Latest Breaking News On - Tax credit increase - Page 1 : vimarsana.com
answer academy, recited a garbled version of the claim made by his ally. >> it's a shame what's happened with the fbi. but we're going to rebuild the fbi. it will be bigger and better than ever. but it is very sad when you look at those documents and how they've done that is really, really disgraceful. and you have a lot of very angry people that are seeing it. they've found tremendous things on the other side. when you look at the hillary clinton investigation, it was -- you know, i've been saying it for a long time. that was a rigged system, folks. >> all right. in isolation, it's actually hard to figure out what he's even saying. but it's not hard to figure out where the president picked up those talking points that he was fumbling around with. those talking points have been airing around the clock on trump tv. it's also hearing them directly from people like congressman matt gaetz, a republican on the house judiciary committee who
took a ride on air force one with the president last week. he personally warned trump that mueller's investigation is, quote, infected with bias against the president. he urged his colleagues to shut the investigation down. >> the congress has an obligation to expose this bias, to expose what i believe is a corrupt investigation. i call on my republican colleagues to join me in calling for the firing of bob mueller. and look, it's time for mueller to put up or shut up. if there is evidence of collusion with russia, let's see it. >> like the congressman, the president seems to believe erroneously that neither the mueller investigation or any of the active congressional probes have turned up a shred of incriminating evidence. >> let's put it this way. there has been absolutely no collusion. that's been proven. when you look at the committees, whether it's the senate or the house, my worst enemies, they walk out and say, there is no collusion but we'll continue to look. there is absolutely no collusion. i didn't make a phone call to russia. i have nothing to do with russia. everybody knows it.
>> absolutely no collusion and everybody knows it. in fact that latter contention is the opposite of the truth. according to an associated press poll just out today, the vast majority of americans, 72%, believe the president has done something illegal or unethical with regard to his ties to russia. despite all the evidence, the trump campaign was eager to get russian help, despite the charges brought against four trump associates including his campaign chairman and his national security adviser, dispute the numerous leads that have still yet to be followed, republicans in congress may be ready to shut down their part of the investigation. according to congressman adam schiff, the top democrat on the house intelligence committee, his gop colleagues already appear to be wrapping things up. and schiff is concerned about what comes next. >> they're refusing to schedule any of the witnesses to come in in january. and there are literally dozens of witnesses that need to come before our committee who may never come before the committee if they shut this down. so i think they are on the verge potentially of reneging on the
be an impeachable offense. >> the question is who is going to stop him. >> keep in mind, the president cannot fire mueller. he would have to get rod ros rosenstein to fire him. people would go out in the streets and say this is not acceptable. >> it's interesting that you say that, i saw this, walter shaub, who was head of the office of ethics for a while until he resigned, said this. this weekend i'm stocking up on portable phone charges, warm clothes, and gear needed for when we take the streets. i'm concerned the assault on the rule of law is coming over the holidays. do you share that kind of concern, that what we're heading for is some kind of genuine constitutional crisis that would require some kind of mass civic response? >> i think it's a possibility. the reason i think it won't happen is because trump's advisers understand that even if mueller is removed, it doesn't stop the investigation. the investigation keeps on
going. if fbi agents have identified criminal activity for example on jared kushner, that keeps on going. prosecutors are going to prosecute, fbi agents are going to keep on investigating. you can't stop that. >> do you trust rows senstein a do you trust sessions to conduct themselves wiin good faith with regards to everything happening in the mueller investigation? >> i trust rod rosenstein. i cannot trust jeff sessions because he's lied to congress under oath multiple times. rod rosenstein is the only one that can remove mueller. he's testified under oath that there is no good cause to remove mueller and that every action he took had a legal and factual basis. >> i want to play what he had to say before your committee in terms of the fact that there was no cause to fire mueller, he was fairly strong about that. take a listen. >> have you seen good cause to fire special counsel mueller? >> no. >> thank you. if you were ordered today to
fire mr. mueller, what would you do? >> as i've explained previously, i would follow the regulation. if there were good cause, i would act. if there were no good cause, i would not. >> and you've seen no good cause so far. >> correct. >> thank you. >> what do you say to those who are sitting across from you in that hearing room who say this entire operation is infected with bias? >> they should look at the actions of robert mueller. he has secured two guilty pleas. no one disputes the legitimacy of those guilty pleas. he's put two indictments out on paul manafort and mr. gates. no one disputes that those indictments don't have a rock solid legal and factual basis. there is nothing they can point to that robert mueller has done that is wrong. they have pointed, however, that some members of his team donated to democratic candidates. well, that's correct. the fbi director, christopher wray, was also part of the team, he gave over $39,000 exclusively to republican candidates.
but i still trust the fbi director. it's demeaning and offensive to think you can't do your job just because you donated to political candidates. >> congress men ted lieu, thank you. >> thank you. senator richard blumenthal has been one of the most outspoken voices on the need to protect the mueller investigation. he joins me now. do you share my feeling that over the last week there has been an intensification of the rhetoric coming from trump tv and from his allies in congress around shutting down this investigation? does it feel that way to you? >> there is clearly a feeling that the rhetoric has intensified, at least among some of the trump supporters. and the targets of this investigation, like donald trump himself. and there is increasingly a need to protect the investigation. my hope is that my republican colleagues will speak out and stand up. now is the time for that kind of courage in the public interest.
>> let me just say, there is not a lot of that going around. back during the summer, when mueller was first named, which was back in the spring, there was widespread by partisan support. newt gingrich said he was a great choice even though newt gingrich is now talking about how corrupt and inept he is. then during the summer when the president appeared to be firing sessions, there were republicans like lindsey graham and others saying he cannot move against mueller, if he does we will stop him. i have not heard those kinds of reassurances publicly from republicans recently. have you? >> senator grassley said this week that he believes that robert mueller is a person of integrity and professionalism. but you're absolutely right, chris, there have been few voices explicitly supporting the special counsel, and pointing out that there is no evidence, not a scintilla, that political bias of any kind has infected or affected the special counsel's investigation. there is no evidence that any fbi agent's political views have
impacted this investigation. and so you point out absolutely correctly that the rhetoric has intensified. but there is no evidence to support it. >> one of the key elements is the obstruction case or the possibility of the president committing obstruction of justice when he fired james comey, when he asked him to go easy on michael flynn. there was an interesting exchange with the president this morning on a key factual matter the white house has yet to answer, which is when the president himself found out that michael flynn had lied to the fbi. take a listen to this exchange. >> reporter: mr. president, when did you find out that michael flynn had lied to the fbi? >> what else is there? how many times has that question been asked? >> we don't know the answer. do you know the answer? >> well, he has said in a tweet that he knew that flynn had lied to the fbi when he fired flynn, which means he also knew when he asked comey to pledge his
loyalty, when he asked comey to go lightly on flynn and his investigation, and when he fired jim comey has director of the fbi, because comey would not drop that investigation. i think there is a credible case of obstruction of justice against donald trump. and that's one of the reasons why this rhetoric about the special counsel, impugning the fbi, which is really reprehensible for the president of the united states, these dedicated men and women come to work every day and they park their political views at the door. i know from having been a united states attorney for 4 1/2 years, and the attorney general of the state of connecticut, that these professionals work hard to be objective, fair, and aggressive in pursuing crime. >> if the president did indeed know that at the time, i mean, the tweets seem to imply it. i don't know if they've come out and admitted that he knew that michael flynn had lied to the fbi when he fired him. if he did, then he knew he had
lied to the fbi when he told james comey to fire him. isn't that more than a credible case for obstruction, isn't that the case; isn't that right there in front of everyone? >> it's a credible case from what we know publicly. there is probably even more evidence, indeed mounting evidence that is known only to the special counsel and his team. and i think that the case is building piece by piece. it will form a mosaic at some point that has increasing power. and i think that to speculate at this point, i'm not prepared to do. but i think the special counsel is pursuing it methodically. >> let me ask you this. are you confident that the white house will not do something constitutionally reckless in the face of more indictments returned or robert mueller getting closer to the president's own guilt? >> the special counsel clearly is coming closer to the oval
office. i am not at all confident, unfortunately, that the president will avoid compulsive a impulsive or rash action. >> if your colleagues were serious about that, they would have voted on it already. you of seem to have more trust that the sort of checks are in place than me standing here from outside this sort of black box, looking into it does. i guess i'm asking you, if you have private reasons to believe that your colleagues will be there in that moment if needed. >> i am not trusting. and i am not confident. i am pushing legislation and advocating for it. and i'm hopeful that my colleagues, republicans as well as democrats, will be convinced that the need is now. i agree with you. >> senator richard blumenthal,
thank you. >> thank you. still to come, the tax bill jam job. is there still a chance, any chance it's going to go down in defeat? it just got slimmer today. and next, russian president vladimir putin's remarkable and curious praise of president trump, in two minutes. ♪ do you want clean, stain free dentures?
try polident. the four in one cleaning system kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria, cleans where brushing may miss. helps remove stains and prevent stain build up. use polident daily.
today. >> translator: objectively, we see some serious achievements accomplished during the short span he is president. look at the markets, how they've grown. >> trump and putin spoke by phone yesterday. you'll never guess what they talked about. >> reporter: how was your call with vladimir putin? >> it was great. he said very nice things about what i've done for this country in terms of the economy. he said also some negative things in terms of what's going on elsewhere. >> trump and putin also struck a strikingly similar note on the topic of alleged collusion. >> i have nothing to do with russia. everybody knows it. that was a democrat hoax, it was an excuse for losing the election. >> translator: you know, all of this has been invented, made up by people who are in opposition to president trump. >> and these uncanny echoes all come amidst a "washington post"
report that trump continues to reject intelligence that had captured putin's specific instructions on the operation. trump scoffed at the suggestion that his candidacy had been propelled by forces other than his own strategy and charisma. joining me is msnbc terrorism analyst malcolm nance, author of "the plot to hack america." that last nugget from "the washington post" story, it was so striking at an intelligence level, that the u.s. intelligence apparatus appears to have intelligence of putin giving direct instructions over this operation. what's your reaction to that? >> well, that's a significant piece of information, if it's true. it's quite possible that it is true, because you don't actually have to go and expend resources to be at the tippy top of collection inside putin's office. sometimes you can downstream information that's given to
subordinates or deputy subordinates. and somewhere along the line someone gets sloppy with their communications and we get a copy of an action message that authorizes this operation to go ahead. you have to remember, this entire russia investigation started as a counterintelligence operation. we had information indicating that russian intelligence was carrying out this operation and was doing it with the assistance of american citizens. >> what do you make of the sort of echoes between trump and putin's rhetoric on both the economy, which i want to get to in a second because i think it's a deft maneuver pby putin to ingratiate himself. >> i don't know who is leading who, there's some evidence that it's vladimir putin. he knows how to play trump. from as early as december of 2015, when trump was still in the field with 15 other
candidates, vladimir putin came out and gave him somewhat of a tacit endorsement, saying that, you know, donald trump was a colorful and brilliant character. and trump really responds to that. now what we have here is we have putin in no uncertain terms putting words into trump's mouth, and waiting for trump to respond in a way that he already knows. the chinese are also doing this as well, you know. trump responds to flattery. >> it's amazing how much the chinese have also been playing from the same playbook, lavishly praise the president, the president praises them back in this kind of endless loop. what are the concrete, tangible impacts of having a president who just refuses to abide the basic core intelligence findings on this operation and to the extent it may have continued? >> there's no need to pull
punches here. it places us in danger. the purpose of the u.s. intelligence community is to give the president of the united states the best open access to the best intelligence there is in the world from all sources, multisource intelligence, and giving it typically in a compact format that he can consume and then make proper, adequate decisions about safety, security, and the economy of the united states. most notably, the safety of american citizens. if you have a president of the united states who doesn't even want to hear it, where he doesn't even think that this information is good enough for him, and that it's corrupt, and that it will somehow harm him, then what you have is a president who will then blindly ignore things that could in fact damage the security of the united states, or compromise the security of the united states. it's literally like walking around with your eyes closed on a high-rise scaffold.
>> what's your fear? compromise, what do you mean? there's one level that seems obvious, that something like this might happen again. they've learned the bang for the buck of breaking into a few in boxes and publishing on the internet is pretty high. is that the kind of thing you're worried is going to happen again? >> well, we already know that's going to happen again, because this administration has taken absolutely no steps to try to secure the united states from any further intrusions. the things that are happening are happening at the department level, at u.s. cyber command, nsa, and organizations who are taking whatever steps they can. but there is no national infrastructure program. there is no imperative to get the united states electoral process secure, because he just doesn't believe it. but the president has already shown that he can compromise information. when he had the meeting with foreign minister lavrov and kislyak in the oval office which we didn't know anything about until the russians reported on
it, he actually compromised top secret security programs between the united states and israel. he could do that inadvertently again because he does not respect the sanctity of the top secret information that he has. >> malcolm nance, thanks for being with me tonight. >> my pleasure. next, the trump judicial nominee so unqualified even a republican senator took him to task. months. i want to talk about years. treatments have gotten better, so... i'm hoping for good years ahead. that's thanks to research funded by the american cancer society. the same folks giving me free rides to treatments, insurance advice, and a place to stay during chemo. i need that stuff like you don't know. and now that you do, please give at cancer.org.
about it the other day, these are the most qualified people ever. >> the idea that the president picked the most qualified people ever has become something of a punch line. brett tally's nomination was withdrawn. he rated unanimously unqualified by the american bar association, the fourth judicial nominee under president trump to receive a not qualified rating from the bar association. and the second to receive the rating unanimously, which is really quite rare. the white house also pulled the nomination of jeff matteer who had described transgender children as evidence of, quote, satan's plan. today, thanks to a video clip tweeted out by senator sheldon whitehou whitehouse, we witnessed a trump nominee tacitly admit he is not qualified for a lifetime appointment. >> have you ever tried a jury trial? >> i have not. >> civil? >> no. >> criminal? >> no. >> bench?
>> no. >> state or federal court? >> i have not. >> have you ever taken a deposition? >> i was involved in taking a deposition at wiley rein when i first came out of law school. >> have you ever taken a deposition by yourself? >> i believe no. >> have you ever argued a motion in state court? >> i have not. >> have you ever argued a motion in federal court? >> no. >> when is the last time you read the federal rules of civil procedure? >> the federal rules of civil procedure, i, uh -- mm-in my current position i obviously don't need to stay -- you know, invested in those on a day-to-day basis. but i do try to keep up to speed. >> oh, that is hard to watch. if you're not a trial lawyer,
perhaps it's hard to understand just how horrible that performance was. luckily we have a trial lawyer, watergate prosecutor nick ackerman, to explain. and i can do it with what's already within me. because my body can still make its own insulin. and once-weekly trulicity activates my body to release it. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly easy-to-use pen. it works 24/7, and you don't have to see or handle a needle. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, if you have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you're allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have a lump or swelling in your neck,
severe stomach pain, or symptoms like itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c and blood sugar, activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.
we want to help you too. find out how much you can save in just two minutes at sofi.com/save as a trial judge you're obviously going to have witnesses. >> yes. >> can you tell me what the daubert standard is? >> umm, senator kennedy, i don't have that readily, uh, at my
disposal. but i would be happy to take a look at that. >> do you know what a motion in limine is? >> yes, i haven't -- again, my background is not in litigation, as when i was applying replying chairman grassley. i haven't had, again, to do a deep dive. and i understand and appreciate this line of questioning. i understand the challenge that would be ahead of me if i were fortunate enough to become a district court judge. >> matthew peterson is up for a lifetime appointment, i can't stress that enough, for the u.s. district court for the district of columbia. one of the most important federal courts in the country. msnbc's legal analyst nick ackerman is former assistant watergate prosecutor. nick, it's good to have you here. >> thank you. >> i think non-lawyers watch that and you just -- the reaction you have to it is, it
looks like a literal nightmare that you might have about like a stress dream about being unprepared for something. but as a trial lawyer, what is your reaction to watching that? >> to watching that? these are such basic concepts, such basic skills he's asked about. daubert, every trial lawyer knows that that relates to expert witnesses and the standard for admitting expert testimony. on motion in limine, that's something that comes up during the course of a trial to get an advanced ruling from a district court judge on a ruling on evidence. >> how common is a motion in limine? 10 being basically every trial has one, 1 being quite obscure. >> probably a 12. these are not obscure concepts. the idea that this person is being appointed for a lifetime position as a federal district court judge, he doesn't know
anything about the rules of evidence, he doesn't know anything about the federal rules of civil procedure, he's never looked at them, he's never been in a trial, he's never done a trial, i mean, it just is mind-boggling. >> what does it matter? >> it matters because this is a very important position. he has to be sort of the gatekeeper, the person that oversees the trial, that conducts the trial. he's never been in one before. from the standpoint of a litigant, he's doing cases, they're not only civil cases were people's money and fortunes are at stake. but he's also doing criminal cases. and if he doesn't know this stuff, guilty people are going to be allowed to go free, and innocent people will be locked up. i mean, that is what we're looking at, when a person just doesn't understand how this all works. >> will you explain, one of the things it's hard for people who don't know the federal courts very well, the difference between a district judge and an appellate judge, and why not knowing this for the district judge is so important. >> the district judge is actually the trial court.
i mean, people who have disputes, or it's the government coming in, for example the paul manafort case, you've got a case there where you've go to a very complicated transactional case that's a conspiracy to defraud the government, that the district court judge is sort of the gatekeeper. she's going to decide on questions of evidence, what comes in, what goes out, or in the case of a civil case, the same sort of thing, a sex harassment case, you would have the same issues. i mean, if he doesn't know the basic concepts of what the job is, it's almost like saying just because he went to law school, therefore he can be a judge, just because somebody went to medical school as a dermatologist doesn't mean they can be a brain surgery. >> right. >> that just doesn't work that way. >> what do you think about the sort of standard of -- i mean, we've now seen a few of these judges, we saw brett tally in a similar situation, he got pulled pack. we've seen some of the appellate court level, there's been a huge push by the trump administration to get people on that court.
are you satisfied or confident that they have the necessary qualifications? >> it's appalling. the people they're trying to put on the federal district court is absolutely appalling. it's going to mean that litigants don't feel like they're getting a sense of justice. it means that litigants will have to pay more for legal fees because these judges won't know what they're doing. >> and they'll also get overturned. there's real consequences if you screw up a trial. >> huge. >> as a judge, if you make the wrong ruling. and it's a very hard job, let's be clear. >> this is not for a rookie, basically. >> and if you screw it up, there's going to be consequences, because there will be an appeal and you could end up with a situation in which convictions get voided, huge civil suits get overturned, things like that. >> or even worse, if somebody who is guilty gets let go because this judge doesn't know what he's doing and you've got somebody who should be in jail that doesn't go to jail. i mean, this is a pretty complicated job. it's not just dealing with civil issues but it's also criminal issues. i mean, you have to be a pretty
well-rounded lawyer to take on this job. >> i guess when you watch peterson there struggle on these basic concepts, is this the kind of thing, if he spent, you know -- if you went back and crammed, he could be okay? >> at least he could have sat through a couple of trials. maybe if he walked into the federal district court in d.c. and sat there for a week and just watched what was going on, maybe, maybe he could have figured it out. >> but are you confident that someone like that -- i guess my question is, is there a certain amount of experience you just need to be able to qualify to do this job that you just can't get from watching trials and books? >> yeah. it's a matter of being a trial lawyer, having been there and done it. and even when you've done that, i think most people who get pointed to the bench, the federal bench, there's a learning period even at that. >> i know some people, yeah. >> yeah. so it's a tough job in a lot of ways. and it's a very, very important job. and the kind of people that they're putting on there, this is not about liberals or
conservatives or democrats or republicans. this is about competence, just plain old fashioned competence. >> nick ackerman, always a pleasure. >> thank you. ahead, the week that was. is doug jones' victory a major milestone for the resistance? plus tonight's thing one/thing two starts next. constipated?
turn up your swagger game with one a day men's. ♪ a complete multivitamin with key nutrients plus b vitamins for heart health. your one a day is showing. thing one tonight, the biggest election news this week was of course doug jones' unlikely victory in the alabama senate race. but we also got results in an election held a month ago. new york mayor bill de blasio won reelection by a wide margin. at least three votes were not counted in that race. and they're all from the members of the trump family. how multiple trumps tried and failed to vote correctly, that's thing two in 60 seconds. just serve classy snacks and be a gracious host,
no matter who shows up. do you like nuts?
i mean, we have the worst mayor in the united states, de blasio, who is the worst mayor in the united states, like not even a contest. >> new york city does not agree with donald trump. mayor de blasio was easily reelected last month by a 35-point margin, like not even a contest. president trump and his family were not in new york for that election. but they did attempt to participate. unfortunately the "daily news" reports that melania, ivanka, and jared's votes did not count. the first lady correctly filled out her absentee application as you see here. but when it comes to her actual ballot, election officials say she did not sign the ballot envelope. trump's daughter ivanka also managed to botch her ballot, she didn't mail it until election day which was too late to be counted, officials said. her husband jared kushner, he didn't mail his back at all,
according to the board. so that's not going to count. that makes it 0-3. how about the president himself? officials say donald trump filled out his ballot correctly, but if you look at his absentee ballot application, donald trump wrote his own birthday as july 4t 14th, which is weird because trump's birth certificate says he was born on june 14th, which means he was a month off on his ballot application about his own date of birth. it's unclear if trump's incorrect ballot application will affect his growth. >> this issue is very important to me because throughout the campaign and even after, people would come up to me and express their concerns about voter inconsistencies and irregularities which they saw. all public officials have a profound responsibility to protect the integrity of the
vote. we have no choice. we want to make america great again. we have to protect the integrity of the vote and our voters. with one a day men's. ♪ a complete multivitamin with key nutrients plus b vitamins for heart health. your one a day is showing. let's get the one with the candy canes. well, you know, the wrapping paper doesn't make the holidays. it's what's inside that counts. it's a phone for mom. okay, well, it's also what's inside the phone that counts, too. circuits? no, the network. so the network is inside the phone? well, no, the network's around the phone. and verizon is the most awarded network ever. that's why more people count on it. here you go. (announcer) a gift is only as good as the network it's on. so give any google pixel 2 and get $300 off with no trade-in required.
17 points on average. borrow up to $100,000 with low rates and no hidden fees. find your rate in just two minutes, and take on your debt at sofi.com. just a few hours ago, republicans finally released the finished version of their tax plan. with a few new developments today, they could have the votes they need to pass it. senator marco rubio got what he needed to change his vote to yes, a small increase in the refundibility of the child tax credit, even though jim tankersley of "the new york times" says rubio's changes slightly reduces the value of the tax credit increase. bob corker of tennessee who won by partisan praise for standing up to the president didn't even get that much of a concession or any, as far as we know, but he's still changing his vote. he had originally been the only gop senator to vote against the plan because of deficit worries.
today he flipped. senator susan collins of maine praised the bill today after previously appearing to waiver. it remains to be seen if senator mccain and cochran, back and forth battling illnesses, will be present for the vote next week. nonetheless the passage of the tax overhaul looks quite likely. this bill would cut taxes for corporations, for billionaires' heirs, and for some middle class families, but raising taxes on millions of middle class americans. the house is expected to vote tuesday for a bill over 1,000 pages long. the calculation for speaker paul ryan and his party is pretty clear. with voters tipped to the way the tax plan will cost the middle class, republicans are just trying to get this thing through as quickly as possible. and crazy as the tax bill is, it's only been one part of a roller coaster week. everything from the shocking alabama senate election to the #metoo movement reaching the white house, next. when you have a cold...
and if that pain could mean something worse. joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain, and helps stop further damage 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, my mom's back to being my mom. visit enbrel.com... and use the joint damage simulator to see how joint damage could progress. ask about enbrel. enbrel. fda approved for over 18 years.
renewed scrutiny to the white house. congress man blake farenthold of texas won't run for reelection next year and omarosa, remember her? reportedly fired and had to be physically removed from the white house. rod rosenstein testified republicans look poised to cut taxes for corporations while raising taxes on many middle class families and democrat doug jones won that alabama senate election despite steve bannon's best efforts to pull it out for the accused child molester. a shocking victory that made clear the price republicans could pay at the polls. senior contributing editor. michelle, i want to start with you on this theme, which is you've now got a situation after which al franken was drummed out by the democratic caucuses and fear about disarming. democrats will hold responsible, republicans are not.
and now a week later, trent franks is gone and roy moore didn't win, looks like that did not come to pass. >> that looks like a good bet because it puts the dell cmocran a better position to not only call out other republicans but demand hearings and investigation into donald trump's horrific record of sexual harassment and confess sexual assault. you know, he's obviously very rattled, i think the one thing that we might have -- was it this week he sexually harassed a sitting senator on twitter? >> i can't remember. i think it was this week, actually. yeah, this week. it was this week. [ laughter ] >> i think monday he sexually harassed a sitting senator on twitter. yes, that's correct s. >> so he's clearly rattled by this moment and accountability and i think that it just spares democrats from having to answer the question even though the question is always posted in the
blackest of bad faith, what about al franken. >> right. ben, i want to show you the newest polling. i'm amazed at the numbers right now coming up in polling. one of the things that happened is a lot of people caught by surprise on trump's win and there was over compensating in the way the media talked about and treated the trump coalition and skepticism, all of which was genuine and perhaps earned but when you look at the numbers, it is bleak for republicans. trump in the 538 compilation is lowest ever. the new ap poll out today has him at 32%. i mean, things are not good for the republican party's popularity right now. >> no, and i think, you know, the trump effect, i think is what i predicted it would be. i said it all through the 2016 election that i believed trump would disappoint the people who are willing to hold their nose and vote for them and hope for
the best and find themselves more and more being disgusted with behavior. i thought independence and people willing to vote republican at times would end up feeling as though the republican party representing something they can no longer support as long as he's the leader of it. once he won, i counted on the idea maybe republicans will try to hold him accountable, certainly not cheer lead for him but have been and i think steve bannon, the trump miracle. i haven't even heard that before. >> that is a really good clip for null fa caification attempt >> he's trying to speak this language. a lot of people are really seeing what a bunch of us warned them would be the case and it's going to come back to bite the republicans -- i think it's going to come back to bite them in 2018. very hard. >> i haven't had -- i don't think we talked about the doug
jones win. it really is -- i mean, there are so many distinct things about the race with roy moore and accusations but as a political earthquake to get a democratic senator in alabama. >> more so machine a senator in massachusetts during obama's first term. what is amazing is we now have proof. for a long time we had increased democratic margins that have fallen short in red districts. now we finally have one that jeff sessions can seat. this is incredible and yet, you don't see any sort of instinct for self-preservation among republicans in congress, which is really astonishing. they are not just yolking themself to the tax bill, which obviously fulfills a lot of dreams but incredibly unpopular and yolking themselves to donald trump's obstruction and this kamikaze attack on the fbi. it's so hard for me to
understand what they think they are going to get out of this and how they think they will be remembered. >> it's a great question. what do you think the psychology of republicans on the hill is given what they are facing, given the aftermath of jones? >> well, so, you know, in alabama for instance, you know, i think these people are still conservative. they still like things like the tax bill. >> right. >> this is -- elections are becoming for republicans these days, elections are constant battles of lesser evil arguments and everybody is discussing can we deal with this person or can we put up with that person or vote for this guy if it keeps this guy out. policy is barely on people's radar at this point. i don't think it's surprising republicans would be pushing what is considered a conservative agenda thinking if they can somehow rescue this situation and stop putting scum bags up for people to vote for, if they can put people in there. it seems like what they keep putting up either somebody
FbiShameVersionClaimAllyPeopleThingsLotDocumentsSideHillary-clinton-investigationPresident17 points on average. borrow up to $100,000 with low rates and no hidden fees. find your rate in just two minutes, and take on your debt at sofi.com. just a few hours ago, republicans finally released the finished version of their tax plan. with a few new developments today, they could have the votes they need to pass it. senator marco rubio got what he needed to change his vote to yes, a small increase in the refundibility of the child tax credit, even though jim tankersley of "the new york times" says rubio's changes slightly reduces the value of the tax credit increase. bob corker of tennessee who won by partisan praise for standing up to the president didn't even get that much of a concession or any, as far as we know, but he's still changing his vote. he had originally been the only gop senator to vote against the plan because of deficit worries.
PointsFeesRateRatesDebtSofi-com17Two10000000000RepublicanVotejust a few hours ago, republicans finally released the finished version of their tax plan. with a few new developments today, they could have the votes they need to pass it. senator marco rubio got what he needed to change his vote to yes, a small increase in the refundibility of the child tax credit, even though jim tankersley of "the new york times" says rubio's changes slightly reduces the value of the tax credit increase. bob corker of tennessee who won by partisan praise for standing up to the president didn't even get that much of a concession or any, as far as we know, but he's still changing his vote. he had originally been the only gop senator to vote against the plan because of deficit worries. today he flipped. senator susan collins of maine praised the bill today after previously appearing to waiver. it remains to be seen if senator mccain and cochran, back and forth battling illnesses, will be present for the vote next week. nonetheless the passage of the tax overhaul looks quite likely. this bill would cut taxes for corporations, for billionaires'
RepublicanVotesTax-planVersionDevelopmentsPresidentVoteBob-corkerMarco-rubioPraiseChangesMuchjust a few hours ago republicans finally released the finished version of their tax plan, and with a few new developments today could have the votes needed to pass it. senator marco rubio got what he needed to change his vote to yes. a small increase in the refundability of the child tax credit even though the "new york times" tweeted rubio's changes actually slightly reduces the value of the tax credit increase. bob corker saying the white house reminded him of an adult day-care center didn't get much concession, or anything, but still changing his vote. original lly the only gop senat. today he flipped. senator susan collins of maine praises the bill after previously appearing to waver.
VoteMarco-rubioVotesTax-planIncreaseChild-tax-creditNew-york-timesVersionDevelopmentsRefundabilityChangesBob-corkerthink? >> you would think so. we have made some progress, neil. i was very happy to see that we ended up keeping the mortgage interest deduction because if we had done away with that, that would have really hurt the real estate market for home owners, so i'm glad that we kept side. i am really happy about this tax credit increase. but it is still not enough. the problem that democrats have with this is it still that's there is basically a 2% of tax increase for low income workers, so that essentially is kind of like a reverse robin hood plan, where it is taxing the poor to give tax credits to the rich. >> neil: they are going to have benefits and credits, and they are the ones. >> that is what democrats are most concerned with. the good news is still that a donald trump said that we will be able to file this on one beautiful sheet of paper, neil. so i have got mine right here. >> neil: look at you.
Neil-cavutoReal-estate-marketMortgage-interest-deductionProgressHome-ownersProblemIncomeTax-increaseDemocraticWorkersSideTax-credit-increase