes, how far it goes. when we come back, the president just gave an interview with his favorite newspaper, "the new york times." at blue apron, we're building a better food system. where instead of paying for middlemen, we work directly with family farms to deliver higher quality ingredients for less than you pay at the store. get $30 off at blueapron.com/cook the country and the world. it's one of the big stories of the time. asked if he thinks susan rice committed a crime. the president answered -- do i think? yes, i think. we have the president of the united states to say he thinks someone has committed a crime when that president of the united states and his team are being looked at by the fbi, by the senate intelligence committee. by the house intelligence committee. some people's back and forth, the finger pointing. this is a big deal. >> there are two reasons, one, in the campaign, it's worrisome when the president threatens to jail his political opponents. whether hillary clinton before and now susan rice. that's not what we do in america. and you ask the president of the united states to weigh in on what the doj can do. usually, obama was always aware of not saying yes, someone committed a crime or no, they didn't. it's very unusual to see that. a real break with norm is important. >> he dines to say, michael, the president, to bolster his claim but pledge at the right time? >> this is not exactly president obama manipulating the microwave inside trump tower. but it is a legitimate distraction for him. i can tell you that the news on susan rice yesterday, inside the white house, they are asking additional questions about what other decisions they made inside the white house that should have been made. >> and if, if, if, if, if, if obama administration officials were improperly unmasking these names or improperly spreading this around they should be held accountable for that. just as if the president's team colluded in any way with the kremlin, they should be held accountable but aren't they supposed to say let's wait for the facts and this responsible party is the president of the united states. i think it's going to be the biggest story. do think? yes, i think a crime. >> this is turning into a spectacle of some type of allegations. and it takes one step further with what happened on twitter a few weeks ago which is the president saying without substantiation that he thought president obama had tapped him. which it turns out would not be legal and therefore would be a crime. this is more directly saying yeah, i think someone who hasn't actually been charged. >> i want to sneak this in. mr. trump criticized media including "the new york times" for failing to cover the rofrgs. sick naling out fox news and bill o'reilly for praise. and then he went on to say bill o'reilly, advertisers and the heat. i think he's a person i know well, he is a good person. i didn't think anyone would want that one. >> it's a -- well, from that statement, it came from the very serious and weighing in on -- the president doesn't way in on random legal issues. that's a strange one, too. >> and he doesn't say these are serious allegations, but i've known him for a long time. there's a way to strike a balance as president. he does black and white. he didn't do gray. everybody, thank you for joining us. just moments away from a live news conference with president trump and king abdullah of jordan. wolf blitzer in the chair, after a quick break. it's nice to remove artificial ingredients. kind never had to. we've used real ingredients, whole nuts, and natural flavors from the very beginning. give kind a try. does your makeup remover every kiss-proof,ff? cry-proof, stay-proof look? neutrogena® makeup remover does. it erases 99% of your most stubborn makeup with one towelette. need any more proof than that? neutrogena.

Transcripts For MSNBCW Morning Joe 20180731 10:00:00

Former GOP representative Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski interview newsmakers, politicians and pundits about the issues of the day. Former GOP representative Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski interview newsmakers, politicians and pundits about the issues of the day. days before according to the leak, he says there was a meeting with donald junior, with jared kushner, with paul manafort, with yates and possibly two others in which they, out of the presence of the president discussed the meeting with the russians. we checked with their lawyers. the ones we could check with which was four of the six. that meeting never, ever took place. it didn't happen. >> there's no second meeting here? >> it's highly unlikely. i always have to leave the option open as a lawyer. in case they come across something that startles us or feels some of the things we feel are important. >> what's he saying? what's he saying? run that clip again. i -- >> actually, the words. try and listen to exactly what he is saying. >> and what's he saying here? >> we'll hear it. let's look at it again. maybe it will make sense. >> there's no second meeting here? >> it's highly unlikely. i always have to leave the option open as a lawyer, in case they come across with something that really startles us or feels some of the things we feel are important. >> another round? >> yeah. >> i think willie can translate wlarch . >> what a journey. >> my drinks are free. >> rudy giuliani is debating himself. >> he is debating himself. so in the morning on cnn he raised the idea of the second meeting. that came out of the blue to a lot of people. what second meeting? he put that on the table. he says to preempt the "new york times" story we haven't seen yet and maggie haberman says she doesn't know what he's talking about. 12 hours later on fox news, he's shooting down the idea that he raised earlier that morning on cnn. it's a debate all in his own head. the best part, he did it to kill a story he single-handedly brought to life. >> right. none of us were talking about that story. he is talking about the story. again what he says, well, we shoot it down just in case we don't know about something that they -- they know wevhether the did it or not, mike. like donald trump lying on air force one to cover up the real meeting of the don junior meeting which don junior said his father didn't know about. a little perjury issue if we find out that donald trump -- all of these -- no big deal, if donald trump knew about the meeting. it's a big deal for don junior because he committed perjury, if that's the case. it's just like trump lying about that meeting means that something went on in that meeting that they wanted to hide. and now you've got rudy saying, well, but -- you know, we're not going to say it didn't happen, because we don't know if it did or not. yeah, they do know whether it did or not. >> it's incredibly taxing and tedious to have this put on us, this early in the day? begins one segment talking about meeting that took place in the very same segment, same 30-second clip goes from there was a meeting a meeting that occurred we wanted to get out to get ahead of the news and 10 seconds later called it along alleged meeting. as if the meeting he referred to didn't take place. what time of night was he interviewed for that? that's my question. >> i don't know. i will say, we have -- >> there's that question. a good one. >> some of the worst v.o. of rudy giuliani i've seen, i think. we need -- come on. look at that. get some good shots of the guy. what's he doing with that ring? >> world series ring? >> pulling it or something? >> heidi, do we need to play it again? do you have any idea what he was saying, and what would your follow-up have been if you were interviewing him? >> play even more. not only did he confirm a meeting none of us were talking about but actually flashed out some of the details in those meetings. that apparently michael cohen may have been in donald trump's office when don junior came and said, hey, we're about to meet with the russians. so he seemed to corroborate that. >> that's not good. is it? >> he also put gates potentially in the pre-planning meeting, which would be huge, if true, since as we all know, gates, rick gates, paul manafort business partner, has been cooperating with the special counsel for several months, which means we don't have to rely just on michael cohen for this information, that rick gates may have confirmed it and mu mueller known about it a long time. bottom line, the number of conspiratorial meetings around the russians is increasing and so is the circle of trump officials, trump campaign officials, who participated in these conspiratorial meetings. >> at least he has paul manafort's innocence. >> well, there's that. the first trial in the special counsel probe kicks off today with jury selection for paul manafort. the president's former campaign chair is accused of hiding at least $30 million that he made before his days with trump as an unregistered foreign lobbyist for ukraine, and its former pro-russian president. told the prosecution plans to call 35 witnesses including agents from the fbi, treasury department and irs to show how he stashed his wealth in overseas banks to avoid paying u.s. taxes. last week a member of robert mueller's team said he does not anticipate a government witness will "utter the word russia" during the trial. but if manafort is convicted, they could use it as leverage for him to talk about anything he knows pertaining to the trump campaign and russia. the trial is expected to last about three weeks. manafort face as similar trial in washington in september. >> richard -- >> a long haul for him. >> yeah. and the question everybody has is, why has he not pled yet? absolutely no defense. have him dead to center. after he goes through this in virginia, he'll go through it in d.c. >> short answer, i have no idea. but there's so much apparent evidence against him that you -- either he's going to spend the rest of his life in prison or he's going to have to do some sort of a deal and i don't know -- i'm not a lawyer. like you, i am not a lawyer. what the sequence has to be here. clearly they have a lot on mr. manafort. >> clearly they do. it's interesting. when everything seems to collide with donald trump and things start going really bad. >> he deflects. >> he decides he's going to take a meeting with a group of tirendtir tyrants. it's a playbook. >> it is. and at a particular time, stormy daniels was about to hit the front pages he went there. now he's open to meetings with the iranians. after this, when he gets in trouble, he'll talk about meeting with the martians. let's take a quick look at the president of the united states doing what he likes to do most. deflect. >> i'll meet with anybody. i believe in meeting. i would certainly meet with iran if they're ready to meet. i don't know if they're ready yet. they're having a hard time. i ended the iran deal. it was a ridiculous deal. i do believe they will probably end up wanting to meet, and i'm ready to meet anytime they want to, and i don't do that from strength or weakness. i think it's an appropriate thing to do. if we could work something out that's meaningful, not the waste of paper that the other deal was, i would certainly be willing to meet. >> do you have preconditions noor meeting? >> no preconditions. no. they want to meet, i'll meet. anytime they want. anytime they want. good for the country. good for them. good for us, and good for the world. no preconditions. if they want to meet, i'll meet. >> so the reason why we needed, the world needed to have someone at the meeting with vladimir putin and donald trump is because in the past week or so, since helsinkhelsinki, donald t has, one, sent a signal he wants to lift sanctions on an oligarch who's close to vladimir putin, that we just put on a couple months ago, and, two, now he's talking again from a position of weakness. wanting to meet with iran. it's a -- it's a complete 180 turn. there's very little, actually, to explain that, richard, but there is a playbook for donald trump. threatened to bomb a terrorist state. say you want to meet with the terrorist state and then capitulate to the terrorist state. are we going to see what happened in north korea happen with iran now? >> almost certainly not. if the administration were serious about meeting with iran, they would have done it before they unilaterally got out of the nuclear deal, that by the way iran was -- >> what if foot eputin asked hi reach out to iran? >> another reason the iranians want no part of it. the secretary gave a big speech calling for regime change. the administration is ratcheting up sanctions. got out of the nuclear deal after the president said he's meet without preconditions. the secretary of state started listening to preconditions on nuclear issues, iran regional behavior, how they're treating their own people. >> look what we've been saying about north korea all along and you have donald trump declaring victory in north korea, when the north koreans now, we keep finding out, in more ways, that they're cheating and, in fact, their nuclear program is more dangerous today, u.s. intelligence officials tell us, than it was when donald trump first started negotiating with the north koreans. >> a front page story in the "washington post" today, after last week's story about their nuclear program, we learn now their missile program, intercontinental ballistic missile program is continuing. the only word i take exception with cheating. we don't know if north korea is cheating because we don't know what north korea and the u.s. agreed top it's like a piece of swiss cheese. the holes were bigger than the cheese. >> we know this. donald trump said americans can sleep at night. that nuclear weapons were no longer a problem with north korea. we know that's a lie. >> we know that's a lie, and nothing like that was accomplished. what we're seeing is a pattern of summits where the promise is great. we don't really know what was agreed on -- wrong at both ends. there's no preparation and there's no follow-through. no engine, no caboose. all of these summits essentially leave us worse out than where we were before them. >> think about it, willie. the north korean leader leaves far stronger than when he first met with trump. putin, much stronger than -- made donald trump look like, you know, his patsy on the world stage. he's much stronger than he was before, and now trump is saying, we don't negotiate from a position of weakness or strength. no. if you're the united states of america, i'm sorry. you always negotiate from a position of strength. >> as richard points out, the president is supposed to come in end of the process. dot handshake, sign the declaration. not come in at the beginning making promising and declaring victory at the end of a press conference where nothing was actually achieved. one of the patterns of the trump administration, the president make as grand public declaration, the rest of the administration comes in to reshape it or clean it up. yesterday mike pompeo talked about all the preconditions he would need to see before a meeting with iran. >> if iranians present a commitment to change how they treat their people, that it's worthwhile to enter into a nuclear agreement that actually prevention proliferation, the president is prepared to sit down and have a conversation with him. >> one of the things they tried to get in at the senate hearing. who should the american people, the united states senate listen to. you have president trump saying one thing on the big stage and then people like pompeo, bolton and others coming in after the fact, saying something completely contradictory? >> the answer is clear. listen to the president of the united states. that's what the rest of the world is figuring out. as much as they may respect the secretary of defense or the secretary of state, end of the day, if they don't speak for the united states and it doesn't appear they do, how can you listen to them. the two summits we had, there was no staff in the room. they weren't in the room. the president of the united states has become the chief different mat of the united states. we have to learn, that's reality. so the secretary of state and others can come in before or afterwards and try to clean it up, but we -- he is -- look, i like mike pompeo. don't get me wrong. i think the president is putting him in an extraordinary difficult almost untenable position like with rex tillerson. if you're not in the room and don't know what transacted, how can you authoritively say this is the policy of the united states? >> and talking republicans trust donald trump more than their family, more than they trust the media. so at what point do republicans visit -- at what point do republicans, the question we continue to ask, at what point do republicans say, wait a second. we were anti-putin and anti-russian. didn't like him shooting down commercial aircrafts or invading other countries. poisoning people, assassinating -- but now donald trump says he's okay. so he's okay. and rewriting 70 years of policy that republicans champion and then makes nice with north korea. and now he sounds so weak. basically begging the iranians for a summit. at what point does somebody like nikki haley go, i'm out. i'm running against this guy in 2020 before he ends up, like, turning u.s. foreign policy over to all of our enemies. i was -- >> if he hasn't already. >> if you remember, i was critical and every other conservative was critical of barack obama being so focused on dealing with iran and cuba. that was child's play. donald trump is north korea, russia, now iran. there is not a tyrant, not a terror state that this guy doesn't want to cozy up to. >> i think the answer is, at least all the evidence we've seen to date is never. never. that's what -- i can't stress enough, there's no evidence whatsoever that his base supporter or any member of congress is actually turning on him in a public way. i'd say the opposite is true. he's growing more powerful. his sway is growing more powerful. >> because conservatives now like iran and now like north korea and conservatives like russia? >> i don't think people pay that close attention to it. i think people look at him and say, he's doing it different. the old way didn't work. i don't believe any of you guys on the set. they don't trust us. they trust him. >> heidi, they could go on the google machine 30 seconds. you don't have to trust me. go to your neighbor's google machine and type stuff in. the truth is out there, but this isn't the "x files." >> russia was the perfect example. right? it never happened. can't sit alone with putin for two hours, meet with him. treat him like the pope when standing next to him. surely republicans will turn on him. nobody turned on him. even the couple of congressman, kel, concerned about that. within 24 hours, all ran for the hills. why? because they fear the base. >> it's painful. >> the base loves trump. >> somebody needs to tell the base the truth and could that, go to town hall meetings and actually tell the base the truth, heidi. they ought to try it sometime. you have, again, with donald trump, you have him capitulating to terror states, and then you have steve scalise actually joining in. somebody in the republican majority joining in, signing on to impeach rod rosenstein, because they're trying to get to the bottom of vladimir putin and his attempts to undermine american democracy. well, that is a republican leader. not abencher. that is a republican leader who is actually working hard to subvert and investigation already indicted several dozen russians, and we have the -- the u.s. military, the u.s. intel community, has the goods on the russians. they tried to subvert american democracy in 2016, and steve scalise is signing on with freedom caucus back benchers to try to actually subvert and investigation over someone actually trying to undermine american democracy? >> joe, i saw your tweet yesterday about how this election in 2018 is going to be the most important of our lifetimes for a lot of people, and i think that is your answer. whether you want to go down -- whether it's foreign policy or it's guns or it's the tax cuts. there's going to be another proposed round of tax cuts for the wealthy now. at the same time that president trump's base is closing ranks around him, look into the poll numbers, and see what's happening with the intensity of the disapproval on the other side of the ledger, and that's why this election is so important, but that's also why it's so hard to tell exactly what's going on has to match those numbers up, because what we could see here is a repeat of what happened with barack obama, which is that when barack obama was not on the ballot in the mid-terms, his people didn't come out but an intensity on the other side of the ledger that swept democrats, and you could see the same thing happening here, just because those numbers are becoming stronger with each one of these examples that you cite. the intensity of the disapproval on the other side is strengthening. manifold, twofold, threefold. >> one more point about iran before we go to break. >> yes. >> often ask, what if obama had done this? we don't have to ask. he did it during the debate almost to the week in 2007, 11 years would meet with ahmadinejad, savaged by republicans and hillary clinton and democrats as well. still ahead on "morning joe," president trump heads to florida to stump for a candidate who's stumping for trump? we'll explain. plus, two weeks ago republican senator rand paul announced he was concerned about president trump's choice of brett kavanaugh for the supreme court, but yesterday paul wrote on twitter, i have decided to support his nomination. who could have saw that coming? >> and when we look at the senators who may or may not support kavanaugh, jim vandehei, let's not even put rand paul on this list. he does this every time. i'm going to vote against that. i'm going to vote against that, and he always ends up lining behind the president, supports donald trump blindly. he's going to vote for kavanaugh. it's a joke for him to even -- any reporter that thinks he's not should really seriously look into another profession. he's going to vote for kavanaugh. ♪ ♪ let your perfect drive come together at the lincoln summer invitation sales event. get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models plus $1,000 bonus cash. 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. no matter how much you clean, does your house still smell stuffy? that's because your home is filled with soft surfaces that trap odors and release them back into the room. so, try febreze fabric refresher. febreze finds odors trapped in fabrics and cleans them away as it dries. use febreze every time you tidy up to keep your whole house smelling fresh air clean. fabric refresher even works for clothes you want to wear another day. make febreze part of your clean routine for whole home freshness. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. >> that's a new ad from congressman ron desantis in his bid to become florida the nominee for governor. president trump will rally in florida today where desantis who endorsed a tweet last december helping him move ahead in the polls of former front-runner adam putnam, the state's agriculture commissioner, and "i am behind donald trump every step of the way." >> wow. i guess he likes the putin stuff. likes changing u.s. foreign policy. it's a big fan of iran, i guess. i guess a big fan of north korea. the party's changed so much. i mean when i was a republican we liked balanced budget, when wheeze balance a budget, actually. we liked paying down the debt. we liked keeping in entitlements solvent. let's see. what else? oh! we were against tyrants in iran and north korea. that's changed. all of that has changed. it's so funny. i mean -- you can't -- i used to say that the party is not conservative anymore. but we are so far beyond that. they are -- they are -- they've adopted vladimir putin's foreign policy. donald trump has adopted vladimir putin's foreign policy. you have people on russian television every night saying, the soviets. we could never do this when we were the soviet union. donald trump is doing it for us. that's what russian television commentators are saying. then you look at our domestic policy, our foreign oepolicy. stalin wishes he had the ability to impose tariffs and then pay farmers $12 billion that a lot of farmers are saying, we don't even need. as ron johnson said it is a soviet-style-type economy when you start -- when donald trump starts talking about picking winners and losers. i don't know if it's soviets sell, it is socialism, though, and that used to be, at least where i'm from, that used to be something that conservative voters were against. maybe it's a selling point now. i don't know. >> so let's talk about your former political party, which changed drastically, i submit, since you were last a registered member of the republican party. >> right. >> and jimmy pointed this out earlier. this poll who would you trust for accurate information? among trump supporters the result, trump, 91%. friends and family, 63%. mainstream media, no surprise, 11%. so if you're running for governor of florida, if you are ron desantis you clearly seek his fave perp understandable. you want a favorable tweet from the president of the united states. rockets him ahead in the primary, but among the base we continually talk about, how deep and lasting is the fear, the clear fear that many of elected republicans have about the president of the united states? >> i mean, i think it's -- i just -- the fear is there. what i don't understand is, when leaders of my party did something i disagreed with, i went after them. went home and explained to my constituents why i went after them. they're spending too much money. newt's talking about -- >> they're spending more now. >> just saying. i could go home, voted against the bill because they're spending too much money. i voted against the bill because newt's talking about getting rid of the tax cuts. jim, that's what i i don't understand is, i'd hold 100 town hall meetings a year. you can explain to your constituents and i can tell you my constituents way back then always understood. yeah, okay. don't go along with the party, then. if the party's going the wrong way, go your own way and found it strengthened me, not only among independents but among party members who trust immediate more because they didn't blindly follow party dictates. >> but fear is an exceptionally powerful motivator. step back one second. georgia, basically a swing state. florida, basically a swing state. the president of the united states weighs in on both of those races, and takes trump candidates who were way behind in the polls and instantly makes them such favorites that people are telling putnam to get out of the race. >> it's insane. >> instant, overnight. that's power. >> adam putnam, one of the most able leaders in the state of florida. republican or democrat. florida voters would be a fool to not vote for adam putnam. >> but they don't agree with you by a 12-point margin and think the establishment is foolish to back putnam. that's the pow are he has and why it outlast it's -- the thing trump proved all the things we thought the republican party stood for, didn't necessarily is what the base of the party stood for. turns out they get more jazzed about immigration, about the changes face of america -- >> this is exactly -- i remember driving over with -- with my former chief of staff, driving over after katrina hit, and we were dealing with, richard, just extraordinary incompetence, not only at the federal level but the state and local level. now, my chief of staff said, you know what? this is what happens when you go down ideological check boxes. by the way, he's a very conservative republican. in fact, he's -- he's -- he's an elected official. he said, we check off, are they pro-life? are they pro-gun? are they pro-this? pro-that? and we get the candidates we want, and then a katrina comes. and ideologically they're lined up but don't know anything about leading. here you have ron desantis, dressing his baby in "make america great" outfits and reading bedtime stories, it's cute, clever. he's playing the trump card. what's going to happen when a category 5 storm goes across the i-4 corridor? will desantis be able to deal with that as well as putnam? no. nobody would begin to think that. it's lunacy. not just talking about this race, but this is how -- people ask, how do we get the katrinas, the poor leadership we get? and it is the stupid, dumbing-down ideologically on the democratic side and on the republican side. are they pro-choice? are they anti-gun? whatever on the democratic side? and same thing on the republican side. and nobody's looking for, are they a leader that can get my family evacuated when a category 5 hurricane comes in tampa bay? >> just to say we're going to have that problem, and didn't we already have that problem for two reasons? one, the risk of sounding wonky, severe weather, cost of climb change is the norm, no longer the exception. look what's happening around this country. and our infrastructure combined with that means we can't cope. so this is -- governing's hard but we are making it harder because we're not serious. not serious about climate change or infrastructure. this country face as crisis economically, socially in human terms and are simply letting it happen. >> by the way, not serious about elected serious leaders. best leader i've ever seen and wasn't warm and fuzzy, jeb bush. never seen anybody lead on a state level as effectively as jeb bush. not a close second of all the people i've seen over the past 20, 25 years and jeb wasn't warm and cuddly. you know? he just did his damn job. anyway -- still ahead, president trump is awake. good morning, don. and tweeting this morning. he's taking a shot at the coke brothers. >> oh, my god. >> taking a shot at the coke brothers. yeah, a smart move. you're so powerful. hey, keep attacking the coke brothers. attack them every day. year so powerful and strong. by the way, also senator enough to sit down with bob mueller. e really should not listen to all of those people because you went to princeton and you fordham you're not smart enough to sit down with him. i'm not sure where you went to high school but smart enough to sit down with him and keep attacking the koch brothers after the network announced it wouldn't support some republican candidates this november. willie it is a veritable war of words out there. >> yes, it is, and the koch brothers are happy to have it. >> as am i. we'll be right back. ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ just say the words ♪ and we'll beat the birds down to acapulco bay ♪ ♪ it's perfect for a flying honeymoon they say ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ you'll make my morning, buty the price ruin my day.ou? complicated relationship with milk? pour on the lactaid, 100% real milk, just without that annoying lactose. mmm, that's good. but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? olay regenerist wipes out the competition; hydrating better than $100, $200 even $400 creams. with our b3 complex, beautiful skin doesn't have to cost a fortune. olay. officials overseeing billionaire charles koch will not be -- supporting republican congressman kevin cramer against incumbent democrat heidi hide kamp in north dakota. supporting those outside the republican party seeking to distance itself from president trump over disagreements on trade and immigration. the decision deals a big hit to cramer, who's already being out-fund razed by heitkamp. on the heels of that the president is tweeting this morning saying -- the globalist koch brothers who have become a total joke in real republican circles are against strong borders and powerful trade. i never sought their support because i don't need their money or bad ideas. they love my tax and regulations cuts, judicial picks and more. i made them richer. their network is highly overrated. i have beaten them at every turn. they want to protect their companies outside the u.s. from being taxed. i'm for america first, and the american worker. a puppet for no one. >> my god. >> ooh. except for vlad. two nice guysideas. make america great again. god. >> i don't know where to start. >> there's a lot there. >> jim, first of all, there's no reason why charles koch a classical liberal, no reason why charles koch would support donald trump, would support the protectionism. they obsess over government spending, they want not balanced budgets but rational budgeting and you got the biggest spending bills ever, trump going on the biggest trade war we've been at since herbert hoover was president. you can go down the list. economically there's really no reason for charles koch or any libertarian or in his case classical liberal to support donald trump, is there? >> no. i think you outlined perfectly what the koch brothers stand for and it's more traditional republican party topics on recognizes, taxation, even immigration is a different place than the president. charles koch probably likes this tweet because one of the things that the koch network is trying to do is rebrand themselves. they know how radioactive they are in politics. david koch has stepped back from political operations. charles koch is the leader of that organization, probably happy to have this. but, again, i think he's definitely speaking for a distinct minority inside the republican party. but speaks for what we thought republicans stood for pre-trump. >> heidi, they always have been very uncomfortable with some of the more hard core republicans views on immigration. they've been concerned about exploding military budgets. they've also been concerned by protectionism. this was before trump. and don't know they have much of a choice but to do what they have done here if they want to stay true -- by the way, donald trump can't make the kochs any more money than they already have. >> they never liked trump. they didn't support him in 2016. they held out for quite a while. and, yes, the issues range the gamut from the deficit spending to the muslim ban. charles koch was on the record likening that to nazi-style racism. but here's the thing. mark short is tightly aligned with the koch network and he was right there in the white house as a legislative director and they took away "the crown" jewel of their agenda which was the tax cuts. so surprise, surprise, now mark short is leaving. he's gone after the tax cuts have been enacted and i know personally from speak with the kochs and the representatives that as early as january they started to become very uncomfortable, they started to pick up whiffs of the protectionism that was about to come with the tariffs and the trade wars and were very concerned about this, so they've been kind of in this position for several months. not surprising they would come out at this point, that they are comparing this to depression-era tariffs and trade protectionism. but i do think this is significant because, joe, so many times we've sat in this chair and talked about what is it going to take the republicans to stand up to trump. well all along it's been who behind them. it's been the donors threatening them on the tax cuts, for instance. the donors have outsize influence over a lot of these republican representatives. so i do think that this is an important moment, and a potential change, and strategy that could, could show some fractures in the party because donors are so powerful in this party. >> it's a great point to make. by the way, i know the koch network is still working with the white house when it comes to criminal justice reform, but willy the president launching this war against the kochs this morning, you wonder where paul singer is going to be, where other republican donors will be. because heidi is right, the only thing that these republican candidates would fear more than donald trump's wrath are a lot of traditionally republican donors saying you're just not conservative any more, i'm cutting off the spicket. >> donald trump doesn't consider any of that when he sends out a tweet like that. as heidi points out they did not support donald trump financially. they sat out the 2016 election. he never forgot that. they came out the koch brothers and criticized him about the muslim ban. steve bannon talked about the koch brothers quote shut up and get with the program. steve bannon to the koch brothers. but this is at the end of the day for the koch brothers about trade. this is what pushed them over the top, the idea that trade somehow bad which is the message that president trump put out there. they see these tariffs, the bail out of the farmers as fundamentally contradictory to everything they stand for. so they say of course we'll back republicans as we always have but we also might back a democrat who stands up to things like this. >> that's great. free trade, immigration, they have been drivers of american economic success. so trump is all about cultural republicanism. these guys are much more about classic economic republicanism, a small state and openness which again has been the real engines of america's success. great to see people standing up to this. >> thank you all for being on this morning. coming up -- all right you two. >> let the past be the past. >> exactly what i've been trying to say for 2000. donald trump's new defense strategy in the mueller probe is not new. but it continues. utter confusion. we'll have the dizzying new comments from the president's lawyer rudy giuliani, plus from fire and fury to a meeting with no preconditions the president sets the stage for a north korea style shift with iran. we'll talk about that ahead on "morning joe". and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ >> that ted cruz's father was part of the assassination plot along with lee harvey oswald. he's just citing a report what people say. i know you worked for ted cruz so i'm not going to have you answer this question, but i'm just saying, just -- >> it's true. >> an announcement -- okay, good. an announcement to anybody out there, if you accuse my father of assassinating the president and then make fun of my wife and say she's ugly, all i can say is duck. not only duck today, duck tomorrow and duck every day for the rest of your life because i'm going to be coming after you every day and either you're going to be finished politically or i'll be finished politically and chances are good i'll have a lot more hate in me -- >> oh, my lord, no hate in your heart. >> you're reduced to dust. that said that's shocking i'm looking past a guy that worked for him. i'm looking at you walter. how shock that ted cruz is to donald trump after donald trump accused his father of being a part of the assassination of jfk and suggested that ted cruz's wife was ugly. >> the obsequitous of republican leaders to donald trump is something history will be baffled about. you go up and down the line. as you said earlier in the show there were times as a republican you had to stand up to a republican president, whatever. the fact that nobody will stand up to him shows that they care more about their primary than they do -- >> the example you bring up with ted cruz, it's taken to the lowest level. he wrote the piece in "time" magazine -- >> for donald trump. for time 100. >> i would write the piece too but i would say something else. >> it's just your father. what's the big deal? >> go down the list of republicans, only those retiring, like corker and flake are standing up. >> here's the problem, though, howard decent -- i've noticed some people who are retiring, to borrow a term i've already borrowed a term from walter isaacson and others are borrowing regularly, even those retiring are going to be lobbyists. they won't say anything negative about donald trump even when it has to do with u.s. foreign policy that has tied this country together with our allies for 70 years. >> the political system is broken. i'm going to blame the republicans but i'm sure the democrats have some skin in this program. you see a total lack of statesmanship. we see goldwater and nixon and you can even get the republicans to vote against trump. susan collins has no business for voting for brett kavanaugh and she's going to do it. it's ridiculous. no willingness to stand up for your constituents. it's all about being re-elected. it's only about being re-elected not about exercising the mandate that the voters gave them to do something. >> which you would think is an incredible opportunity for the democrats. we'll get to that. >> we're not so much better. >> i need to ask, willy, if somebody attacked your father and your wife and i'm dead serious at nbc news, the way that donald trump attacked ted cruz's father and wife, would you ever work with him? would you ever write a time 100 piece about saying how great they are. >> i would not go out of my way. i understand on the one hand he's a republican senator who wants to get things done and may require the support of the united states, but on a personal level i wouldn't do all these other things and lavish him with praise in the way ted cruz has. to the governor's point. remember we had mark sanford the day after he lost his primary. what did he say when i asked him what was your advice to republicans running this fall? he said simply pledge allegiance to donald trump. so whpeople are scared for thei jobs. >> fear and quivering. >> they are quivering. >> as opposed to some back bone, some spine and some belief that you put country ahead. >> really quickly as a public service announcement, i mean this for kids who are running, who we think they want to get into politics at some point, i'm dead serious. nothing sells. nothing sells with voters like being yourself. for standing up against something that everybody thinks you need to fall behind. voters love independents. i know you've seen it before. >> it's conviction politics. it's what they like. >> conviction politics. i'm telling you, when gingrich was man of the year, and he was supposedly the most powerful -- go after him every time. and constituents would say why are you doing it? i would explain it one, two, three at a town hall meeting. okay. got it. you can do it. >> that's why we love stories like "profiles in courage," the kennedy book. >> also with us for the conversation, we have staff writer for "the atlantic," an nbc news and msnbc contributor. good to have you on board. the intros are not happening today, joe, just not happening. but i will get to the news. >> we do know each other. >> president trump's lawyer rudy giuliani is not ruling out the possibility of a second 2016 meeting about russians peddling dirt to traufump campaign. something he raised then denied in television appearances yesterday. giuliani said he was heading off a story from the "new york times" quoting from the report he said journalists included maggie haberman. giuliani said he and trump attorney spent a great deal of time on sunday trying to run the story down. giuliani said he believes he managed to shut it down and how to kill the story but yet speculated -- >> you're using your outside voice again. >> the journalists found other reasons not run the item. maggie haberman said i lost the thread of what the former mayor is talking about. [ laughter ] >> not the only one. in his third and final fox interview, if you call it an interview, giuliani backed off his flat out denials senior trump aides discussed the russian's offer in an earlier meeting. >> there wasn another meeting that hasn't been made public. three days before. according to cohen or according to the leak he says there was a meeting with donald jr., with jared kushner, with paul manafort, with gates and possibly two others in which they out of the presence of the president discussed the meeting with the russians. we checked with their lawyers, the ones we could check with, the four of the six. that meeting never ever took place. it didn't happen. there's no second meeting here? >> it's highly unlikely. i have to leave the opening open as a lawyer in case they come across with something that startles us or we feel is important. >> natasha, giuliani introduced this meeting in the morning on cnn and over the course of the dave he says there was another meeting three days before and then at night he said i'm telling you that meeting did not take place, it never happened. again having a debate with himself. the most salient line of all his interviews, quote, nobody can be sure of anything. do you know anything about this other meeting he's talking about? >> it certainly makes sense. i want to step back. i think this is really now it shows it's very obvious the trump team strategy is to get ahead of stories because if it's true that the "new york times" was planning to release a story about this june 7th meeting that occurred two days before the trump tower meeting then that's obviously what giuliani was trying to get ahead of and that's what he told the "daily beast" last night. we don't know if this meeting took place yet but that seems that would make complete sense given up to everything we know the days leading up to the trump tower, the famous speech that donald trump gave about hillary clinton, the dirt that he's previewing about hillary clinton and her ties to russia and her work at the state department was that night, paul unanimous fortfort -- manafort and jared kushner were with him when he gave that speech at that rally that night. it's very obvious what happened here and donald trump learned about it on june 7th the meeting and probably approved it and gave the go ahead and i couldn't resist bragging about it that night. >> i'm not a real lawyer but i played one in law firms for about five or six years. and the thing that was most fascinating is when you would be around somebody that was a great trial lawyer, and you did discovery and everybody started pulling pieces together, there was always, always the most exciting thing to see would be a great timeline coming together. and i got to say, of all the cases that a lot of prosecutors i talked to have ever seen, the timeline that is coming together in this case against donald trump, against don jr., against all of them, whether you're talking about the proactive statement on air force one, go back to the campaign where donald trump on the very day said russians if you're listening go after these 33,000 emails, the russians start working on it that day. the timeline from beginning to end is pretty extraordinary, and it's going to look very stark inside a courtroom. >> so, i think that rudy giuliani has the same crisis communication correspond school online that carter page did. you're absolutely right. because the public communication on how this is going, i mean giuliani is incoherent. i don't know from one day -- >> what's going on. you were communication director -- what's he doing. >> nothing we learn. you would say normally, okay, this is wrong, go out and clean this up. then you go out and clean it up. reporters report it and the story dies. they don't do that. they go out and confuse it more and confuse it top of that. giuliani talks about what you would not normally talk about. all lawyers would like to preserve a defending for future use. that's what they do. except he talks about it. i told sean hannity, well i don't want to say -- i have to keep that open as an option in case his client lied or it is revealed as we've seen all along which was pointed out this morning. it keeps advancing. no we met with no russians. we might have met with russians. we did meet with the russians. there was no collusion. there might have been collusion. there's no crime. it is a crime. collusion and conspiracy are interchangeable words. >> incredible. devaluing the truth. >> look what rudy giuliani is doing and mumbling words and doing a great disservice for his client. look what his client is doing. he's just babbling. michael cohen is hurting to get a plea deal by having lanny davis go out and put it all out there in the immortal words of the fantastic mr. forks it's amateur night in dixie. >> it's bad. michael cohen has stopped looking for smoke signals from the white house. >> i want to pick up on your point about the timeline. while all this is going on, this is noise they are creating, mueller is putting together a timeline and it has real dates and real witnesses and real logs and real evidence about what actually occurred. so -- >> by the way donald trump may not care about what the facts are. he may be in the white house that talks about an alternate version of facts. 91% of republicans may be the same way. bob mueller cares about facts and so do the judges deciding these cases. >> meanwhile, walter, you have rudy who is not just -- clearly is going rogue on the white house press office and just calling up his mega phone to make an announcement on fox news, not to be grilled in anyway or given a tough question in anyway, allowed to make announcements and then change those announcements and then devalue the truth, transform the truth, change the facts, bring in more alternative facts what ever you want to do, whatever he chooses. what's the point of the press briefing at this point? the white house press briefing where reporters wait every day to try to understand what's happening in this white house, to try to understand what's happening in this world, to try and get closer to the facts? >> you're right. giuliani is totally unhinged. he has been for a while. what he's doing, as rick said, is undermining the case so badly that i don't know why they are allowing it. there's no control at the white house. it's not just the press briefing, the chief of staff, general kelly, these are probably people who would like to reassert control but can't. on the final point i'll make is we really have to give respect to bob mueller at the moment. robert mueller, despite all these incoming missiles and attacks so methodically, carefully kept his eye on the ball and laying things out, doing it in a way that makes it clear this is no witch-hunt, not leaking, you know -- giuliani is leaking the possibility of a meeting that he says might leak. but mueller is a man of deep and true integrity and the attacks on him are appalling. >> you know, willy, while the reason why robert mueller doesn't care what rudy giuliani or the freedom caucus or donald trump say is donald trump is playing ping pong in queens with his phone spurs, mueller was running through the jungles of vietnam and saving men there, and came back highly decorated guy. could have cashed in and made tons of money but he dedicated his life to public service. he's the antithesis of donald trump in every way. >> robert mueller is not listening to this noise. he's not watching rudy giuliani on fox three times contradicting himself. when you hear rudy giuliani the other day say robert mueller doesn't have a damn thing. rudy giuliani doesn't have a damn idea what robert mueller has and neither of us eritrea. it didnoesn't appear the presid of the united states objects to the way rudy giuliani defends him. remember during the stormy daniels payment story of a couple months ago giuliani told a couple different versions of that story. he's the kind of guy, new york guy that creates this fog machine that donald trump likes. >> right, exactly. it's unclear whether there's any coordination going on outside of donald trump and giuliani. i think giuliani mentioned he had discussed this potential story leaking with jay sekulow who was a tv lawyer going out and being the pr person for the president last year, anyway. this is -- i want to go back to the timeline for a continue that rick talked about because i think that's really, really important to judge whether or not this meeting is likely to have occurred. i think that this -- knowing a pre-planning meeting happened, knowing the trump campaign was very eager to get this dirt on hillary clinton has to be looked at from the perspective of, okay, well the campaign actually already knew or at least one member of the campaign already knew rurchs had dirt on clinton in the form of thousands of emails. remember george papadopoulos had been told by russia linked foreign national that the russians did have this dirt on clinton. so if you use common sense and if you say it's very likely that papadopoulos told the campaign about these emails beforehand and you look at their eagerness and willingness to accept this meeting with the russians on promise to obtain dirt on hillary clinton and don jr. didn't seem surprised at all, that it makes total sense they would be very, very eager to take this meeting and that donald trump himself would be in on it. >> the "wall street journal" editorial board south with a new op-ed entitled trump's lose the house strategy. it reads in part mr. trump might not welcome the democratic house but he also might not fear it as long as republicans keep the senate. even more than most politicians mr. trump always needs a foil and speaker nancy pelosi would be from central political casting. mr. trump could cut deals with democrats on paid family leave, public work spending and trade protectionism. house democrats could start up the impeachment machinery and once under way the momentum would be hard to stop. but as long as he's safe from conviction by the senate mr. trump might figure he can benefit from a backlash against impeachment the way bill clinton did. the president may think a democratic house may improve his chance for re-election as independents conclude he's the only barrier to a left wing government led by elizabeth warren. that's pretty insightful. >> i do not read "wall street journal" op-ed. haven't read it for 30 years. that's very interesting thinking. >> so on point. i mean, this is exactly what could happen. i don't think trump's support is not there. >> the interesting thing is what it captures is trump's amorality. trump has no loyalty to anybody but himself. >> but how do you feel about that, that's a reality that could play out, whether he's moral or not. >> but you're right. the fact that he's so amoral -- >> the thing about the republican party -- >> he's a democrat. >> please. a democrat -- please. you mortally wound me. >> gave money to the dnc when you were there? >> i don't think so. if he did -- >> that wasn't a fair question. he always gave money to the dnc. >> i never called him, that's for sure. >> a lot of democrats did. >> i actually don't think -- i think trump may be thinking that's what i thought was insightful. this is a mirror into the thinking of a csociopath. there's a little we hate nancy pelosi in there. >> but nancy pelosi would make a good, a good counter point. >> you can say anything a lot. you can say anything about nancy pelosi but one thing she's not stupid. she's a smart political operative and smart enough to know whatever her numbers may be, unlike many people in washington, she's not driven by ego that needs to put her in front of the television cameras every day. if she thought that was a possibility she would be much lower profile. >> my only problem with that editorial is that it's 7:21 on july 31st, you know what donald trump is thinking about? 7:22. it's true. >> that could happen by default. >> second of all, mika, i don't think democrats will impeach trump unless there's a real reason to do it. hating donald trump is not a reason to impeach him. i think manafort, i mean the manafort trial will be an enormous problem for donald trump. and that is a piece of the puzzle that is, in fact, connected to the collusion. really clear -- we're all acquainted with trump's m.o. in new york. there's no chance that donald trump, his total top down command control is the way he runs. no chance he didn't know about the meeting. good chance he sat in on one of the meetings with the russians. >> the guy knew everything. that's how he ran the campaign. it was a mom and pop operation without a mom. he knew absolutely everything that was going on. but, if you just look at the history of it, it is true, walter, that -- we can go back to 2010, tea party comes in, in essence re-elects by overreaching re-elects barack obama in 2012, we all got elected in '94, overreached, got bill clinton re-elected in 1996. this happens all the time. and there is no doubt for donald trump's re-election, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house is much better than a republican because right now he's blaming the democrats for not being able to build the wall. republicans are in charge. >> you know, he would swing -- this is why he goes and meets with north koreans. begs the iranians to meet with him. he would certainly sort of play with the house democrats and i think that, you know, he would change his stripes as he's often done. the weird thing about it, though, i think natasha had a wonderful line which is tv lawyers. i mean people who aren't real lawyers but the giulianis and lanny davis that's out there for tv. this is what happens when you're not sort of having a strategy for the long run, and you're just dancing for the 7:22:00 a.m., 7:23 a.m. tweets you're going to do. >> howard decent thank you very much. still ahead on "morning joe" it's clear that the russians used social media to attack the american election. but it doesn't stop there. natasha has new reporting on how moscow has now weaponized the american court system against the kremlin's enemies. she'll take us through her new reporting on that. an update on the start of paul manafort's criminal trial. you're watching "morning joe". we'll be right back. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? you'll make my morning, buty the price ruin my day.ou? complicated relationship with milk? pour on the lactaid, 100% real milk, just without that annoying lactose. mmm, that's good. the first trial in the special counsel probe kicks off with paul manafort. he's accused of hiding $30 million he made before his days with trump as an unregistered foreign lobbyist for ukraine and it's former pro russian president. the prosecution plans to call 35 witnesses including agents from the fbi, treasury department and irs to show how manafort allegedly stashed his wealth in overseas banks to avoid paying u.s. taxes. joining us now, washington bureau chief susan page and former assistant u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york. good morning. what should we be looking for? give us a preview of the manafort trial. >> this will be a classic fraud trial in many ways but for the fact that manafort is a high-profile defendant and a lot of attention on it for ext extraneous reasons. he made a lot of money, spent lavishly. the trial will be very dry and burglary. when gates was the that will be the most compelling interesting part to the rest of the world. but, you know, it's a strong case. i think there's a very good chance that he's going to get convicted. always hard to make those predictions. opening arguments, which will be after jury selection which can take a couple of days in a trial like this, the opening arguments will be to lay out both the government's case in a nutshell, and what some of the defenses might be which are hard to see right now what those might be. >> manafort is interesting because he was obviously donald trump's campaign chairman. this trial has to do with before he had that relationship with donald trump. do you see a nexus here at all of the russian investigation and what this trial is about? >> i think the "new york times" headline was perfect, actually how it's not explicitly part of the trial but looming over it. the prosecutors have promised the judges, this is a no nonsense judge and he wants to keep the russian investigation out of this. manafort has asked to barney mention of the fact that he was even trump's campaign manager. that was granted with the exception there was one bank loan where the person who loaned him the money was basically offered a job on the campaign in exchange. i believe it's going to come in through that. but, no. i don't -- there's not going to be explicit talk about it. the real issue is in the jurors. and this was manafort asked for the trial to be moved to another location. that was denied. as i think it should have been because it's a very tricky thing to try and find jurors who can be completely impartial in any case. everybody brings their own biases to any trial. maybe they don't like the police. maybe they were a victim of a crime and think any defendant who was charged must be guilty. so prosecutors and judges and defense attorneys are always trying to weed out biases like that. here that's going to be even harder, because we're in such a politically charged divisive time, and so even if the campaign, the fact that he worked for trump is not explicitly part of the trial it may be in the back of jurors' head. you do run the risk, if i were a prosecutor i would be worried about jury nullificationullific decid deciding the case other than on the facts of the case. >> i wonder how important the outcome of this or even the revelations along the way are to the mueller probe? >> you know, i think this is an important test for robert mueller as well as something of really consequential problems for paul manafort and that's because this is the first trial from charges he brought as special counsel. if he has a trial that seems very authoritative and feels like a strong case and paul manafort is convicted it makes it harder for critics of robert mueller to say he's on a witch-hunt. this is one more example of the consequences of the meticulous investigation that he's done. of course, we've been waiting to see if it's possible paul manafort might be pressured to cooperate in the probe that does have something to do about russia, about collusion and obstruction of justice and that's something that could be an outcome of this trial even if it's never mentioned in courtroom. >> you and "usa today" have been checking in with your trump panel to see how they feel about the state of affairs in washington. does russia register with them, more or less now than it used to and more broadly how are they feeling about president trump? >> it's interesting because some of the trump voters that we've been talking to think russia did meddle. some think they didn't. they believe that the assertions that president trump has made in opposition to the conclusions of his intelligence agencies, we found some trump voters do view russia as an enemy not as a competitor. some of them were a little uncomfortable with that press conference with vladimir putin. but this has not shaken their support in donald trump or their faith in him. they are -- ias though the attacks against donald trump just make him stronger with them. they see him as standing up for the things he said he was going to do in the campaign on things like that, even building the wall and shutting down the government as a threat to do it, something that shows he's doing what they said he'll do. he's pursuing the issues that prompted them to vote for him. >> your latest piece for "the atlantic" how russias punish dicy dent using u.s. courts. how russia has weaponized red notices and the u.s. judicial system against its enemies. tell us more about that. >> yeah. over the course of my reporting i found ice as been detaining asylum seekers on the basis of these red notices which is not an arrest warrant but the closest thing to an international arrest warrant that exists today. russia is the top abuser of interpol in terms of issuing these red notices which are politically motivated. what i.c.e. is doing is cracking down on visa overstays and using that as jumping off point as an excuse to detain these individuals who are then denied bond hearings because of these red notices that have been issued by russia against primarily dissidents and kremlin rivals. the red notices are being given a lot of weight by the department of homeland security even though they have no independent value of their own. sign court filings, for example, the dhs has argued that arrest warrants issued by russia are valid because of the red notice that has been put out by interpol which, of course, only require that russia fills out the right form. interpol and red notices have no independent value of their own. what we're seeing these people are detained and are kept in detention and ultimately they are facilitating these back door extraditions because the u.s. does not have an extradition treaty with russia. lawyers have been appealing that decision because their argument is that these individuals would essentially be sent to their doom if they were sent back to russia, but it is -- it is kind of a way to facilitate these back door extraditions which is a disconnect that we don't have an extradition treaty with russia because we don't trust their system of justice. >> natasha, thank you very much. still ahead on "morning joe" -- >> i will have mexico pay for that wall. mark my words. mexico will pay for the wall. believe me. and whose going to pay for the wall? mexico. 100%. >> we heard that throughout the 2016 campaign but now trump is threatening to shut down congress if congress doesn't fund the wall. the government democratic senator will join us next for that. we'll be right back with much more "morning joe". en? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges... how mature of them. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ security, after many, many years of talk within the united states, i would have no problem doing a shutdown. it's time we had proper border security. we're the laughingstock of the world. we have the worst immigration laws anywhere in the world. i would be certainly willing to consider a shutdown if we don't get proper border security. >> is the funding of the border wall wait until after the mid-term elections? >> probably. that's something we do have a disagreement on. >> you're not worried about a government shut down? >> no that's not going to happen. >> i twhohink it would be bad politics for the republican party. we would get blamed. there's a way to get wall funding and deal with the daca population. >> if the president wants to shut down the government, that's his prerogative. i think it would be a mistake and i don't think it would be necessary. >> president trump and republicans on capitol hill at odds over whether a shut down over immigration border wall funding should be on the table. joining us now a member of the judiciary committee, senator hirono. there's a hearing on child separations at the border this morning. senator, thanks for being with us. i want to get your view on this idea of a government shutdown, the president who for years has promised mexico would pay for it. now says he'll shut down the government if democrats and republicans in the senate don't agree to pay for it. what's your reaction? >> the president could have gotten his border wall funding months ago when he was presented with a bipartisan bill to protect the 800,000 daca participants and he kept saying he would sign such a bill and he did not. so the president says a lot of things. he changes his mind. he governs by chaos, which he mainly creates himself. >> senator, is there something you would offer, put on the table in a larger package for border security? >> i think we should have impressive comprehensive immigration reform. i don't hear him talking about daca that he created a huge vulnerability for. the president goes from issue to issue. it's always about himself all time every time. he throws red meat to his base every time he feels threatened or insecure. that's something we can couldn't on from him. >> he came back and said let's take care of the daca kids if you give me border wall funding what would you say? >> i remember the meeting i participated in where he said send me a bipartisan bill i'll sign it. by the time we got back to our offices that was off the table. so how can we even couldn't on this president to maintain his position on anything? as i said the one thing we can couldn't on is when he feels threatened he'll go on attack and continue to throw red meat. one of the red meat is always to attack immigrants. >> i want to get to the hearing we advertised the judiciary committee on which you sit will have a hearing on family he new if i if i occasion efforts. incredible outrage, well founded outrage and confusion, frankly about why these families have not been reunited. what do you hope to find out today >> we'll find out why some 7/eleven children have been deemed ineligible to be reunited with their parents. what happened to the 400 children whose parents are already deported. what about some 40 children they don't even know where the parents or who the parents are. so this is total chaos. we need to find out specifically what do you have in mind, how do you plan to reunite these people. i find it incredible in the hearing before the judge, thank goodness this judge in san diego is keeping the administration's feet to the fire, is to, for them to say well we did it, we accomplished what we needed to do in your time frame and yet there are 7/eleven or so of these children who are deemed ineligible to be reunited. really what constitutes ineligibility to reuniting these traumatized children with their parents. >> walter? >> i want to raise this to a larger issue because when you said trump was willing to accept a bipartisan bill and maybe calm down the immigration thing, and he reverses himself, he does so because he's so infected the republican party with an anti-immigrant sentiment that he got backlash from republicans. do you see any way that you and the senate which is supposed to be the deliberative body could be working with republicans and maybe could spill over to the house to sort of say we can actually do a bipartisan thing without the right-wing of the republican party rebelling against that? >> there's always hope. as i said the senate actually had a bill. this was about the fourth iteration of a bipartisan bill that we thought the president would be willing to go along with because that's what he said he would do. you know, i look at it is the senate is the one body and while it would being a great for the house to wake up to their responsibilities, i think that we should do what we need to do in the senate to pass a bipartisan bill, which we came up with. so, i'm hopeful that we can do that again. but at the same time if we wait around for the president to make up his mind what he deems acceptable, we should live so long. that's my attitude. >> senator hirono of hawaii. report back to us after that meeting. so let's bring in susan page right now. saw san, let's talk about the politics of this. hearing today, obviously a lot of fireworks, got democrats that to abolish i.c.e. and you also have a lot of people wondering where these remaining children are and why the trump administration lost them. >> this is one of those issues that divides the american public along the lines that have become pretty familiar since the election of donald trump as president. this is something that is moving suburban, better educated suburban voters towards the democratic party and as it solidified trump's support among his core supporter. we've been talking this morning about president trump, now rules a new republican party. that's not only because of the issues he's presented, it's because he's changing some of the demographic nature of the republican party and i thought david wasserman made a smart point yesterday when he said one of the things going for democrats in the mid-term election better educated voters are more likely to vote. that has been a good thing for republicans in mid-terms. this time it's going to be a good thing for democrats because these are the kind of voters that have been in the past predominantly republican but disturbed and moved away from the gop because of issues like these family separation policies. >> i want to ask you something, the reality of separating children. seems to me that the administration may have run afoul of current law. talk about the aspects of separating immigrants from children, is there a criminality there? >> i think extreme view of it that some people have taken is that it's akin to kidnapping. i think that is pretty extreme. i don't think anyone would actually pursue that theory of criminal liability. it talks to the point of this is unheard of before. the way in which childrenbeing, ripped from their parents' hands and the real -- the issue about the laws is whether children will be held in some kind of custody. you know, that's what the trump administration tried to challenges and undo, was that children until recent -- under the law now cannot be held in jail basically for any extended period of time. so that was -- that, combined with this unprecedented policy of prosecuting every immigrant that came over the border regardless of the circumstances, you know, which had never been done -- >> or their legal status, if they were seeking asylum. >> exactly. >> is there more that judges can do? i know some judges are being tough, but it seems to me that the only help for these children are these judges who can start holding the administration in contempt if they don't start moving faster. >> right. and you see this over and over, both in the immigration front and, frankly just to circle it back for a second, in the -- with the, quote, witch-hunt. you see judges over and overlooking at the facts, looking at the law and holding this administration accountable in a way nobody else either seems willing or able to do. so, yes, i think the judges in the immigration world right now are sort of the unsung heroes because they are trying to enforce deadlines that they've set that the trump administration, you know, there are very low consequences if they ignore them. you know, i think we'll see more of that going forward. >> mimi, great to have you at the table. thanks so much. coming up on "morning joe", the latest by the push by some republicans to impeach the deputy attorney general, the effort that has the support of the third ranking house republican, majority whip steve scalise. "morning joe" is coming right back. when my hot water heater failed, she was pregnant, in-laws were coming, a little bit of water, it really- it rocked our world. i had no idea the amount of damage that water could do. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they were on it. it was unbelievable. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege. we're the baker's and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today. new laptop with 24/7 tech support. yep, thanks guys. i think he might need some support. yes start them off right. with the school supplies they need at low prices all summer long. save $200 on this dell laptop at office depot officemax. it's a high-tech sleep revolution. the sleep number 360 smart bed intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts. so you wake up ready to run the world. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. walter, kwifrg quislings, it will be used moving forward. what are your final thoughts? >> i was watching that congressman i know well from the new orleans area, steve scalise, talking about -- disappointing to me. republicans used to be very much about the rule of law, about law. here you have a deputy attorney general who is a republican appointed by a republican with a special prosecutor who has served this nation -- >> who is a republican. >> and they're methodically laying out a case. when you talk about quislings, that's where you really, really cross the line, is when you are no longer in favor of the rule of law. >> my question is what do people in louisiana -- the good people in louisiana, the good people in northwest florida, the good people in this country, what do they think when their representative is trying to stop, derail an investigation that actually benefits vladimir putin, the stopping of that investigation and his interference in american democracy? it is that simple. we have the evidence. >> you know, i have been down living in new orleans now. it is surprising how things are beginning to turn among conservative republican business leaders. >> yes. >> and that's where you are getting a bit of a divide between the sort of hard-core trump supporters that have nailed russia. i don't get it. >> by the way, look at the polls. they have announced they've become pro russia, pro putin compared to where they were a couple of years ago. >> used to be for the rule of law, used to be for standing up to russia, used to be for free trade, used to be for balanced budget. >> used to be. walter isaacson, thank you so much. still ahead, rudy guilliani muddies the water again in the special council probe, revealing the possibility of a second meeting it trump campaign officials regarding russians offering dirt on hillary clinton. we will go through his latest cable news rambling session straight ahead. "morning joe" coming right back. d age-related macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable. the president's made it clear through his tweet and there was nothing as far as we know that would lead anyone to believe that there was anything except for discussion about adoption. >> looking back on it. i think donald trump jr. would tell you it wasn't the right thing to do but it wasn't a big deal because nothing came of the meeting sfw meeting. >> if he's proven to have not told the truth that campaigns look for dirt. there are some things in politics you take for granted. >> i have been looking at the federal code trying to find collusion as a crime. >> it is not. >> collusion is not a crime. >> there's so much going on there. i mean there's the lie, there's the lie that the president of the united states actually concocted on air force one when his lawyers weren't around, where he said it was about adoption. so they were all trotted out and they lied about that. so, you know, it was all about adoption. and then, of course, we find out that the president did lie about that. >> correct. >> and that he was the one that actually drafted the lie. but then you actually go on and i've got to say -- and i see my good friend jim who was such a sucker, he would regularly taken negative stories written about me and put them on the front page of roll call. >> oh, no. >> it is so great to see you back. >> it is ridiculous. >> my life is like one rolling déjà vu. >> i don't remember it though. you know -- >> you let these little resentments pileup. >> no, i don't. very nixonian. my middle name is millhouse. anyway, so darrell issa, i've heard darrell issa say it now. who is the other republican said it? oh, dana rorhbach. of course, he said it in russian so it took me a couple of hours to get the exact translation. >> right. >> but both of those guys said everybody would take dirt from a foreign power who is an enemy. i can tell you, if somebody from the republic of iran said we have dirt on your opponent, again, i have said it before, you knew like stafford, you know. you knew rachel, all of my chief of starts, bart, they would have immediately picked up the phone and called the fbi. >> right. >> immediately. there's no question! you see somebody run over, you're going over to vote at the capital, by a car, you would immediately call the police, call 911. >> it is the moving of -- which has been -- >> first, for trump supporters answer me that question. >> right. >> would anybody other than donald trump do this? have you ever heard of anybody in all of your years on capitol hill taking dirt from foreign enemies? >> well, no. not only wouldn't they, i think everyone would respond exactly -- democrat or republican -- the way you are talking about. i think it is always the moving of the goalpost, right. it is always saying first, we never had any contact with the russians. okay, maybe we did. we never had any collusion with the russians. okay, maybe there was some collusion. even if there was collusion, it is not a crime. the next one will be, if it is a crime everyone does it. i will say you see it is contagious. not just trump does it but trump supporters to it in congress, and then the trump true believers who are the voters do it. that's why he has this mesmerizing power over the party. >> right. >> where people look to him for truth. they see his truth superior to their family's truth. >> yeah. we'll talk about that in a minute. but, mika, that's it, where they lie about the meeting, then they lie and say everybody would do it, and now we've gotten to the point of even if he did lie. >> uh-huh. >> big deal, it is not a crime. and then guilliani said, he finishes it by saying, well, my client didn't commit a crime, but if my client committed a crime it wasn't a crime. >> well, this is them reacting to what seems to be just coming out like a waterfall day by day by day and deflecting. usually trying to, like, transform world events to deflect against whatever is going on. heidi przybyla is with us as well. you see richard and along with willie, joe and me. we will get to our top story, which is that, president trump's lawyer, rudy guilliani is not ruling out the possibility of a second meeting in 2016 about russians peddling dirt to the trump campaign. >> come on, come on. >> honestly, his family should step in. >> throw grandpa from the train, all right. he needs to go home. >> that was a good movie, by the way. >> the family needs to step in. someone needs to step in. you know what, just let it ride. >> remember when ferris buehler, save ferris. somebody close to rudy needs to take him home. >> if you are interviewing rudy, you really need to be embarrassed if you don't have a follow-up that makes sense. i watched a couple of the interviews, and it has been painful. i'm sorry. it's pathetic. >> i don't know -- >> at some point you need to get your self-respect back. >> i thought one was actually good. >> really? >> that's all they had. do you like purple? >> i love the laughing nervously, wondering how they can let him get away with it because it is so obviously painful. >> anyhow, that's a five-minute wind up for us to give you the news. i did four-and-a-half. let's go. >> numerous television appearances yesterday by rudy guilliani. he told "the daily beast" last night he was heading off a story from "the new york times." quoting from the report, guilliani said that journalists included maggie haberman who reached out to the alleged premeeting meeting. guilliani said he and trump attorney jay sekulow spent a great deal of time on sunday trying to run the story down. he says he believes they managed to, quote, shut it down and helped kill the story, yet speculated the journalists found other reasons not to run the item. for her part, maggie haberman said we don't talk about source but i have lost the thread of what the mayor is talking about. yet in his third and final interview yesterday. >> it was like a trilogy. >> guilliani rambled on and out without much follow-up at all. he backed off his flatout denials that senior trump aides discussed the russian's offer in an earlier meeting. >> there was another meeting that has been leaked but hasn't been public yet. >> okay. >> that was a meeting, an alleged meeting three days before according to cohen or according to the leak. he says it was a meeting with donald jr., with jared kushner, with paul manafort, with gates and possibly two others in which they out of the presence of the president discussed meeting with the russians. we checked with their lawyers, the ones we could check with, which was four of the six. that meeting never, ever took place. it didn't happen. >> there's no -- there's no second meeting here? >> it is highly unlikely. i always have to leave the option open as a lawyer in case they come across something that really startles us or fills some of the things that we feel are important. >> what's he saying? what's he saying? run that clip again. >> actually, listen to the words. try and listen to exactly what he is saying. >> i was trying. what is he saying here? >> well, we'll hear it. let's look at it again. maybe it will make sense. >> here we go. >> there's no second meeting here? >> it is highly unlikely. i always have to leave the option open as a lawyer in case they come across with something that really startles us or feels some of the things we feel are important. >> another round. >> i think willie can translate. >> what a journey. >> a friend of mine, my drinks are free. >> rudy guilliani is debating himself. >> yeah, he is debating himself. >> so in the morning on cnn, he raised the idea of the second meeting. that came out of the blue to a lot of people. they said, what second meeting? he put that on the table, he says to preempt a "new york times" story we haven't seen yet and maggie haberman says, i don't know what he's talking about. then 12 hours later on "fox news" he's shooting town the idea he raised earlier on cnn. it is all in his -- >> he was killing a story he single-handedly brought to life. >> none of us were talking about the story. he's talking about the story. he says, again, we shoot it down just in case we don't know about something -- they know whether they the it or not, mike. it is just like donald trump lying about adoption, getting everybody together on air force one to cover up the real meaning of the don jr. meeting, which don jr. said his father didn't know about. got a little perjury issue there if, in fact, we find out that donald trump -- all of these people say it is no big deal if donald trump knew about the meeting, it is a big deal for don jr. because he committed perjury if that's the case. but, you know, it is just like trump lying about that meeting means that something went on in that meeting that they wanted to hide, and now you've got rudy saying, well, but, you know, we're not going to say it didn't happen because we don't know if it did or not. well, yeah, they do know whether it happened or not. >> this is both incredibly taxing and incredibly tedious to have this put upon us this early in the day. i mean he begins one of those segments by talking about a meeting that took place, and in the very same segment, in the very same 30-second clip we played he goes from there was a meeting that occurred that we wanted to get out to get ahead of the news on, and ten seconds later he is calling it an alleged meeting as if the meeting he just referred to didn't take place. i mean what time of night was he interviewed for that, that's my question? >> i don't know. >> there's that question. it is a good one. >> some of the worst of rudy guilliani i think i have ever seen. we need some glamour. come on, let's get some good shots of the guy. by the way, what is he doing with his ring. i have seen it for a couple of weeks. he is pulling at it or something. >> heidi, do we need to play it again? do you have any idea what he was saying and what would you follow-up have been had you interviewed him. >> i think we can play even more, because not only did he confirm a meeting none of us were talking about but he actually fleshed out some of the details in those meetings, which was that apparently michael cohen may have been in donald trump's office when don jr. came and said, hey, we're about to meet with the russians, so he seemed to corroborate that. >> that's not good, is it? >> he also put gates potentially in the preplanning meeting, which would be huge if true, since as we all know gates -- rick gates, who is paul manafort's business partner, has been cooperating with the special counsel for several months, which means we don't have to rely just on michael cohen for this information, that rick gates may have confirmed it and mueller may have known about it for a long time. but the bottom line is that what we're seeing here is that the number of conspiratorial meetings around the russians is increasing and so are the trump officials who participated in these meetings. >> coming up, when stormy daniels hit the headlines president trump was all about north korea. with michael cohen on the front pages, suddenly a meeting with iran sounds good to the president. we are going to talk about the real impact of the vague proposals or deflections straight ahead. first, bill karins with a vague check on the forecast. bill. >> vague deflection, an excellent weather person. today is the last day in july and the peak of the hurricane season is august, september and october. so far, so good. knock on wood somewhere around here. i will show you the fire videos. this continues to be the story of the week, maybe the story of the summer out in california. still coming in from the carr fire, over 100,000 acres burned, there have been eight fatalities in california, two of them firefighters, and we have also seen hundreds of structures burned. that fire, by the way, is like 25% contained so they still have a lot of work to do. here is a look at the map that shows the fires. here is the big one, the ferguson fire in california, the mendocino and the carr fire near redding. this is all smoke, just horrible air quality. the temperatures, still continuing the soar. near carr fire, imagine being on the fire line putting out the fires, 103, 101 to 100 over the next three days. in the east, the opposite. flash flood watches from winston-salem to atlanta. we will pick up significant rain in the next couple of days, through friday as much as two, three, four inches. aisles lated areas on have five inches. for flooding, most concerned with the north georgia area. minneapolis looks great. dallas, we'll take 90. that's 100 times better than the 110 you had only a couple of days ago. new york city one much the spots, you've been dodging the rain tropes so far. i think wednesday after will be the first shot of thunderstorms. you're watching "morning joe." we will be right back. the fact is, there are over ninety-six hundred roads named "park" in the u.s. it's america's most popular street name. but allstate agents know that's where the similarity stops. if you're on park street in reno, nevada, the high winds of the washoe zephyr could damage your siding. and that's very different than living on park ave in sheboygan, wisconsin, where ice dams could cause water damage. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline. chair is accused of hiding at least $30 million that he made before his days with trump as an unregistered foreign lobbyist for ukraine and its former pro-russian president many we are told the prosecution plans to call 35 witnesses including agents from the fbi, treasury department and irs to show how manafort allegedly stashed his wealth in overseas banks to avoid paying u.s. taxes. last week a member of robert mueller's team said he does not anticipate a government witness will, quote, utter the word russia touring the trial. but if manafort is convicted the special counsel could use it as leverage for him to talk about anything he knows pertaining to the trump campaign and russia. the trial is expected to last about three weeks. manafort also faces a separate trial on similar charges in washington in september. >> you know, it is interesting. when everything seems to collide with donald trump and things start going really bad -- >> he deflects. >> he decides he's going the take a meeting with a group of tyrants. he did north korea. >> it is a playbook. >> it is a playbook. >> people made fun of us for saying it. >> with north korea at a particular time when stormy daniels was about to hit the front pages, he went there. now he is open to meetings with the iranians. i guess after this when he gets in trouble, i gesell 'talk ab-- guess he'll talk about meeting with the martians. let's take a look at the president. >> i would certainly meet with iran if they wanted to meet. i don't know if they're ready yet. they're having a hard time right now. but i ended the iran deal. it was a ridiculous deal. i to believe they will probably end up wanting to meet, and i'm ready to meet any time they want to. and i don't do that from strength or from weakness. i think it is an appropriate thing to do. if we could work something out that's meaningful, not the waste of paper that the other deal was, i would certainly be willing to meet. >> do you have preconditions for that meeting? >> no preconditions, no. if they want to meet, i'll meet, any time they want. any time they want. it is good for the country, good for them, good for us, and good for the world. no preconditions. if they want to meet, i'll meet. >> so the reason why we needed, the world needed to have someone at the meeting with vladimir putin and donald trump is because in the past week or so since helsinki donald trump has, one, sent a signal that he wants to lift sanctions on an oligarch who's close to -- close to vladimir putin that we just put on a couple of months ago. and, two, now he is talking ben from a position of weakness, wanting to meet with iran. it is a complete 180 turn. there's very little actually to explain that, richard, but there is a playbook for donald trump. threaten to bomb a terror state, say you want to meet with a terrorist state, and state. are we going to see what happened in north korea happen with iran now? >> almost certainly not. if the administration were serious about meeting with iran, they would have done it before they unilaterally got out of the nuclear deal that, by the way, iran was complying with. >> what if putin asked him to reach out to iran? >> the other reason, the iranians want no part of it. they're not going to sit down with somebody -- the secretary of state the other day gave a big speech essentially calming for regime change. the administration is ratcheting up sanctions. again, they got out of the nuclear deal, after the president said he would meet without preconditions, the national security council under the secretary of state started issuing the preconditions on nuclear issues, on how they're treating their own people. >> you can look at what we're saying about north korea all along and you have donald trump declaring victory with north korea, when we find out now more ways they're cheating and, in fact, their nuclear program is more dangerous today, u.s. intelligence officials tell us, than it was when donald trump first started negotiating with the north koreans. >> there's a front page story in "the washington post" that says after last week's story about the nuclear program, now we learn their intercontinental missile program is continuing. the only word i take exception with is cheating. we don't know if north korea is cheating? why? because we don't know what the united states and north korea agreed to. if you look at the commune caiq that came out of the singapore summit, it was like a swiss cheese but we have had two summits. >> donald trump said americans could sleep at night, nuclear weapons were no longer a problem with noerpt. we know that's a lie. >> we know that's a lie and nothing like that was accomplished. again, we are seeing this pattern of summits where the promise is great. we don't really know what was agreed on, and then there's no -- it is wrong at both ends. there's no preparation and there's no follow-through, no engine, no caboose. >> coming up on "morning joe", the president's firing off tweets this morning aimed at a political network that's been closely aligned with republicans, at least before donald trump was around. what a brewing feud with the koch brothers could mean for the up coming mid terms. "morning joe" is coming right back. we have got a problem. a few problems actually. we've got aging roadways, aging power grids, ...aging everything. we also have the age-old problem of bias in the workplace. really... never heard of it. the question is... who's going to fix all of this? an actor? probably not. but you know who can solve it? business. because solving big problems is what business does best. so let's take on the wage gap, the opportunity gap, the achievement gap. whatever the problem, business can help. and i know who can help them do it. to me, he's, phil micwell, dad.o golfer. so when his joint pain from psoriatic arthritis got really bad, it scared me. and what could that pain mean? joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain, helps stop irreversible joint damage, and helps skin get clearer. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common, or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. since enbrel, dad's back to being dad. visit enbrel.com and use the joint damage simulator to see how your joint damage could be progressing. ask about enbrel. enbrel. fda approved for over 15 years. guys,but you've got sto be strong.st remember janet? she got cash back shopping with ebates and hasn't been skeptical since. where'd the money come from? stores pay ebates. psh!!! psh!!! then ebates pays you. psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! and they'll send you a check. psh!!!! oohh!! sign up for free. shop your favorite stores. get cash back. ebates. something to believe in. join today for a $10 bonus. you'll make my morning, buty the price ruin my day.ou? complicated relationship with milk? pour on the lactaid, 100% real milk, just without that annoying lactose. mmm, that's good. trade. i never sought their support because i don't need their money or bad ideas. they love my tax and regulation cuts, judicial picks and more. i made them richer. their network is highly overrated. i have beaten them at every turn. they want to protect their companies outside the u.s. from being taxed. i'm for america first and the american worker, a puppet for no one. >> my god. >> except for vlad. two nice guys with bad ideas. make america great again. god. >> i don't know where to start. >> there's a lot there. >> jim, first of all, would support donald trump, would support the protectionism. they obsess over government spending. they want not balanced budgets but rational budgeting. you've got the biggest spending bills ever, trump going on the biggest trade war we've been at since herbert hoover was president. you could go down the list. economically there's really no reason for charles koch or libertarian, in his case a classical liberal, to support donald trump, is there? >> no, you outlined what the koch network stands for and it is more traditional republican party topics, regulation, taxation. even immigration he is in a different place than the president. i think charles koch probably likes this tweet because one of the things that the koch network is trying to do is rebrand itself. they know how radioactive they are in politics. david koch has basically stepped back from all political operations. charles koch is now sort of the leader of that organization, probably happy to have this. but, again, i think he is definitely speaking for a distinct minority. it is the republican party as we know it right now, but certainly speaks for what we thought republicans stood for pretrump. >> heidi, they've always been very uncomfortable with some of the more hard-core republicans views on immigration. they've always been concerned about exploding military budgets, pentagon budgets, and they've always been concerned by protectionism. this was before trump, and i don't know that they had much of a choice but to do what they have done here if they want to stay true with what they believe in. by the way, donald trump can't make the kochs any more money than they already have or they already need. >> they never did like trump as you accurately point out. they didn't support him in 2016. they held out for quite a while and, yes, the issues range the gamut from the deficit spending to the muslim band. charl koch w charles koch was on the record likening that to nazi-style racism. but here's the thing. mark short is tightly aligned with the koch network and he was right there in the white house as the legislative director, and they took away the crown jewel of their agenda, which was the tax cuts. so, surprise, surprise, now mark short is leaving. he's gone after the tax cuts have been enact, and i know personally from speaking with the kochs and the representatives that as early as january they started to become very uncomfortable. they started to pick up whiffs of the protectionism that was about to come with the tariffs and the trade wars and were very concerned about this. so they've been kind of in this position for several months. it is not surprising that they would come out at this point, that they are comparing this to kind of depression-era tariffs and trade protectionism. but i do think this is significant because, joe, so many sometimes we've sat in this chair and talked about what is .that it is going to take for the republicans to kind of stand up to trump. well, all along it has been who behind them. it has been the donors threatening thm on the tax cuts for instance. the donors have outsize influence over a lot of the republican representatives, so i do think it is an important moment and a potential change in strategy that could, could show some fractures in the party just because the donors are so powerful in this party. >> still ahead, we'll talk about a new column that caught our eye. stephanie grace explains how throughout history only 19 officials have been impeached, yet somehow a group of republicans in congress think rod rosenstein deserves to be the 20th. steve scalise is now signing on to the idea. that's just ahead on "morning joe." oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. if you look at what mark meadows and jim jordan and devin nunes have been doing, they've been fighting to get more information from the justice department and, frankly, it is mind boggling that justice won't comply. they ought to want to work with us to root out the bad apples, and if putting impeachment on the table is one more tool to get them to comply with the subpoenas from congress, we need to make sure they do their job and comply. >> if this came up for a vote, you would support them? you would vote yes? >> i would. >> house majority whip steve scalise speaking last week on "fox news." political columnist for the new orleans advocate stephanie grace writes about scalise on a new piece entitled, on rosenstein impeachment, steve scalise crosses the line. stephanie joins us now. with us, professor of political science and director of international studies at stanford university, former u.s. ambassador to russia, michael mcfaul. he's also an nbc news analyst. senior writer at the weekly standard john mccormick is with us as well. stephanie, why is this the line? first of all, i guess i would start you off there. how would you be able to explain in terms of someone like steve scalise would understand that this is incredibly dangerous? >> well, i mean the first thing that hit me on seeing that is the line that i was a little surprised to see him cross. i've known steve ska lien for many years. he is very conservative. he is very much in line with the republican party. he is very much on the trump train, no question about that. but this is different. this is really, you know, for one thing breaking with the leadership, breaking with paul ryan who said, you know, really this is dangerous territory and really calling into question whether congress is going to -- where is the line? you know, how far will congress go, the republican congress, to kind of help donald trump out in this situation? and it is interesting. i have been hearing from a lot of people who know steve scalise, like him, and they were -- they were disappointed. you know, the word that comes up sometimes is i thought he had more integrity than that. >> right. >> and -- >> it is a question that, you know, i might ask from my point of view, one might say, well, she -- she's on a different team so she's trying to fight for her side. but for republicans, for the party, why is this potentially -- i mean is there any scenario, stephanie, where this ends well? >> i mean it is hard to see where it ends at all. you know, when you look at impeachment, and you mentioned in the intro i looked back at how many people have been impeached in this country. obviously become. you know, the most recent one was a local judge from here in the new orleans area, a federal judge who had a real trial before the senate. it was, you know, it was bribery, it was graft, it was sordid stuff but criminal behavior. that's what this is supposed to be. that's what impeachment is, and the trial -- you know, one thing i learned watching it is there are a bunch of senators who are former prosecutors because it was a trial, very much like what you would see in court. i cover louisiana politics so i have been in court a lot. i have watched a lot of trials of politicians. this is something totally different. rod rosenstein has not been accused of anything criminal certainly. it is a question of a difference between congress and the executive branch. to hear steve scalise basically say impeachment is a tool, it is how you get leverage, that just to me really defines it down to inappropriate level. >> not a lot of people have been impeached in history. john mccormick, so he would be number 20 if it were to actually happen. the trump train, is this what it is? it is barrelling out of control or just going so fast that those who are on it are hunkering down, hanging on for dear life? >> yeah, you know, jack gold smith had a good piece in the weekly standard saying it is muddying the waters. there are even factual errors. they hold him accountable for not vetting the steele dossier when he didn't become doj until later. he said on tv, why would he impeach rosenstein, for what crimes? rosenstein is an executive branch employee. if he has done anything impeachable or even just not living up to his job, donald trump could fire him tomorrow. >> do you believe in the sincerity of the arguments from people like steve scalise, jim jordan, mark meadows of the freedom caucus that they're concerned that documents are being withheld or is it an operation to protect the president? >> you know, i haven't talked to them directly to be honest. i think a lot is to protect the president. i think if you go point by point you could find some legitimacy to some of what they're saying, but a lot is just smoke. a lot is just muddying the water. >> ambassador mcfaul,tive top d topic. the president proposing in a joint news conference with the head of italy, meeting without preconditions with the head of iran. this is something that, as you know very well, barack obama was vilified for 11 years ago when he talked about it in a debate. what is your reaction to the president, who seems to say and actually says it out loud, it is a good thing to get along with people. it is better than the alternative, which is war? >> well, two things. first of all, yet it is another data point about how disconnected the president of the united states, the commander in chief, president trump is from his entire trump administration that works on national security. this happens time and time again where there's one policy by the administration and he seems to be kind of ad libbing, said something different. secretary pompeo said there were all kinds of preconditions, and he pops off and says, i'll meet with anybody. the second thing though is another part of his philosophy that i think is fundamentally flawed when it comes to diplomacy. he thinks that having meetings is the goal of diplomacy, whether it is kim jong-un and the singapore summit, vladimir putin and the helsinki summit and now maybe mr. rouhani and the dubai summit. i don't know where they're going to meet and they're not going to meet because the iranians do not want to meet. but he confuses that as the goal. instead, normally democrats and republican presidents alike as well as other leaders look at summits as the means to achieve american national security objectives. and in this instance i have no idea what american national security objective he's seeking to achieve by saying that. we know from that helsinki summit in my opinion, the actual summit was bad for american national skur national security interests. we don't know everything that was talked about, but what we do know about -- including me, by the way, we do know that was talked about. i think it was bad for america. so time to get everybody on the same team and understand the purposes of summits. >> so, john and rick, you've got singapore. you've got helsinki. you now have the potential of the president going to tehran, two guys in a room in three different spots in the world. you have steve scalise coming out favoring impeachment in order to curry favor with the president. what does this say to us about the level of fire among the base of republican party politicians, specifically in the house? are they so afraid of crossing this man or saying anything adverse to this man's policies that we hear relatively nothing from them? >> i don't know if it is fear or true loyalty for some of them, but i mean they're all in. they're all on board. if you look at any of the reecet examples you gave about helsinki or kim jong-un, the republicans would have been screaming bloody murder if barack obama said kim jong-un loves his people or if he gave legitimacy to vladimir putin. if you look at the polls, 90% of the republican party is on board with donald trump and these things haven't dented that support. >> most members of congress are not -- we call them leaders but they're not leaders, they're followers, and joe as well. if you can articulate why you oppose certain policies to your constituency, they will listen to you but they won't do it. they're afraid that all of these trump voters are just going to turn against them so they won't take it on. sometimes you got to say, look, i'm going to say what is right and if i lose my seat, i lose my seat. that should be the conservative position anyway. >> mr. ambassador, it has gotten ridiculous. you have a leader in the republican party, in the republican house who is actively working to help hide -- you know, cover vladimir putin's footprints in the 2016 election. when steve scalise signs on to impeach rod rosenstein, he is no longer just helping donald trump. if you look at the indictments that came down a few fridays ago, he is helping cover up vladimir putin's interference in american democracy, isn't he? >> it is incredible. i got to say it is incredible. we have been talking about this for two years. the russians violated our sovereignty, right? aren't they supposed to be about america first? aren't they supposed to be protecting our borders? well, our cyber borders were violated. we now have overwhelming evidence. we have indictments on gru military officers and yet for some reason our america first patriots won't stand up and defend america. i don't understand it. this is not democrats and republicans, folks. this is america sovereignty being violated. it is hard -- i mean i work on national security. i don't work on domestic politic goes. this is a national security issue. never in history has it happened and yet people don't want to stand up and defend our sovereignty. >> you're talking about republicans, members of the republican party, and there is -- we began this segment talking about steve scalise and this position of potentially impeaching rosenstein. it is incredible. i think that when you hear someone like ambassador michael mcfaul talking about this, given the way he has served our country and the experience he has, we should be frightened at this point. i don't understand why more people aren't stepping up. i don't get it. >> well, it is not that they're just not stepping up -- >> people in the white house. >> -- they're actively, actively signing on to bills to cover up vladimir putin's attempt to undermine american democracy. that's not hyperbole. how many russians have been indicted now? >> 25. >> 25. you have 25 russians indicted. you have the united states military and the united states intel services saying, this is a member of the gru that was at this building, these are the key strokes they made at this exact time. this is how they infiltrated the dnc. this is the russian agent that did it. i mean the evidence -- i mean vladimir putin's dna is all over this. by the way as i always say, you could go into any court and get judicial notice of that. when steve scalice signs on to actually try to stop this investigation, by firing the guy and impeaching the guy that actually is allowing it to move forward, you've got a guy, steve scalice, and by extension, anyone who does not condemn him, who is doing the work of an ex-kgb agent who is trying to undermine american democracy. am i overselling this? >> no, you are right. who's connected together. trump is saying this is a win hunt. steve scalice agrees by signing on to, frankly, embarrassing impeachment document, he's saying these 25 indictments -- >> against russians. >> against russians, that that's the witch hunt. he's defending the gru. >> he's defending the gru against the united states military. the professionals at ft. meade. the professional also in the intel community. >> so let me connect something else. if the president is willing to pay off important stars, playboy models to keep quiet, what do you think else he would be willing to be compromised on? >> ambassador michael mcfaul, thank you. thank you both very much for your reporting as well. president trump weighs in on the next dangerous chapter in america's gun debate. that's next on "morning joe." it's what this country is made of. but right now, our bond is fraying. how do we get back to "us"? the y fills the gaps. and bridges our divides. donate to your local y today. because where there's a y, there's an us. another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. president trump tweeted this morning, quote, i'm looking into 3-d plastic guns being sold to the public. already spoke to nra, doesn't seem to make much sense. senate minority leader chuck schumer responded saying, quote, your administration approved this. what kind of incompetence and dangerous governing is this? and to check with the nra? holy moly. attorneys from eight states and the district of columbia have sued the trump administration to stop the company, the texas company, from publishing the blueprints. senator nelson of florida says he plans to file legislation today to block the blueprints from being released. and that's another example of the president playing with the truth by tweeting out something that's very misleading. or he clearly doesn't -- it could be that he just doesn't know because he doesn't think. >> his administration approves the plan. >> i think there's more. >> yes. >> i think at this point we need to look at his behavior as strateg strategic. now to the ongoing crisis of migrant children and families separated at the border. "the washington post" has highlighted the dire conditions those children faced in one illinois shelter, including reports of children forced to scrub toilets with their bare hands and of a 10-year-old being denied medical attention after breaking his arm. joining us now, immigration attorney jeff goldman who successfully advocated for the reunion of of two boys ages 9 and 10 from that shelter with their parents after a federal judge ordered the government to release them. they are the first known reunions by judges order in the country. thank you so much for being on. so the status of the remaining children, how many are there? what are the continued conditions that they live in? what do you know? >> mika, there's still hundreds that have not been reunified with their families. we know about 460 of them may never find their families because the parents have been already removed and deported to their home country. leaving the children here. i think at the end of the day, most of them will be reunified with the parents. i think they'll have to do dna tests. this is going to cost the federal government millions of dollars to try to reunify all of these children. i think the taxpayers are paying and paying for nothing. this never needed to happen. >> so who pays to transport these children to various parts of the country? who pays to maintain these children on a daily basis in those various parts of the country? >> for the the two boys i helped get release from the facility in chicago, the federal government was ordered to pay for the reunification, for the flights, but we decided not to wait. we had some donors who were offering private money to fly the boys immediately to be reunified and we choose that route instead. there's been word the federal government is going to have to reimburse people who paid for these flights. we don't know. we don't really care. we just wanted to get the kids back with the mother. >> you have rare inside information of the process. how you identified these two boys and how you got them back to their parents. i think a lot of people would like to see what you were able to do for hundreds of other kids. >> we were contacted by one of the mothers. she called my law firm directly and said she was given our phone number by someone who said we could help. once we understood this is a parent whose child had been taken out of her arms at the border, we were able to sit down, focus, and went into action. shed an that point did know where her child was. it's actually remarkable. the government released her after ten days in jail, left her without any knowledge of where her child was but another woman who she met in prison was able to find her child and she called and said i think you're client is in chicago because my friend has met a friend called joco. we got in touch with the highest level of people in chicago. the federal government farms out these key tensidetention center private contractors. we called, they said we're not releasing him. we said, the mother's right here, she's able to take the child back. no, we're not releasing him. >> why not? >> the federal government could not let these contractors release the children. the federal government, after a very well-planned chaos, that they created, decided to let's call these 2,000 children orphans. therefore, parents would have to go through extensive back ground security checks not just of the parents but of anyone the parent knows or lives with. which is ridiculous when the parent is standing at the government's door asking for the child. >> what did they tell you about their time when they were being held? >> just routine. they did attend classes. they had time to play. one of my clients was left in solitary confinement for two weeks, unable to touch or communicate or talk to anyone because he broke out with a rash which the doctor at the facility said was chicken pox. it wasn't chicken pox. this child already had chicken pox. and they ended up injecting him with something to hopefully help this rash, without a parent's permission, of course the child didn't know what was happening. my two clients absolutely were forced to scrub toilets without gloves on, sweep the floors. these were 9 year old boys. >> i can't imagine the legal ramifications and potential out of all these stories. >> child abuse. >> i don't even know what -- that's incredible. >> many of the children were told if you don't do this, you're not going to see your parents. >> that's child abuse. >> absolutely. >> what would we say of -- >> if this is how -- if they forced 8 year olds, 9 year olds to scrub toilets, oh, my god, it would be an international scandal. >> joe, just a month ago, our country spent i don't know how

Transcripts For MSNBCW Morning Joe 20180809 10:00:00

Former GOP representative Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski interview newsmakers, politicians and pundits about the issues of the day. jonathan, we're probably going to get swept in like three when we get divisional playoffs. so, i mean, but, listen, it was a fun summer. mika, why don't we go to the news. in an interview last night president trump's lawyer said special counsel robert mueller will personally have a lot to answer for just hours after they rejected mueller's reported latest offer to get a sit down interview with the president. trump's legal team said they have made the counteroffer listing their conditions for access to the president who is a subject in the wide-ranging investigation of russian interference in the 2016 election. trump's attorneys also publicly voiced their desire for the probe to end. within the next three weeks and suggested that mueller would be violating doj policies, if it does not end. >> don't have an internal deadline. we are moving. i use the phrase, expeditiously. i said and i know you said, we want to see this come to closure soon. mayer? >> it is about time it ends and i also think and i hope the special counsel as sensitive to it as we are, we don't want to run into the november elections. so back up from that. this should be over with by september 1st. >> if it isn't over by september, then we have a very, very serious violation of the justice department rules that you shouldn't be conducting one of these investigations in the 60-day period. >> but, what giuliani claims would be a serious violation is, in fact, a distortion as the justice department inspector general recently wrote that the 60-day rule is not written or described in any department policy or regulation. adding it is generalized, unwritten guidance that prosecutors did not indict political candidates or use overt investigative methods in the weeks before the election not that they terminate investigations. >> mika, it's important to remember that rudy giuliani back in the 1990s, he was into the investigation of bill clinton and it was perfectly fine that ken starr conducted an investigation and went on years and years through one election after another after another. robert mueller is not going to be indicting anybody right before an election and that will be consistent with guidelines. but you have, if you're in pursuit of a couple of dozen russians who you have evidence that violated american democracy and tried to undermine american democracy, you don't end that investigation because rudy giuliani tells you to end that investigation. in fact, you need guidance from rudy giuliani and go back on just about every topic and see what he said when republicans were indicting or trying to that's more ilegitimate than this one and i wonder where is the sense of justice on the part of mueller, on the part of the justice department. the real story here is not that this case isn't going to fizzle. it's going to blow up on them. the real question is, what we talked about before. a lot more to what they did that nobody knows about yet. and mueller is going to have a lot to answer for. >> you know, willie, with rudy giuliani going around and izeyes bulging while he's talking and looking disoriented, you look for excuses for america's mayor, for being this wildly off base. again, we just showed off the top of the show all of the members of the trump administration and the trump campaign that have already been indicted and are also, that have also pled guilty. that have already pled guilty. i mean, you on top of that have 25 russians. this is an active investigation. now, rudy giuliani says they have nothing. they already have trump's second campaign manager. trump's -- i mean, indicted. trump's deputy campaign manager indicted. trump's national security adviser indicted. this is like the grand jury indicted all of these people. trump's foreign policy adviser that he said was one of his two most important, indicted. trump's first campaign manager had charges dropped. and trump's first congressional endorser now indicted. the man who put him, who put his name into nomination for republican nominee now indicted. and 5 russi25 intel agencies sa is the forensic evidence of vladimir putin, the gru, ex-kbg agents trying to undermine de c democra democracy. how does rudy giuliani even have the nerve to go on there and say what he just said? >> that is an awful lot of indictments and plea bargains. trump's legal team continues to put out these arbitrary calls based on, i don't know what, other than they want it to end to clear the president. may 10th the vice president of the united states said, quote y think it's time to wrap it up. rudy giuliani said again, and also repeated last night that bob mueller doesn't have anything. laid out everything bob mueller has shown he has. neither rudy giuliani or you or i know what he has. >> first of all, the president's team who has been delaying for eight months an interview is also saying they need to hurry up and end. but, second, just look at -- i'm just always amazed what the mayor's team will say on the record. what he said in that interview is that the president's story, if told to mueller, would put him into perjury. so, what he's saying is the president's story is wrong. it's a lie. he just admitted it on national tv because of the president's version is true, its it is not perjury trap. we have kind of blown right past the fact of what he admitted just there. >> matt miller, go ahead, joe. >> i was just going to say to nick, hey, nick, the point and people think i'm joking about it. i'm not. if i were president of the united states and all of my lawyers thought i was too stupid or too much of a liar to sit down and just talk to robert mueller, i'd fire them. but this is all we have heard consistently from donald trump's lawyers. that he's too stupid to sit down with robert mueller. that mueller will twist his head in circles. or that he's such a liar that he can't, that it would be a, quote, perjury threat. now, listen, if i were going to sit down and ask you a series of questions, there would be a problem if the editors of "new york times" called me up and said, you know, we can't let nick know on today. why not? you'll catch him in lies. my response would be, don't lie. just have him tell the truth. this is what every time giuliani and his lawyers come on and say he's too stupid or he's just not smart enough. they say that behind the scenes to keep up with the robert mueller. but every time they come on to a show like hannity say we can't let him on because he'll perjure himself. he's such a liar, he can't help himself. >> sit down with the special counsel is no joke and even an innocent person would go into that with fear and trepidation. this is the president and he has a team of qualified lawyers around him who could prep him for this and if he can learn to tell the truth for two hours he could get through it. >> learn to tell the truth. >> here jewgiuliani is, what do he think we're, he accuses miller of thinking that the president's teams are fools. i think he should be accused of thinking the american people are fools. we need to like call it out. you know, this is ridiculous. they want justice, let's do the justice. you can demonstrate justice in front of us. >> what giuliani is doing. not much of a legal strategy. this is a public relation strategy. trying to drum up outrage among republicans or perhaps some independents about this probe. we have seen it's been somewhat effective. like the polling on mueller's probe has dropped in recent weeks and months. we know he's been chipping away at people who view this investigation has integrity and should continue. and they, meanwhile, as we just pointed out, they're the ones dragging this on. that's part of this argument. it's taking too long and a waste of taxpayer money and waste of time and distraction and slowing down the president's agenda and becoming more and more of a talk point and as the doj of regulation, mueller may push pause here but he doesn't have to wrap it up before september 1st. and, of course, we saw from james comey high doe doesn't ha push pause either. >> so, matt miller all the times i laid out previously that the trump administration and trump's lawyers have called for an end to it, bob mueller has ignored those calls. is he aware and conscious and do you think he feels any pressure from the outside on his investigation? >> i doubt he feels a lot of pressure from the outside. when bob mueller was running the fbi, he handled his job with the fbi the same way he handles this one which is to put his head down and plow forward. one of the interesting things about the president's strategy is i think the time when mueller's probe was in this long, kind of five-month period between when they indicted russians for the social media interference and indicted russians for the hacking. there was a five-month period where they were really dark. the president was making some headway arguing at this was going on too long. he is now back in business. he's back out. kind of indicting russians. and to the point i think jonathan made, you know f txwok president agreed to the interview a long time ago or drawn the line a long time ago, i'm not going to agree to this interview, they're going to have a better case. but a better political case that this was going on too long. by dragging it out themself they are the ones responsible for the obstruction of justice portion of this. it could have been wrapped up a long time ago if the president aagreed to an interview. >> they're doing thedo their be but they're even horrible at this. i mean, you look at the fact that now the administration is saying that they are going to sanction russia and foreign governments for interfering with elections. they're doing that specifically because of the indictments that were laid down last month. robert mueller using the u.s. military information had the specifics of how the russians tried to destroy our election. what computer screens, what their key strokes were. what buildings they were in. the detail was so specific that we busted them red handed beyond any reasonable doubt. but think about this. if mike pence had his way and this had been shut down in may, like mike pence was saying, we would never have this evidence that, basically, showed what the russians tried to do and what they're going to try to do again in 2018. >> oh, yeah. that's just one part of it. i mean, for instance, before the mueller probe began, we were operating in which the trump campaign and trump white house was insisting that there was no contact with russians at all. >> but mike pence said, can you believe that mike pence actually had the nerve to say in 2017, we were never talking to any russians. nobody related to this campaign ever talked to any russians. we were talking to americans. just as extraordinary lie when you look at the collection of russians that they were talking to throughout 2016. >> i feel like sometimes people don't quite, it's not presented comprehensively in front of people and people don't grasp how much robert mueller and his team and sometimes we're jaded about it. for instance f , if we just fou out today there was a meeting in trump tower, we would think it is a political crisis but now it's. the issue and i think we have to bring this in here because it's a prong of this, it is not just the media pressure and it's not rudy giuliani going out there, there is intense capitol hill pressure, too. rachel maddow last night unearthed a private recording of devon nunez saying they were going to take another stab at the impeachment of rob rosen ste stein. so we have this congressional prong that seems to be working to provide some for the trump white house and to kasie because she's so plugged in on the hill. is this a serious threat from nunez or acting rogue here? >> we're going to have to ask paul ryan whether he would let something like that go forward. in theory, they could make that privilege and force his hand. but the broader point you're making, sam, is the right one. we're really headed for the real wreckeni reckoning and easy to lose sight of it and the drips out of the special counsel's office and evolving what seemed to me a set of excuses that rudy giuliani was giving to republicans that would question what is going on with robert mueller. but, look, republicans are going to have to decide at some point depending on what bob mueller is going to find. are they going to defend the president at all costs? that's what nunez is saying on that tape. he's saying no matter what mueller finds, we need to stand behind president trump. there is going to be republicans on the hill who are going to do that. and i think a wide middle that is going to have to really look inside themselves and decide, okay, how am i going to handle this? we saw that in water gate what turned the tide for richard nixon after it was clear that there was crimes that were proven that republicans in his own party turned on him. >> you know, if you look at devon nunez, if you look at some members of the freedom caucus, they remind me of the people that we conservatives used to call useful idiots that would fly down to nicaragua that the united states is doing terrible things and we're apologizing and we conservatives, we republicans called them useful idiots for always apologizing for the russians and always being part of the blame america first crowd. well, when you look at what leaders of the freedom caucus are doing, when you look at what nunez is doing, i think we need to stop saying what they're doing is trying to protect donald trump. because what they're actually doing is they're protecting vladimir putin and covering up more crimes that the united states military and intel agencies are digging at right now this very moment. they've unearthed some of his crimes. they're looking for more crimes. but you have devon nunez bragging about trying to stop the investigation and russia's interference. it's shameful. >> a division within america in here between the white house and the institutions of america in here. we're actually, basically, what i hear about trump supporting and invade the investigation, i hear him defending the mafia, the biggest mafia of the world in vladimir putin, basically. you have a have to address him d address that head on rather than being divided among us. i feel like president trump has a choice here. step up and lead the country ethically speaking and stop defending corrupt leaders around the world. >> no sign that's happening any time soon. but that would be the hope. still ahead on "morning joe" criminal charges ahead, chris collins says he will be on the ballot this november. we'll break down the government's case against him and what it means for republicans' message heading into the midterms. you're watching "morning joe." we will be right back. you've tried moisturizer after moisturizer but one blows them all out of the water. hydro boost from neutrogena®. with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back. neutrogena® wells fargo has supported community organizations like united way, non-profits like the american red cross, and our nation's veterans. we knew helping our communities was important then. and we know it's even more important today. so we're stepping up to volunteer more and donate over a million dollars every day. so our communities can be even stronger. it's a new day at wells fargo. but it's a lot like our first day. are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. all right. willie we have some clean up here. we're going to be talking music. we have some cleanup here. i must admit i must have been sleepi sleeping. >> he did an interview addressing the back lash for the first time. kasie doesn't like dave, but they do, along but they go to every phish show. >> before you go hating on dave matthews, you need to watch the movie lady burird. >> i have seen it. >> you realize where they're making fun of dave matthews, it is the mean girls making fun, you're being a mean girl about dave matthews. >> i'm hurt by that accusation, joe. i really am. the boys i went to high school with who listen to dmb just left it, i can't do it. i can't do it. >> so, sam stein, is this sort of -- is this along the line of creed. is this like a creed/nickelback backlash? >> am i wrong? >> yeah, you're wrong. >> i don't know. >> it's the fans of dave matthews. who we recall as the big fans of dave matthews from high school and college and, of course, willie, have turned us against him. >> is this what we're really talking about today? >> can we please move on. >> i have to say, willie, you know, alex says we're circling the drain. >> we're down the drain. we're not circling. >> you know, i did not for some reason like steely dan when i was in high school and college, but i like him now. some great music. >> okay. >> i'm going to help alex and try to pull us up out of the drain. mika, this is for you. chris collins of new york has been charged with insider trader and lying to investigators alleged to have worked with his son to avoid significant losses on a inesthavestment. prosecutors say collins was at a congressional picnic at the white house last year when he learned that they received bad news about a drug trial for the company's only product. he served on a board for three years until 2017 and remains one of the biggest shareholders. the congressman frantically attempted to reach his son, cameron, who he tipped off to the corporate information days before it was made public. they claim cameron collins and several others used the information to avoid more than $700,000 in losses. when news of the failed drug trial was made public, the shares of the company aplplumme. he refuted the allegations against him. >> the charges that have been levied against me are meritless. and i will mount a vigorous defense in court to clear my name. i look forward to being fully vindicated and exonerated ending any and all questions related to my affiliation. as i fight to clear my name, rest assured i will continue to work hard for the people and constituents of the 27th congressional district of new york and i will remain on the ballot, running for re-election this november. >> you know, collins is just the latest member in the trump orbit to find himself in legal jeopardy over financial gain, including at least one with the same prosecutor. his former personal attorney as president, michael cohen, also as you know, under investigation by the southern district of new york for tax fraud. that, according to "wall street journal." cohen simultaneously served the president and had a business and cashed in on his connections. a top donor agreed to paid cohen $10 million if he successfully pushed a project. sitting with questions of financial misdoings. forbes recently, man, what a report, that commerce secretary wilbur ross' practices have sparked lawsuits and reimbursements and a fine from sec and tom price was also questioned about a favorable purchase of a stock at the time that was also at the center of collins' arrest. price was fired amid scandals and former epa administrator scott pruitt talk about the swamp. it's now up to trump's neck. he, of course, intendinattended white house and then he was allowed to resign. but, willie, there is such a -- such a culture of corruption there. somebody yesterday said that collins had to feel picked on when you had wilbur ross, in their words, doing insider trading at a pace the guy thought he only had two weeks to live. and, you know, since trump says he's only good until 11:00 a.m. in the morning, that was a pretty busy 9:30 to 11:00 block to do insider trading. you look. look at the "forbes" article. just a culture of corruption and, of course, as they always say, the fish rots from the head. >> matt miller, these are just the people around, profiting off hotels and ivanka had to shut down her clothing line. they put money in a trust that does not isolate them from profits, certainly, to put it mildly. >> i think joe hit the nail on the head when he called it a culture of corruption. democrats have the ability now to make this case that there is this culture that starts at the top with donald trump and starts with his family members and pervasive throughout his administration and also list the treasury secretary on government planes and under inspector general investigations and now moving it over to a member of congress. the problem for other members of congress. this is not to say every republican member of congress is corrupt. of course, not. but every one is allowing this to go unchecked. no one in a leadership one on tg we need to stop it and investigate it and shine some sunlight. that becomes a political vulnerability for all of them. one of the interesting subplots of this chris collins thing, he is the second person to literally have committed a crime on the white house grounds. they made that call while he was standing on the white house grounds. it's the same place where mike flynn, in his white house office sat down with the fbi and lied to the fbi. the highest crime rate of any neighborhood in washington. >> i don't know if i'll go that far but maybe. you know, the point that i keep coming back to is 2006. that year democrats mounted a fairly robust culture of corruption campaign to take back the house. and it was effective. you talk to any democratic strategists that work in those races. that was the theme that they resonate the most. this go around you have arguably way more data points to point to here as we listed right now. but i don't see democrats making this case. i mean, matt's right. i mean, you could argue that a really effective campaign strategy say, look, republicans are letting this go unchecked and we have x, y and z and you need to elect us so we can actually bring some ethics and disability and oversight to this process. but that's not really in the democratic playbook and i'm not entirely sure why. >> democrats almost have an embarrass of riches to figure out how to run and some people who are nervous on that side that they will not come with a clear message, it will be too muddled. if they regain control of the house, something that trump allies have told me. more than impeachment proceedings which could be a gift to the president. day after day and where they're marching up every single person who has any affiliation in front of the cameras on capitol hill and bogging them down that way. to follow up on matt's point, it's remarkable. the indictment has the listed time in which he makes the call to his son to tell him this. footage of him on the phone at that moment. there aren't too many occasions where we have live streams of insider trading. >> beyond democrats, iful feel like we ne to have -- we have politicians helping write the ethics rules of insider trading and all of these things corrupt. we need to go back beyond the parties and we need to go back to the people and people need to vote for people who are ethical. go back to the people and people want ethics and valus and all of these things. i want to say one thing, though. he needs to have a fair investigation is the fair thing in here. so, we do need to give due process due process so we don't jump to conclusion but we need to watch all the warning signs in here and go back, again, to saying what is right and what is wrong. >> well, kasie hunt, that is absolutely right and to an extent i think people are open to the truth. joe found out on the campaign trail himself giving his constituents bad news in realtime, even if they didn't like hearing it, that helped him actually at the polls. but in this case, the truth is being so devalued. i just worry that it's going to be a very difficult landscape running up to the midterms and beyond for republicans especially for some of who are participati participating. >> that answers sam's question why democrats aren't using this broadly. they tried this against president trump and they tried to make everything stick and nothing sticks to the guy, it seems. i'm not convinced based on my reporting that is going to be true in the midterm elections and strategists are saying people are demanding more from their candidates, but part of the reality is, too, democrats aren't calling for collins to be shoved out of office. that's partly because, you know, they face their own ethical problems. i mean, bob menendez fought an indictment while he remained for quite a while in a powerful post on the foreign relations committee. this is a problem that goes across the establishments in washington and i think people are frustrated by that. and don't forget, one thing animating the democratic base right now is opposition to corporate money in elections. one litmus test issue for a lot of progressive candidates is are they refusing to take donations from corporate packs? that's also something that leadership in washington is grappling with. they're not sure what to do about it. i do think they're creating some problems for themselves in that way. still ahead, another trump campaign figure facing serious legal jeopardy. we'll check in on paul manafort's trial. how an alleged $16 million spending spree came into play. that's coming up on "morning joe." you're turning onto the street with i get rewarded explowherever i go. going out for a bite. rewarded! going new places. rewarded! learn more at theexplorercard.com testified that the former trump campaign chairman had at least $16 million in unreported income from ukraine, which manafort allegedly spent between 2010 and 2014. just a few years before he sought an unpaid role leading the president's campaign. after the conclusion of testimony by manafort's deputy rick gates there was a tense moment between counsel prosecutors when ellis discovered an expert witness had been in the courtroom for other testimony. as "the washington post" described ellis erupted saying that he typically bars all witnesses, save the case agent from observing the proceedings and thought he had done so in this case. u.s. attorney uzo asonye said he believed the transcript and ellis snapped. i don't care what the transcript said. maybe i made a mistake. don't do it again. >> matt miller, the judge, the judge has been bheads with the prosecution and doesn't seem to like the prosecuting attorneys too much. what is going on there? >> i think a little case of black robitis. he is known to be a tough judge and he has been out of line here. if you look at him here. almost like when your parents say, doesn't matter what i said, do this anyway. sort of admitting that even if he made a mistake he's blaming the prosecutors on it. he is accusing one of the prosecutors of crying. i think the ultimate question is what impact it will have on the case. if this were a much closer case, i bet the prosecution would be pretty worried that his remarks some of which would be in front of the jury would have an impact. such strong evidence against paul manafort and such strong evidence of his guilt that it is not likely to tip at end the of the day. >> i was surprised when the judge told one of the attorneys to stop crying in the courtroom. he's like, i'm not crying. it's just like yesterday where they said, but you said he could. read the transkrcript. i don't care what's in the transcript. not the sort of stable justice that you want overseeing an important case like this. what is his story, what is his background. >> let me just say something about the crying. that particular prosecutor that was crying. he locked up the family in new york and actually, actually had to be around the clock protection because while he was investigating, they tried to assassinate him and have him killed. i doubt he was crying in the courtroom because of tough words from the judge. this judge has been on the bench for long time. you know, judges, look, they have lifetime terms for a reason. to make them insulated from political pressure and lack of accountability. i think largely we like that, but there are always down sides that come with the good sides. you see some judges that have this arrogant approach in the courtroom and you hear from people who practice in that court that judge ellis is like that in a lot of cases, but he's also a judge that i think when reporters are in the room and high profile and likes to show off a little bit for the press and i think you're seeing some of that here. >> all so fascinating. the ohio congressional race that was already too close to call gets even tighter, thanks to a couple hundred uncounted votes. we'll show you where the candidates stand this morning. we'll be right back. booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline. it's a revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999, intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts. so you wake up ready to train for that marathon. and now, save up to $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. ends wednesday. welcome back to "morning joe". we're having sort of a battle of the bands and it is going in the downward direction. i'm going to our control room. alex, do you have a confession, a rock and roll confession >> huey lewis. top of the list there. partridge family to some people. but i'm picking huey. >> these are all classics. abba, "waterloo." beethoven's fifth. one are two pieces by tchaikovsky. >> hall and oats. >> willie, you don't have any problem with huey, do you? he was a sound track to ""back to the future"." >> i didn't know he wasn't cool. i think he's great. >> everybody just stop. we're all so old. still ahead president trump and his legal team appear to be playing "hardball" with robert mueller over a possible interview. member of the judiciary committee senator richard blumenthal will join us to weigh in on that and rudy giuliani's timeline for the russia probe, rudy expects it to be done soon so i guess we should all hurry. plus, we'll talk to the michigan demonstrate who is poised to become the first muslim woman in congress. rashida talib will be our guest coming up on "morning joe". (ford chime) it's the ford summer sales event and now is the best time to buy. you ready for this, junior? yeah, i think i can handle it. no pressure... ...that's just my favorite boat. boom. (laughs) make summer go right with ford, america's best-selling brand. and get our best deal of the summer: zero percent financing for sixty months on f-150. right now, get this special offer on f-150: zero percent financing for 60 months - during the ford summer sales event. are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec®. it's starts working hard at hour one. and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. presidency effective at noon tomorrow. >> that was president richard nixon, 44 years ago last night as today marks the anniversary of the first and only time a president resigned from office, joe. >> mika, you had said before that your father, obviously, knew richard nixon, and after his wife pat died, that he actually came over to your house, and you remember seeing him as such a broken man. >> yeah. it was, obviously, i think the loss of his wife. but he was sitting on our porch on a chair was pulled out from the table with a setting sun behind him down the hill and i just sort of couldn't believe what i was seeing. so much history and so much turmoil for this country all wrapped up in his story. >> but, really, willie, it's interesting the only time richard nixon broke down in public. anybody saw him breaking down in public was when his wife pat died. at the funeral he broke down so much he was embarrassed about it later. but that 44 years ago, john meacham says it's his first memory of any news event despite the fact all he talks about is the french and indian war. we should talk more about watergate. >> walter isaacson is here, the "new york times" tweeted out their front page. still takes your breath away for a skorngsd president of the united states resigns from office. >> yeah. the issue here is that it resonates with what happens today. it's an obstruction of justice. nixon afterwards and mika remembered him being sad. afterwards nixon became kind of a statesman. he talked about the world, doing discussions. he would do these amazie ing to. during his time in office he became unhinged when it came to justice. we have to go back and look at things. >> walter, i'm curious, when you look at the people that got indicted, got in trouble during the nixon administration, we went over a laundry list and, of course, nixon was in for six, seven years before things really completely blew up for him. just in a year's time, a little over a year's time donald trump has seen his first campaign manager or second campaign manager indicted in a trial right now. his first national security adviser indicted, pled guilty. his deputy campaign manager indicted, pled guilty. a guy that worked for him through the inauguration who, of course, already pled guilty. one of his top campaign foreign policy advisers pled guilty and is pleading with the government. his first congressional endorser and member of his transition team has pled guilty. along with 29 russians. we don't know what the 29 russians have been indicted, what they have to do with the trump campaign and whether there is a conspiracy to influence the election. that's part of the investigation, but even if you just look at the list there's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven -- six or seven people that have already been indicted and most of them pleading right now, guilty. how does that stack up with nixon and watergate even seven years in? >> well, it's stinkier in a way because he said drain the swamp. so many of these things involved just people wanting to make large sums of people. people slurping at the trough like the congressman doing insider trading on the white house lawn. nixon at least wasn't lining his pockets. you see that with the trump hotels and their businesses and finances. this is the type of thing voters rebelled against which is this pure line your pockets and get rich type of corruption. the other thing is nixon did like trump try to discredit the institutions of our society. discredit our norms. but nixon never went as far as this to call, you know, to try to obstruct justice publicly in a way that trump is doing. so, it's amazing that we've gotten back to this. >> it is amazing. sam stein, of course, you're reporting always tries to take it to a higher level, 30 years after, of course, richard nixon resigned you are, of course, digging deep into a controversy about the dave matthews band and what happened in chicago 30 years later. >> don't do it. >> and scandal, sam, that according to your reporting was called poopgate. explain. >> okay. >> it's breakfast time. >> we were doing so well. >> you want to jump off of walter's point? >> i'm only quoting your tweet, sam. you just tweeted it like ten minutes ago. don't sit there acting all innocent. follow up on walter's -- >> well, i'll say -- >> talk about watergate or poopgate. >> and maybe you can weigh in on this. >> i was struck by how a lot of what we see with trump, we sort of don't take as seriously as maybe we should because it happened so out in the open. so for instance, a tweet he put up a week and a half ago, roughly, in which he basically was talking about firing jeff sessions for not closing down the investigation. i thought at the time that was pretty wild. then i thought to myself, having read the memo and sent it privately to jeff sessions about getting rid of the investigation into russian collusion and that memo has been read by a journalist we would think this is the craziest thing ever. because he tweets it out in the open part of us think this is trump being trump. same thing to a lesser degree with the respective break in. so if the russians had literally broken into the dnc and stolen a file cabinet as opposed to hacking e-mail account, maybe we would conceive of this differently because it would be physical as opposed to something on the internet. i'm wondering to a degree, how does this affect our thinking? >> well all of our norms have been totally disrupted and when you set out to break norms, norms get broken. we now have a society in which people can do things like openly to affect justice. openly line their pockets. and somehow we've become ignored to it. if we watch it in plain sight it's like they destroyed all the norms. the biggest norm of all which even nixon tried to do, i'm trying to bring people together. i'm a unifier. here you have a guy who outright tries to divide the couldn't. >> yeah. >> yep. >> you had watergate tapes and now this time around you just have everything that the president says on television. there's no tapes to be uncovered. as you see with us we have sam stein, walter isaacson. the fact that omarosa thinks he's unhinged. >> omarosa can secretly tape the president of the united states inside the white house, the fact that his lawyer and so-called fixer is taping the white house, what do you think the russians and the chinese -- >> what a useful idiot is what they are thinking. the fact that he would bring in someone close, that he would be so unbelievably reckless to bring in someone close who would audiotape their conversations. what kind of people do you have around you? again, he needs a wall around him. white house reporter for the associated press jonathan lam erelameer is with us. kasie hunt is with us. >> joe, are the google dolls cool or uncool? >> that's a good one. let me tell you something. the google dolls are cool. amazing. iris amazing. you know what if you don't like the dolls, if you don't think black balloons aren't the best songs of the '90s turn off the tv right now. >> and eamon javers is here. >> he often sings his questions to the white house staff and the president in tune. >> i was more of a punk rock guy than a google dolls guy. they were harder core and then drifted more into a poppy kind of thing. i liked them before they sold out. >> i liked them before they sold out and after they sold out. it's great. >> you're good with all of it. >> anybody like pink floyd? >> we all liked pink floyd. >> got it. >> okay. here we go. >> in an interview last night president trump's lawyer said special counsel robert mueller will personally have a lot to answer for just hours after they rejected mueller's reported latest offer to get a sit down interview with the president. trump's legal team said they made a counter offer. i'm sure it's fantastic. >> there was one of my favorite episodes on the simpsons was when lionel huts said to mr. burns we have a counter offer, we think you'll like it. and actually mr. burn turned it around and he wrote zero. he picked it up and said we'll take it. release the hounds. that's what robert mueller is thinking right now. you have a counter offer. listen, i got what they call a subpoena. i'll just put that one on you any time you want. >> this is incredible. so trump's team listed their conditions in their counter offer for access to the president who is the subject in the wide ranging investigation of russian interference in the 2016 election. which endangers this country. trump's attorneys also publicly voiced their desire for the probe to end within the next three weeks. >> that's not going to happen either. >> and suggested mueller would be violating doj policies if it does not. >> actually that's a lie. >> giuliani went on to challenge the special counsel's motive for seeking an interview and suggested mueller will soon be the one under screw ti. >> i. >> not true. >> we offered them an opportunity to do a form of questioning. he can say yes or no. we can do it. if he doesn't want to do it. he knows the answers to every question that he wants to ask. he's going to ask him did you tell comey to go easy on flynn. the president will say no i didn't. hey, bob, you know it. why do you want to get him under oath. do you think we're fools. you want to trap him in perjury. we're not going to let you do that. i've never been involved in an investigation on either side that's more illegitimate than this one, that's so more obviously illegitimate and i wonder where the sense of justice is on the part of mueller, on the part of the justice department. the real story here is not that this case isn't going to fizzle, it will blow up on them. the real question is what we talked about before, there's a lot more to what they did that nobody knows about yet and mueller is going to have a lot to answer for. the investigation here has to be on the investigators because we cannot let this happen again in american history. we may not have a president as strong as president trump. unless a president could have really been cracked by this. >> walter, i'm an older guy. i know you, of course, are not, you're a spring chicken. >> yes, he is. >> us older guys do you remember that unbelievable saying in absence of malice when it was said, i got these things called subpoenas, now you can talk to me now or i can give you a subpoena. and either way i'm going to talk to you and i'm going to get the truth out. rudy giuliani of all people trying to negotiate whether donald trump is going to talk to robert mueller is so rich because it was rudy giuliani in 1998 who told charlie rose when we're talking about bill clinton, it doesn't matter whether the president wants to talk to the special counsel or not, if he's given a subpoena, he has to comply and sit down and talk to the special prosecutor. >> you know, rudy giuliani keeps going on air to make it seem more and more like there's smoking guns all over the place. he's doing the greatest disservice to a client i've ever seen a lawyer do. then he says well we don't want to testify because trump may accidentally tell the truth or he may end up lying and both will be bad. well it's just ridiculous what he says trying to trap him in perjury, it wouldn't be perjury if trump went there and just told the truth. so i don't know why giuliani is out there unless he's some sort of weird agent trying to undermine his client and to make this investigation look even more stronger than it is. >> he's out there because he wants, it's a very simple political objective which is to turn public opinion against robert mueller. only way you'll do that is hammering him every day. main people who are receptive are people who watch fox news. it's not just republicans who are souring on robert mueller specifically it's viewers of fox news who are souring on robert mueller's investigation, that's because there's a constant drum beat of negativity from rudy giuliani -- >> real quickly, let's say it quickly. robert mueller has not been leaking. >> of course. >> he's an honorable man. he's been extremely successful in this. he's a life long republican. he's a person who has served the country with honor. how can they have no shame when they do this? >> this is tactical and not just with the mueller investigation. i go back to this quote that trump gave. he talked cynically about his anti-press comments, this whole fake news thing. he said very clearly the reason i'm doing it is because i want to be so when you report critical stories of me half the country doesn't believe it. >> that's obvious. they have been softening the ground whatever mueller comes out with they discredit it to people who believe this. they have been reporting this from vice president pence down to rudy giuliani. time to wrap it up. they are giving a directive to robert mueller to wrap up the investigation. it's worth taking a step back. robert mueller is looking at russian interference into the election. >> we've seen very little concern of that from the president of the united states. we know, of course, he missed the opportunity in helsinki to chastized putin on the world stage. we know justin last week or so, we saw that display of force at the white house where his national security officials did finally talk about steps we'll take. warned about russia doing it again in the mid-terms this fall. but that felt like a moment of president versus presidency. they seem very out of step. hours later donald trump goes to a rally in pennsylvania. i was there and said called the whole thing a hoax, it was a hindrance and holding back our ability to have a better relationship with russia. this is what they were doing. mueller will not leak, talk publicly and they are just going hammer away. as you say weigh down public opinion and eventually to when mueller does deliver this report to have half the country not believe it. >> walter, i want to ask you a question. the way i hear it is a bunch of bully, bullying everybody, and distracting everyone from the truth. if you go back to nixon, how do you take back the discussion, actually? how do you go back to what is real, what is unreal and what is untrue? >> the way we did it is the way we did it when it happened with nixon. honorable people in the republican party. honorable people in all parties. honorable people in the administration step forward and say no this is not what america is about. we try to tell truth. >> a lot of republicans are not stepping forward and playing the trump game. what's your message to them. how do we speak to fox news people audience. >> in the mid-term elections people say this culture ever corruption is not something i want to have continue. leadership in the republican party, they will follow what they hear. it only happens if the mid-terms vote out some of the people who have been spineless. >> we know congressional republicans are helping the president do his bidding on this. they presented the freedom caucus did anyway on the idea of impeachment. rod rosenstein deputy attorney general is overseeing the special counsel's investigation. rachel maddox played last night in primetime devon nunes saying they would like to get rod rosenstein but wait until after kavanaugh has been seated on the supreme court. what's happening on the capitol hill as they rally around the president. >> you look at the president and say those voters who were supporting the president those are our voters too. therefore, we got to do what the president wants. we have to appeal to those voters. at the same time you have this bizarre sort of long form slow motion negotiation, the ultimate art of the deal in term of whether the president will sit down or not sit down. look at the timeline. you see rudy giuliani on tv saying we want mueller to wrap this up, we want it to be over by september 1st. but you have these offers and counter offers going back and forth. it seems as if the giuliani team has an incentive to stretch this out than wrap it up. and push it past the september timeline. and then at some point the department of justice will not want to move forward with anything dramatic if you get too close to that mid-term election because we'll have the same problem we had back in 2016 with announcements coming out that could be accused of manipulating the election. if you look at the series of offers and counter offers going back and forth about whether the president will sit down. i did some reporting on this yesterday. some people involved in all of this who feel there will be more rounds of offers and counter offers. i think that ultimately helps the president push this out as far as he can, push it closer to the mid-term election. that gives them many months to try to tilt public opinion against the mueller investigation. the longer they stretch this out the better they are despite what rudy giuliani is saying. >> so, you obviously, are covering the chris collins investigation. give us a sense of where it goes from here and how it plays into all the problems plaguing this presidency or the questions plaguing this presidency. >> chris collins said last night up in buffalo he'll fight this. he thinks he's done nothing wrong. he said he lost money himself personally on this insider trade. that's not the issue. what the prosecutors have alleged is that what chris collins did was use his position on the board of the company to illegally tip off his son and his son was then able to avoid masses losses. when that stock went down 92% when it turned out that the drug that the company made didn't work at all that was a dramatic loss for the son and some of the friends and family around the son, they were facing that loss. able to sell and get out ahead of it and dump that loss on other unsuspecting people in the financial markets. collins said i held on to mimi shares personally i didn't do anything wrong. i lost millions of dollars on this trade. prosecutors say all you need is somebody with a fiduciary obligation to the company which collins did have then tips and then a trade and then you have illegal nude e insider trader. collins will fight eight and run for re-election. will he be able to win while still under indictment and that's possible. >> all right. >> cnbc's eamon javers. thank you so much for being on. >> a punk rock fan. >> i want you to play the ramones all day on your office computer. >> i doubt we'll do that. mika, we met -- thank you. by the way, it was great to meet jimmy buffett a couple of weeks ago. >> you were on stage on broadway playing. >> jimmy was nice enough. >> margaritaville. >> this is a guy that bob dylan told rolling stone of his favorite songwriter. he's playing fenway tonight. wish i could be there. he's playing fenway tonight. he fills it up like every year. kind of crazy. >> so cool. still ahead on "morning joe," senator richard blumenthal joins the table. he'll weigh in on the secret recording of devon nunes. you're watching "morning joe". we'll be right back. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? ♪ hawaii is in the middle of the pacific ocean. we're the most isolated population on the planet. ♪ hawaii is the first state in the u.s. to have 100% renewable energy goal. we're a very small electric utility. but, if we don't make this move we're going to have changes in our environment, and have a negative impact to hawaii's economy. ♪ verizon provided us a solution using smart sensors on their network that lets us collect near real time data on our power grid. (colton) this technology is helping us integrate rooftop solar, which is a very important element of getting us to our renewable energy goals. ♪ (shelee) if we can create our own energy, we can take care of this beautiful place that i grew up in. ♪ another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. welcome back. willie, i'm looking at some of these songs. we're getting responses. i got to say a couple of great ones and, again, you can't pick a cool band and say oh, well my guilty pleasure is elvis costello that concentrate count he's the king of cool. here's some great ones. abba, "bread." who can listen to david gates. gary puckett and the union gap. the archies. let me tell you something about archies "sugar sugar." '60s radical, radical generation. "sugar sugar" one of the top five songs of the 1960s. and don't dis archie and jughead. that song rocks. have you figured out an uncool band yet that you're willing to mention? >> i'm going to stick with mine. i feel no guilt about the dave matthews band. there's a large faction of americans who don't like dave matthews and i picked him up in college. good memories around it. no apologies. but there's a backlash against dave matthews. >> bunch of hippies. >> in the next segment sam stein wants to ask you about the steve miller band. >> come on. >> sam not here at the moment. let's turn to united states senator who is waiting patiently -- >> counselor you opened up the door on the steve miller band. you're not going to stop. steve miller band had a couple of extraordinary albums like from '75, '77, '78. >> take it up to stein. >> hit me where i live. "take the money and run." this guy was great on immigration policy. >> let's get right into it. a member of the progressive group provided the rachel maddox show of you a do of david nunes speaking at a fundraiser in washington last week for kathy rogers. in the recording nunes and rogers said rod rosenstein cannot be impeached but only because it would imperil the nomination of brett kavanaugh. say he should not impeached. nunes spoke about the importance of protecting president trump. >> >> so i don't think you'll get argument from most of our colleagues. the question is the timing of it right before the election. >> the senate has to start -- >> the senate would have to drop everything they are doing and start to, start with impeachment of rod rosenstein. then you take the risk of not getting kavanaugh approved. so it's not a matter of impeaching rod rosenstein it's a matter of timing. so there in lies your catch 22 situation where -- it puts us in a tough spot. that's why we have to keep this. we have to keep the majority. if we do not keep the majority, all of this goes away. >> that's the voice of devin nunes. nunes office did not return calls seeking a response. joining us now a member of the judiciary and armed services committee senator richard blumenthal. thank you for your patience. let's talk about what you just heard. not news that devin nunes believes rod rosenstein should be impeached. he said it publicly. the freedom caucus introduced the idea of impeaching rod rosenstein as deputy attorney general. house speaker paul ryan came out the next day and said he did not support that, the impeachment of rod rosenstein. what nunes is saying there we'll put it to the side for a moment while we get kavanaugh on the bench. but we come back to the idea that rod rosenstein should be impeached. what does that tell you and how seriously do you take that? >> that tells me republican leadership is putting priority on confirmation of brett kavanaugh. we may be the one to determine whether the president has to comply with the subpoena. this strategy is really the most craven and brazen kind of politics in its approach to undermining the rule of law and the second point to be made here is that the reason for retaining a republican majority is simply to protect the president against potential consequences that may involve other subpoenas uncovering other wrongdoing. this culture of corruption is so pervasive, wilbur ross, other members of the cabinet, the president himself violating the clause by taking foreign benefits and payments. we have sued the president, other members of congress have join my lawsuit. it's unparalleled in american history. >> as you look ahead at the dominos that could fall if somehow rod rosenstein were impeached is that to put somebody in place, do you believe who could then fire robert mueller. is that the ultimate goal? >> that's a really key question because people look at the special counsel and say his position is critical, which it is. but ultimately the one responsible for approving the potential indictment, all of the budget, all the personnel of the special counsel is, in fact, the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. so in firing him or impeaching him or unrecusing the attorney general to fire him is really at the core of what i think this strategy is. >> senator, a question for you. nunes is known as somebody who hates the investigation, who has cast doubt on it. but seeing the number for house republicans echo his comments, rogers echoing his sense of the strategy was new to me and i wonder if you take that to mean that the full house leadership is actually secretly behind this plan to impeach the deputy attorney general? >> in my view the republican leadership is ambivalent. it knows what the right thing to do here is. it needs the grit and back bone to stand up and really uphold the rule of law. and that applies to brett kavanaugh as well because right now the republicans are engaged in a conscious effort to hide and conceal documents that are necessary to evaluate brett kavanaugh's nomination. they've not only limited the scope of the documents to exclude all the relevant paper and communications involving brett kavanaugh's service in the bush white house as staff secretary but they've also turned over the screening process to a team of republican lawyers headed by a lawyer who was, in fact, kavanaugh's deputy in the bush white house. and now is serving as a lawyer to a number of people in the bush administration or formerly in the bush administration like brett kavanaugh and they are cherry picking, pre-screening, sanitizing documents so that we have now filed a freedom of information request, we the democrats on the senator judiciary committee, we did it yesterday, because it's the last resort. >> you know, walter, getting back to devin nunes and what devin nunes' strategy is going against rod rosenstein, even the white house sources are telling reporters that the white house considers nunes and the freedom caucus' attacks on rod rosenstein to be a joke. they know it's not serious. they know it's not going anywhere. yet you just wonder why paul ryan is allowing it to continue, and people are now looking about and trying to figure out what paul ryan's legacy is going to be. right now if this continues his legacy is allowing a guy to destroy the intel community's bipartisanship, historically bipartisan nature and secondly allowing members to run around and try to provide cover for vladimir putin by destroying an investigation that looks that putin is crying to undermine american democracy. it's pretty straightforward isn't it? >> the white house considers it a bit of a joke that nunes is acting this way but it's not a joke. we used to be able to have a consensus in congress that people are going to rise above partisanship at times like when we got attacked by russia. i would love to turn it to the senator because i don't quite -- i mean you remember the times when there would be republicans and democrats who say, okay, this transcends our partisan differences, let's figure it it out. other than bob corker and jefr flake who are honest. republicans in the senate are talking to you and saying maybe we ought to move this along. i know mark warner has had some success on the intelligence committee doing that. is there some hope there? >> i always have hope. that's the reason i go to work in the mornings. but i am deeply disappointed in the republican leadership in the senate as well as the house. they've really collapsed like rusty lawn chairs. and the real crying need is to return to that bipartisan consensus. we face an ongoing threat. not only the special prosecutor looking at putin and the potential conspiracy involving the trump campaign in the past and obstruction of justice which is unfolding before our eyes in real-time it's looking forward what putin is doing right now, the pervasive and ongoing threat to our democracy is what's really important. >> looking into the florida voting wells too and it's amazing to me that both parties don't want to say let's stop russia from hacking our election system. >> they are saying the right thing. but what's missing is action. and that will require republicans really standing up to be counted. as they did during watergate. >> senator richard blumenthal, thank you so much for being on "morning joe" today. still ahead, in 2016 she was booted out of a luncheon for heckling donald trump. now she's on course to become the first muslim woman in congress. rashida tlaib joins us next on "morning joe". oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. muslim woman ever elected to congress and thank you for being on this morning. >> thank you for having me. >> so let's start with tezy questio -- the easy question but i have to love it. why your running? >> look, i'm really tired of being outside of the ring, especially now during a time when our country, i think, a lot of us are going through what i really believe is a troubling time in history where we don't feel like we belong or that we feel we're being left behind no matter your background. i think a lot of us on the 13th congressional district want to be able to have equal access to thrive and that's what i ran on and that's why i felt this need to run and to really fight back for all the families that are my neighbors, the people that, you know, helped raise me in the community, and i'm really excited for the opportunity to actually be able to be a voice for all of them. >> rashida tlaib, first congratulations for winning. my question for you is you're a woman of color, you're of muslim -- you are a muslim, of immigrant origin. your parents are immigrants. you just won. how are your going to speak to some of the white americans who are scared, who are scared of they are going to be a minority, scared of people of color, of immigrants. how do you reach out to them and make sure they are on board with you and see you as an ally. >> it has to be through action not just through words. so for me my congressional district is predominantly african-american and white. many of them supported me primarily because of my history in the michigan legislature and what i stood up for. and many of them are going to have to have that direct human contact with me and the work i'm going to do. and throughout the district i'll create neighborhood service centers getting people to every day issues will go hand-in-hand with the legislative work i do. it has to be through actions. they have to be able to proudly say yes she represents my ovals, she represents what i'm about. so many of us want to only be able to label people. she's a child of immigrant. she's palestinian. she's arab. she's a woman. but i'm a girl who grew up one wayne county like them. many of them really relate to the fact of my struggles as a new mom with the public school system, growing up in again in detroit with all of the different issues with poverty and challenges that we face every single day. so it's going to be through action and going to be able to be spoiled by me and they are going to forget that i may not look like them, but i think me having the similar challenges and me having their backs is what i think they are going remember and why they are going to be able to continue to support me. >> fair enough. yet we have a president who is working on divisive politics in this country. it's about us and them and fear is a major role in that. how are you going to address that? you know in terms of divisiveness, in terms of fear of muslims. you know beyond action, how are you addressing that sentimentally even in your own words. >> our country is not divided. people truly believe that. i believe we're disconnected. i stood up when president trump called mexicans rapists. i stood up and absolutely said that's the most unamerican thing company have said. absolutely unfair. i stood up for my african-american neighbors when police brutality is still number one issue. black lives matter to me is something that i stand up for because as an american we all should be standing up for. we are just as connected. that's the problem with our country. that disconnection is why, you know, president trump and all the different people that are surrounding him are able to be able to be loud and be able to continue to divide us is because we're not talking to each other and i'm hoping to be able to build a lot of that connection so that people can see just how beautiful our country is and we'll continue to be able to be. >> beautiful country. >> we just saw the video footage of the august 2016 donald trump speech which you were thrown out of. walk us through that moment. what were you proifting. what were you trying to communicate there. can any line be drawn from that day to what happened this week with you now running for office? >> you should know that moment. it wasn't just me. it was 12 other women that were with me that day. every two minutes he was asked a question. this was the first time ever that the detroit economic club didn't allow us to ask questions. he was a candidate that wanted to run for president of the united states. people don't always ask me what did you say? i asked him have you ever read the u.s. constitution. it was important to me because he was pushing for the muslim ban. he was pushing for things i thought was against core values of our country and against the essence of the u.s. constitution. and all of us as i stood there, you know, i did it as a former michigan state representative and a lot of women knew i was coming they felt a sense of like okay if she can do it i can do it. i wanted to help elevate their voices and stand up. i'm proud of that moment because it was the most american thing i ever could have done to push back on that rhetoric. he was spewing out so much of information but not really getting to the core issues that were important to me and the other women that were in that room. >> sam stein here. i think to mika's point about women running for office, the man you will likely replace, representative john conyers was ousted in part because he was accused of being a serial sexual harasser of people in his office. he denies it, of course, but that was the context of him leaving office. so i'm not asking you to speak specifically to his case, but in general how much do you think this me too movement has both p deciding to run, but also voting sentiment about with what type of public officials they want holding public office? >> i think, you know, it's really important to know congressman conyers was pretty courageous. one of the things you should know about him is he voted against the iraq war when it was unpopular. he voted against the patriotic act, one of the very few. we never had to check him on his votes. obviously the "me too" movement is something that is very close to me because i'm a victim of sexual harassment. i remember that moment of not really understanding what just happened. it was my first job out of college. there are people in leadership, not only in congress, but if companies all across the country and different areas of the vector of business, film, you name it that are silent that are now speaking up and pushing back against the environment that is very toxic and unfair for women. and i'm really somebody that i hope to bring a voice to and i know that for us women, we wait to be needed. we wait until, you know, i call it the bat signal. >> that's correct. >> trump was so much the bat signaller for us like, women, we have to push forward. people laugh at me when i say clear tout room, boys, it's time for us. i don't care if you're a democrat or a republican woman, if you put us in a room to fix and deal with the gun crisis, we would do it in a matter of a few hours. we're so much more courageous when it comes to those kinds of issues that are very personal to us. and i'm hoping that we fill the halls of congress with moms like me, with people that are so much more focused because we have so much more at stake when we're not in the room. >> and we have so much to offer. you touch on so many points that i work, rashida, every day to express to the know your value community. and i met a woman running for congress yesterday who is stepping up for many of the same reasons. women may be reticent to step up, but with when we do, we are so frustrated and we have waited so long for our moment that we're like, we're doing it, move over. rashid, you're a politician, an attorney, a mother and a wife, you are the child of immigrants. thank you. still ahead, three weeks after the one-on-one meeting between president trump and vladimir putin, the u.s. announces new sanctions on russia over the poisoning of of a former spy in the uk. "morning joe" will be right back. ♪ this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ the full value oft wyour new car? you'd be better off throwing your money right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with liberty mutual new car replacement we'll replace the full value of your car. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. you know, willie geist, while we've been talking about 70s acts that haven't gotten their due, we're overlooked one of them. bill murray and his lounge act, having the real words to "star wars" which my kids have been tortured by for 30 years. ♪ star wars nothing by star wars ♪ but you're talking to bill murray this weekend. >> yes, sunday today. we're doing a big two parter because it's bill murray. he doesn't do a lot of interviews. he has a 1-800 number. he doesn't have a publicist or a manager. you call the 1-800 number. if he wants to call you back, he will. that's coming up on sunday today. >> very cool. so still ahead, president the president's legal team turns down robert mueller's latest proposed terms for an interview. >> we can hear you guys talking, by the way, sam. do you want to share with the rest of the class? >> i said nothing, literally. >> come on. do you want to shaure it with te rest of the class? steve miller rocks the house. >> that's how steve miller is. >> as rudy giuliani explains, the special counsel wants to get the president under oath to trap him into perjury. plus, republican congressman chris collins isn't the only person in trump's orbit with who is entangled in financial trouble. we're going to go down the list and it's a long one. "morning joe" will be right back. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? i have the honor of seconding the nomination of donald j. trump as the next president of the united states of america. >> that is congressman chris collins, just over two years ago at the republican national convention. today, he joins this list of people charged with or pleading to crimes. trump's second campaign manager, trump's deputy campaign manager, trump's first national security adviser, trump's campaign foreign policy adviser, trump's first campaign manager and now trump's first congressional endorser and member of his transition team. >> hey, i'm no special counsel, but it kind of feels like there's a pattern here and maybe, maybe one of these witch-hunts where you just walk out of your front door and all the witches are just landing in your front lawn. >> right there in the yard. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." i don't know. it seems like a pattern on this thursday, august 9th. we've got joe, willie and me and along with us politics editor for the daily beast sam stein, political writer nick comfosori, john that here mere of the associated press and author zaneb salbi, former justice department spokes maman and now msnbc analyst matthew miller and now kasie hunt. okay. in the news this morning in an interview last night, president trump's lawyer said special counsel robert mueller will personally have a lot to answer for hours after he rejected mueller's latest effort to get a sit down interview with the president. they had they had made a court offer. trump's attorneys publicly voiced their desire for the probe to end within the next few weeks and suggested mueller would be violating doc policies if it does not end. we don't have an internal deadline. we are more special dishusly. you've said and i said we want to see this come to chose your soon here. >> yeah. i also think and hope the special counsel is as sensitive as to it as we are, we don't want to run into the november elections. this should be over by september 1st. >> if it isn't over by september, we have a very, very serious violation of the justice department rules. but what giuliani claims would be a serious violation is, in fact, a distortion. as the justice department inspecer general recently wrote that the 60-day rule is not written or described in any department policy or regulation. adding, it is generalized, unwritten guidance that prosecutors did not indict political candidates or use overt investigative methods in the weeks before an election, not that they terminate investigations. >> and mika, it's important to remember that rudy giuliani, back in the 1990s, was -- i mean, he was whole hog into the investigation of bill clinton. and it was perfectly fine that ken starr conducted an investigation that went on years and years through one election after another after another after another. robert mueller is not going to indict anybody right before an election and that will be consistent with guidelines. but you have -- if you were in pursuit of a couple of dozen russians who you have evidence have violated american democracy, tried to undermine american democracy, you don't end that investigation. because rudy giuliani tells us to end that investigation. in fact, if you need guidance from rudy giuliani, just go back and on just about every topic see what he said back when republicans were indicting or trying to indict bill clinton. >> giuliani went on to challenge the special counsel's motive for seeking an interview. and suggested mueller will soon be the one under scrutiny. >> we offered him an opportunity to do a form of questioning. he can say yes or no. we can do it. if he doesn't want to do it, he knows the answers to every question that he wants to ask. he's going to ask him, did you tell comey to go easy on flynn? no. why do you want to get him under oath? because you want to trap him into originalry. t perjury. >> he has all the answers. they're not going to change. the president is not going to change his testimony. so stop the nonsense. you are trying to trap him into perjury because you don't have a case. >> i've never been involved in an investigation on either side. that's more illegitimate than this one that is so obviously more illegitimate and i wonder where is the sense of justice on the part of mueller, on the part of the justice department. the real story is not that this case is going to fizzle. it's that it's going to blow up on them. there's a lot more to what they did that nobody knows about yet. and mueller is going to have a lot to answer for. >> you know, with rudy giuliani going around and his eyes bulging and he's looking disoriented, you look for excuses for america's mayor. for being this wildly off base. again, we just showed off the top of the show all of the members of the trump administration and the trump campaign that have already been indicted and are also that have already pled guilty, that have already pled guilty. i mean, you, on top of that, have 25 russians. this is an active investigation. now, rudy giuliani says they have nothing. they already have trump's second campaign manager, trump's -- i mean, indicted. trump's national security adviser indicted. and trump's first congressional endorser now indicted. the man who put his name into nomination for republican nominee, now indicted. and 25 russians where the united states military and the united states intel agencies have said, this is the forensic evidence of vladimir putin, the gru, ex kgb agents trying to undermine american democracy. how does giuliani even -- i mean, how does he even have the nerve to even go on there and say what he just said? >> that's a lot of indictments and plea bargains for an illegitimate investigation. may 10th, the vice president of the united states says i think it's time to wrap it up. rowdy giuliani has said time and time again, put up or shut up. and he repeated as he did last night that bob mueller doesn't have anything. >> the president's team is now saying that they want it to hurry up and quickly end. i'm always amaze at what the mayor's team will will say on the record. what he said in that interview is that the president's story, if put into testimony, is a lie. because it would put him into perjury. >> people think i'm joking about it. i'm not if i was president of the united states and all of my lawyers thought i was too stupid or too much of a liar to sit down and talk to robert mueller, i'd fire them. but this is all we have heard consistently from donald trump's lawyers. that mueller will twist his head into circles that he's such a liar. there would be a problem if the editor of the "new york times" called me up and said we can't let nick go on today. my response would be, well, then don't lie. have him tell the truth. every time giuliani and his lawyers say he's just too stupid or he's not smart enough, they come on and say, you know what? we can't let him on there because he'll perger himself. >> a sit down with a special counsel is no joke and even an innocent person would go into that with some fear and trepidation. if he can learn to tell the truth for two hours, he can get through it without being in perjury. >> this isn't a clear obstruction of justice. you have a lot of construction here. we need to call it out. >> he sets these arbitrary deadlines and he keeps moving the goal posts trying to outrage republicans or others. it's been effective. the polling on mueller's probe has dropped in recent months. they're the ones who are dragging this on. that's part of this argument here is they're saying this is too long, it's a waste of time, it's a distraction, it's slowing on the president's agenda. >> mueller may push pause here. he doesn't have to wrap it up before september 1st. this could be something that resumes in november or december and, of course, we saw from james comey, he doesn't have to push pause, either. this is no hard and fast statute on the books that says he can't do this in election season. >> still ahead, there's donald trump and donald trump jr., michael anyone and michael flynn jr. congressman chris collins and his son, cameron. there's a new legal affair under streetmy at this time. we'll talk about it straight ahead on "morning joe." but first, here is bill carin wes a check on the forecast. >> we have 60 large tun tamed fires now in california. still burning in the mendocino complex and the carr fire is about to head into the top ten, too. it's endless. we're not getting the wet weather or the cooler temperatures. and the temperatures themselves today are soaring. it's going to be 106 in the interior sections of washington state. so today's forecast in areas of the southeast, you'll get some thunderstorms to deal with. we're getting a break in areas of new england after the overnight storms. not too bad in the middle of the country. stray storm around chicago. but look at how hot. boise, 106 today and tomorrow will be even hotter. the possibility of getting up there, about 108 all-time temperatures in boise, 111. so not that far away. and no moisture coming this weekend as we head towards the west. saturday, watch out. another soaking rain coming from the mid-atlantic states. that should linger over the top of us on sunday. the weekend forecast has quickly gotten worse for areas around philly, new york city and southern new england for saturday and sunday. unfortunately i'm all full of bad news today. new york city, enjoy today is the bottom line. sunny and highs in the upper 80s. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. this is your wake-up call. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. it's a revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999... intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. and now, save up to $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, no interest until january 2021. ends wednesday. sfx: [cell phone dialing] no. no, no, no, no, no. cancel. cancel. please. aaagh! being in the know is a good thing. that's why discover will alert you if your social security number is found on any one of thousands of risky sites. are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. the first member of congress to endorse president trump, chris collins is now charged with lying to investigators on an investment in an australian biocompany. collins was at a congressional picnic at the white house last year when he learned that innate immuno therapy putics received d news on a trial. prosecutors say the congressman franticly attempted to reach his son, cameron, whom he tipped off to the confidential corporate information days before it was made public. they claim cameron collins and several others used the information to avoid more than $700,000 in losses. when news of the failed drug trial was made public, the shares of the company plummeted. speaking yesterday after being charged, collins who pleaded not guilty refuted the allegations against him. >> the charges that have been levied against me are meritless. and i will mount a vigorous defense in court to clear my name. i look forward to being fully vindicated and exonerated ending any and all questions relating to my affiliation with innate. as i fight to clear my name, i will continue to work hard for the people and constituents of new england and l remain on the ballot running for re-election this november. >> collins is just the latest to find himself in legal jeopardy, including with his former personal attorney as president, michael cohen, also under investigation by the southern district of new york for tax fraud. cohen simultaneously served the president and had a business to cash in on his connections. last week, the journal reported that a top trump donor agreed the to pay cohen $10 million if he successfully pushed a nuclear project. and then there's sitting and former members of the president's cabinet with questions of financial misdoings. forbes had recently, man, what a report, that comments of wilber ross's businesses have sparked lawsuits, reimbursements and a fine from the s.e.c. tom price was questioned about a favorable purchase of a stock at the time of -- that he was also at the center of congressman collin's arrest, price was fired amid scandals and his use of private jets. and then there's former epa administrator scott pruitt. talk about the swamp. it's now up to trump's neck. he, of course, intended the white house fourth of july barbecue while under 16 investigations. many of those involving his personal finances. then he was allowed to resign. but there's such a culture of corruption. since trump says he's only good until 11:00 a.m. in the morning, that was a pretty busy 9:30 to 11:00 block he had there doing some insider trading. but you look, you look at the forbes article, there is just a culture of corruption and, of course, as they always say, the fish rots from the head. yeah. and matt miller, these are just the people around president trump. what about the trump family itself, still profiting in many ways off its hotels. ivanka finally had to shut down her clothing line. but they are still making money. they put things in a trust in a way that does not isolate them from profits to put it mildly. >> i think joe hit the nail on the head when he called it a culture of corruption. democrats have the ability to make this case that there is a culture that starts at the top with donald trump, starts with his family members, kind of pervasive throughout his administration. you could talk about the treasury secretary's flights on government planes, the interior secretary has been under inspector general investigations. now we see it moving over to a member of congress pt and the problem for other members of congress, that isn't to say every member of congress is corrupt. of course not. but every one of them right now is allowing this to go unchecked. there's no republican chairman, there's no one in a leadership position. there's really no one on the hill who is saying, you know what? we need to get to the bottom of what's happening in this administration and stop it and investigate it and shine some sunlight. so that becomes a political vulnerability for all of them. i think want one of the interesting subplots of this chris collins thing is that he is now the second person to literally have committed a crime on the white house grounds. he made that call while he was standing on the white house grounds. it's the same place where mike flynn, in his white house office, sat down with the fbi and lied to the fbi. you could make a case that the white house compound now has the highest crime rate of any neighborhood in washington. coming up on "morning joe," do as i say, not as i do. that's how you might interpret a heated moment yesterday between the judge and prosecution during paul manafort's criminal trial. matt miller explains that, straight ahead. "morning joe" is coming right back. but one blows them all out of the water. hydro boost from neutrogena®. with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back. neutrogena® so it bounces back. the first person to survive alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen by funding scientific breakthroughs, advancing public policy, and providing local support to those living with the disease and their caregivers. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association. $16 million in unreported income from ukraine. >> wow. >> which manafort allegedly spent between 2010 and 2014 just a few years before he sought an unpaid role leading the president's campaign. there was a tense moment between special counsel prosecutors when the judge discovered a witness had been in the courtroom for other testimony. as "the washington post" described, ellis erupted saying that he typically bars all witnesses, save the case a agent from observing the proceedings. and thought he had done so in this case. u.s. attorney yuso asanye said he believed the transcript would back him up that he had allowed the case expert to remain. >> i don't care what the transcript said. maybe i made a mistake. don't do it again. >> matt miller, the judge has been butting heads with the prosecution it seems from the beginning. doesn't seem to like the prosecuting attorneys too much. what's going on there? >> i think a little bit of a case of black robitis. judge ellis is known to be tough on the prosecution. i think a number of times he's been out of line here. if you look at him here, it's almost like when your parents would say it doesn't matter what i said, i want you to do this, anyway. sort of admitting that even if he made a mistake, he's blaming the prosecutors on it. you've seen him at times accusing one of the prosecutors of crying and personal terms. i think the ultimate question is what impact it's going to have on the case. if this was a much closer case, i bet the prosecution would be pretty worried, some of which would be worried if it were in front of a jury. there's such strong evidence on of paul manafort that it's not likely to tip the balance at the end of the day. >> i was surprised when the judge told one of the attorneys to stop crying in the courtroom. he said i'm not crying. and it's just like yesterday where they said, well, wait, but you said he could. just read the transcript. i don't care what's in the transcript. not the sort of stable justice that you want overseeing an important case like this. what's the story? what's his background? >> let me just say something about the crying. that particular prosecutor that he said was crying used to prosecute the mob. he locked up the benado family in new york and had to be under round the clock protection because while he was investigating the benado family they tried to assassinate him. so i doubt very much he was crying in the courtroom because of tough words from the judge. this is a judge that's been on the bench for a long time. judges, look, they have lifetime terms for a reason, to make them insulated from political pressure. there are down sides that come with the good side and one of the down sides is you see judges with this air began approach in the courtroom. you hear from people that practice in that court that judge ellis is like that in a lot of cases. but he's also a judge that likes to show off a little bit from the press and i think you're seeing some of that here. >> coming up, is seeing believing? the russian bots trailing social media. we'll talk about it next on "morning joe." if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia. house, during my spring break and i was watching that on c. span which tells you what a loser i have been for a very long time. >> a membership is expected to continue work on a broad budget outline embracing president bill clinton's economic plan that was unveiled to congress on february 17th, as well as the $16.3 billion fiscal year 1993 supplemental spending bill. >> the american people proved in 1992 that they were ready to hear the truth. >> reducing the federal government, being reform oriented and believing in change is ultimately the answer for the united states of america. >> so i believe that is how you spent your spring break back in 1993? >> '3. those were rocking good times. .and i will say, you move it forward now to 2018, and people should have been listening to tim penny and john kasich back then. and, of course, we balanced the budget three years in a row after that, but right now, it's pretty remarkable. we've got the largest national debt ever. under donald trump and the republican congress. we've passed the largest spending bill in the history of america under donald trump and the republican congress. biggest pentagon budget ever in the history of the united states. we're spending more now on entitlement programs than we ever have before under this republican congress. more on domestic spending. i mean, every single category that you go through. donald trump and this republican congress, spending more and stealing more from our children and grandchildren than ever before. you know, mika, this is -- these people, if you just look at how they're spending our taxpayer dollars, they're not only corrupt, but they'res also -- they're not conservative. they're not close to being conservative. they're big spending radicals and they're speeding us up towards insolvency. it's really reckless and irresponsible. >> you wonder who people are trying to protect and exactly why. joining us now, eugene robinson, brett stevens and deputy washington bureau chief at "time" magazinelty ex altman. the latest issue in time includes a piece called the real fake new crisis. bots and propaganda are part of the problem. the bigger issue is your brain. >> you know, brett, speaking of conservatives and republicans, you know, the one thing, we would always fight on the floor of congress on with whether it's on foreign spending, foreign aid, whether it was trade, with whether it was getting involved in bosnia, whether it was -- when it had to do with taxes. there were always battles. but the one thing that always united conservative and moderate republicans where we were always together was on smaller government. >> right. >> on balanced budgets. on fiscal responsibility. and this radicalism, this spending radicalism that you can see in black and white, that you can see in dollars and cents, that you can see on the national debt clock, it shows just how radical donald trump and paul ryan and mitch mcconnell's congress has come to spending us into debt. >> right. they're unrecognizable as the republican party that i remember and that i was proud to see my -- to affiliate with when rob a ronald reagan was president. not so subtle white identity politics and blow out deficits and blow out spending. so what's the point? it's the reason why people should be cheering the idea that democrats should take over at least one house of congress, not just for the political hygiene that would represent. but if you're going to have big spenders, let's have big spenders who believe in those purposes of government rather than essentially a hypocritical party mouthing pieties in precisely the opposite way, joe. >> and you have great advice for democrats who are running for office. you're saying forget collusion. just talk about the corruption. this is the most corrupt administration in our lifetime. if you look just judge them on their first 18 months. one of the biggest problems for democratic candidates would be narrowing down all of the corruption and figuring out what to zam into a 30-second ad because there's so much corruption in there and donald trump, paul ryan, and mitch mcconnell's washington. >> corruption and then the questions of honor and integrity in the white house, the ones that, by the way, george w. bush successfully ran with in 2000 against a much less -- a much less tainted white house in bill clinton. i'm not saying forget collusion because i don't think it's potentially important or revelatory. what i'm talking about is strategy. if robert mueller comes up with the goods, if we discover it's as bad as many of us expect, then the chips will fall where they may. but i sometimes fear that democrats will spend all of their time talking, taking a gamble in effect that the russia story is going to pay political dividends for them. it may or may not. what really they ought to be focussing on is the fact that you have a president who lies several hundred times a day, give or take an administration in which there's one scandal after another, most recently with wilbur ross with, tom price, scott pruitt, you know, that ought to be front and center in -- on every democratic campaign mat form. >> gene robin sorn. >> yeah. >> brett mentioned the lying. and we write about that all the time. but i don't think we actually pay enough attention to it. think about it. we have a president of the united states who lies at a clip of at the moment 16 or 17 times a day. he tells the american people things that patently are false, that are self-serving and false. we never had that before. we had presidents who, you know, lied here or there and who spun things this way or that way. we've never had that. it's just an extraordinary situation. and brett is absolutely right. this is certainly the most corruption administration that i can recall and that's with no sort of, you know, not carrying any water for with, you know, nixon and, yes, there were some ethical challenges with the clinton administration and every administration. actually, except the obama administration, there's usually somebody indicted. but this is just incredible and extraordinary. i don't think democrats are going to miss that. at least i hope they don't. >> it's really hard to wrap our head around everything that's going on at this point. alex, let's go to the piece in time, the real fake news crisis. what is it? >> well, there's a dimension that academics and researchers have been noticing that goes beyond politicians spreading misinformation or bots and controls or bad foreign actors. and that's the fact that we, the readers, are extremely susceptible to false claims spread around the internet. all day long, we use cognitive shortcut toes make decisions to help get us through our day. and those tend to break down when we're confronted with an avalanche of information. so we do things like move too fast, we click on headlines we haven't read. we share links that we've only seen other people's synopsis on. we rely on other people's credibilities. what academics and psychologists say if we want to stop the proliferation of bad information, we need to slow down and engage our critical thinking faculties because we are a big part of the problem. >> alex, what's the reality of that happening? the world is not getting slower, it's going faster every minute of every day. so how do you stop something that is so pervasive and so becoming built into our brains, which is to say i've seen something before, i believe it to be true or not to take na extra step of confirming what i read or having to take everything online with a grain of salt? >> you make an excellent point. that's why a lot of the folks say it's really a public health crisis. in some effects, what we need you to do is rewire the way that we interact with when we're confronted on the landscape of the internet and all of these tore ends of information. we need to slow down. we need to read more carefully. we need to question the claims that we're seeing, whether they're by politicians who we may agree with, politicians who we don't. even studies that may seem to be tip top officials. so, you know, it's really on us. you know, i think that the -- the russian effort sort of to sew discord and spread false information government officials say is not going to stop, including with the president, has a predelection for spreading this, this notion that fake news is pervasive. in order to avoid amplifying some of those claims, we have to do our own part. >> and i wonder, brett stevens, how much this really is new to american politics. and how much of it has just been part of our core for a very long time. you go back to the election of 1800, people talk about that being the nastiest race in american history. 1964, the famous book by richard hofstetter, and think about that fact. this is a politico headline from april 22nd, 2011. more than half of democrats believe that george w. bush knew about the 9/11 attacks and that was a story talking about how more than half of republicans believed that barack obama was born in kenya. and so the question is, you know with, is this just who we have been? the difference is we have reckless public figures that are feeding into this paranoia. >> well, whether he said it or not, the line attributed to p.t.barnum for a long time, there's a sucker born every minute. i think two things are new here. one is the level of civic education has been declining. civics aren't being taught as they should in school so people believe all kinds of things about how government operates. how does a phrase like deep state gain as much currency as it has today, except through a kind of 30 or 40 years of miseducation of the american people? and then that has been weaponized, if you will, by the tools of social media in which the dissemination of false or truthy news happens at a speed that is simply unbelievable. look, the other issue here is simply this. as the facebooks of the world have proliferated, as more people get their news from social media, the function of editors has diminished. and so, you know, what do editors do? we are a line of defense against, you know, a second pair of eyes saying, hey, that doesn't sound right to me. there's something the matter with that. and now the number of news organizations in which those editors play that core function is getting, unfortunately, smaller and smaller. >> and the reach of those news organizations that do that is less significant in terms of how people get their news. >> the post of the times are doing well. but -- >> exactly. but i mean, we used to be a filter, a big filter. >> but that's a great point, gene, because think bit. you have the daily news in new york which is always provided an extraordinarily important function of keeping local and state officials honest. mean, b newsroom was wiped out. and you have facebook, which is having trouble figuring out whether alex jones conspiracy theories, same with twitter, about whether that's worth publishing or not. facebook itself, 50% of americans getting their news from facebook. i mean, therein lie also the problem right there. >> yes, that's part of the problem. we could do a whole show on the crisis in local and state level news. and as brett said, "the new york times" and "washington post" are doing fine. national, international reach and everything. but, you know, papers that cover cities and state government are suffering. and, you know, there's malfeasance going on that's not being reported. >> ask yourself, how did the seth rich story not kill sean hannity's career. and that's -- i think that's some instructive -- >> the reason here is in this "times" story, right, the enemy really is us. what facebook is a mirror. it's the most effective mirror and concentrator of what we already care about and are passionate about. if you look at russian propaganda on facebook, it is mostly real material taken from actual real facebook faces. what they've done is held up the mirror to our own worse anger. what we have here is a hard problem to solve because it's really -- it's rooted in what we as americans want and are passionate about. >> alex altman, thank you so much. last hour, we spoke with rashida talib, poised to become the first muslim woman elected to congress after her victory on tuesday in michigan. 2018 is set to become a record year for a variety of diverse groups with a record number of women. 185 so far having been nominated to run for the house alone. this november. and women are now the major party nominees for governor in 11 states. as many as 90 muslim-american candidates have ran for statewide or national office this year, the most since september 11th, 2001. and there are a record number of native americans and a record number of women among that group as well running for office in the midterms. our next guest is helping to usher in a rainbow wave with a record number of lgbtq candidates. more than 400 running for office this year. former democratic mayor of houston, aanese parker, joins u now. thank you very much for being on this morning. tell us why you are running at this point. what's your biggest message? >> all of our candidates are running because they care about their constituents and they're focused on local issues. but they're also very aware that the lgbt community is facing a backlash across the country, particularly in state legislators, where anti-transbills, so-called bathroom bill, are popping up. where so-called religious freedom bills are targeting the lgbt community and they are motivated just as the other communities you mentioned, wanting to serve, but concerned about the direction of our country. >> and talk about this rainbow wave that you're looking at and you're running. we got 400 lgbt candidates running for office this year across the board. what is this inspired by? and is it trump based? >> it's partially trump based but it's not just that. it is a concern about the direction of the country all across america. while there is a very real fear that the trump administration will roll back a lot of the progress we've made in the lgbt community, the worst of the bills that are targeting us are coming in the statehouses across america, and we have an unprecedented number, as you've said, more than 400 out lgbt candidates running. there are only 559 currently sitting lgbt elected officials. we have a map called the alpha america map. anyone can access it and look it up. 559 currently serving. this is a surge of candidates. many of them reflect that broader wave of women, of candidates of color, of transcandidates. we have a handful of republican candidates, a very tiny handful of republican candidates. these are people who are values-driven leaders who want to serve their community who happen to be lgbtq. they may be running an anti-trump message but that's not the basis of their campaign. that's a tactic that may work in some districts. >> mayor, it's good to see you this morning. i've thinking about danica rome who won a seat in virginia. a transwoman. the emphasis of her campaign was to clear up congestion and get rid of the traffic on route 28 and she hammered that local message home until she was elected. some people even criticized her for not emphasizing more of the fact that she was a transwoman. so how do you recommend to candidates wanting to work that balance between their identity, how important is that, versus the themes and issues that are important to voters in their districts? >> all politics is local. danica execute perdly on the playbook. and that is to be open and authentic, to allow voters to know who you are. and what she cared abouts what serving her constituents and that particular issue was the top issue for her constituents. that's what we ask our candidates to run on across america and that's what they're doing. they're running for the same reasons anyone else runs. they want to serve. and you have to match your district. you have to understand your district. >> anise parker, thank you so much for talking about the surge of these candidates running for office, stepping up. we appreciate it. >> you know, mika, we do so much throughout the day, three hours, it's hard to really consolidate the most important few minutes of every day. you know? >> well, i know, because there's so much going on. >> too much. >> before we wrap up today, joe, let's take a quick look back at the day's most important conversation. >> who's your uncool band, and it can't be like black flag. >> i'll stick with dave matthews. >> dave matthews is cool. you have to go with monkeys or the carpenters. is this along the lines of creed? >> sam likes kiss. >> sam stein, he told me before the show, he still has a poster of hanson up. i said the carpenters. they rock -- >> anyone like pink floyd? >> yes, we all like pink floyd. >> and the dead? >> operation social distortion. >> hall and oats? >> mick said the wiggles. >> straight up def leppard guy. >> i like andy gibb and the bee gees. >> i did not, for some reason, like steely dan when i was in high school and college. i like them now. >> are the goo goo dolls uncool? >> i was more of a punk rock guy than goo goo dolls. huey lewis has to be top of the list. abba has made an appearance, partridge family. >> maybe i'm not cool. i didn't know huey lewis wasn't cool. >> i used to be with it but then they changed what it was. now what i'm with isn't it and what's it seems weird and scary to me. it will happen to you. >> oh, my gosh. oh, my gosh. joe. really took things off the tracks. >> ten years ago, rolling stone put out a list of the top 25 guilty pleasure bands. ready for the top five? number five is chicago. number four is abba. number three is journey. number two is elo. and the number one guilty pleasure band according to rolling stone magazine, rush, number one on the list. >> oh. rush. >> pretty good choice. don't stop believing. >> what happened to van halen? are they a guilty pleasure or just a pleasure? >> just a pleasure, turns out. >> straight-up pleasure. >> no one says duran duran, right, because that's too guilty? >> no, no. >> we never admit that publicly. >> joe, you cannot forget the reason kasie d.c. exists and that would be ac/dc. >> how about enya? i kind of like enya. >> way too cool for this discussion. mika, you mentioned bee gees. now, i hope you're referring to disco-era bee gees because that's a guilty pleasure of mine. >> andy gibb had an album -- >> -- the c-span soundtrack. >> i do like that. i do love that. >> and that soothing voice, mika, that soothing voice. >> well, shadow dancing. there's nothing better. >> well, actually -- yes, there is a hell of a lot better. we don't have time to go through that. by the way, i didn't know that rolling stone -- i didn't know that elo was a guilty pleasure. another great band. chicago. the eagles. >> let's just end it.

Transcripts For BBCNEWS BBC News 20240608-1200

There is a weirdness that is there is a weirdness that is the relationship gets closer it becomes fragile. irate the relationship gets closer it becomes fragile.— the relationship gets closer it becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was — becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was waiting _ becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was waiting on - becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was waiting on us i ukraine was waiting on us congress to agree to extra funding that europe did step into the breach there and provide funding.- into the breach there and provide funding. there is no question — provide funding. there is no question that _ provide funding. there is no question that europe - provide funding. there is no question that europe is i provide funding. there is no question that europe is an l question that europe is an important part of the effort in ukraine. at the same time it really is the united states that provides the back bone of it which in some sense provides the strategy which makes most of the major decisions even if a lot of money and weapons are coming from europe. so more importantly maybe and this is something we don't think about often it is the united states that holds europe together on the question so without the united states there it is really not the case that the europeans would be able to fill that void in the void that you are talking, the gap you are talking about over the last six months, europeans were able to partially fill that but there was a gap of money and weapons

Transcripts For BBCNEWS BBC News 20240608-1200

there is a weirdness that is there is a weirdness that is the relationship gets closer it becomes fragile. irate the relationship gets closer it becomes fragile.— the relationship gets closer it becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was — becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was waiting _ becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was waiting on - becomes fragile. we saw while ukraine was waiting on us i ukraine was waiting on us congress to agree to extra funding that europe did step into the breach there and provide funding.- into the breach there and provide funding. there is no question — provide funding. there is no question that _ provide funding. there is no question that europe - provide funding. there is no question that europe is i provide funding. there is no question that europe is an l question that europe is an important part of the effort in ukraine. at the same time it really is the united states that provides the back bone of it which in some sense provides the strategy which makes most of the major decisions even if a lot of money and weapons are coming from europe. so more importantly maybe and this is something we don't think about often it is the united states that holds europe together on the question so without the united states there it is really not the case that the europeans would be able to fill that void in the void that you are talking, the gap you are talking about over the last six months, europeans were able to partially fill that but there was a gap of money and weapons

Transcripts for BBCNEWS BBC News 20240608 00:20

Transcripts for BBCNEWS BBC News 20240608 02:20:45

BACK BONE-ANDROID MODEL-BRAND NEW/In Box - electronics - by owner - sale - craigslist, backbone android

FDA Approves Vibrating Belt to Help Women With Osteopenia

The device was the first approved nonpharmacologic treatment for postmenopausal women with low bone density. It has not been tested for ability to reduce fractures.