Transcripts For MSNBCW MSNBC Live With Steve Kornacki 201703

MSNBCW MSNBC Live With Steve Kornacki March 30, 2017 20:00:00

Here. And the white house ought to explain why that wasnt followed here, but there is a good way to answer these questions and we will do our best to answer these questions but we will not lose sight of the russia investigation and we are going to keep focus on that. Yes . Has there been any uptick in attacks on your or your staffers computers or i. T. Networks since this investigation has been going on . Im not aware of anything like that. Thank withdrew veyou very much. Thank you. Okay. Steve kornacki in new york. That is adam schiff. Just finishing up u a Press Conference there on capitol hill. Adam schiff the ranking democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, of course, the House Intelligence Committee had been pursuing interference of the status of that committees investigation now some quwhat i question. Theres been all sorts of controversy about actions, about statements from the republican chairman, devin nunes, in that statement you just heard there, that Press Conference, rather, that you just saw there, from adam schiff coming on the heels of an explosive report a few hours ago from the New York Times, a report that has all of washington talking right now. The white house saying nothing. What is the times reporting . The times naming two Trump Administration officials that it says played a role in providing information to devin nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. That Information Leading Nunes to announce that President Trump may have been surveilled by the Obama Administration before he took office. Now, those officials, again, according to the reporting of the New York Times here, this is not reporting from nbc news, but according to the New York Times, as the senior director for the intelligence at the National Security council, he was appointed he was brought in, rather, by ousted National Security adviser michael flynn. Also named by the times, michael ellis, a lawyer who works on National Security issues at the white House Counsels office. Now, he previously worked for devin nunes. Remember, key to point out here, the announcement from nunes set off a firestorm of controversy around him and around his committees investigation into russian interference. Nunes had briefed the president before sharing that material with his democratic colleagues on the Intelligence Committee. Of course, those colleagues supposed to be working hand in hand with him here. That led to accusations that nunes was working with the white house and lending some to lend some credibility to trumps claims that he was wiretapped. This new report from the New York Times, if true, could certainly inflame those accusations. We should say this reporting from the times based on sources described only as several current american officials. As i mentioned before, nbc has not independently confirmed the report. The report also says that these officials, played a role in providing the information. That they assisted in the disclosure of the intelligence reports. It is not clear what precisely that entails or how precisely they would have been involved. In a statement, a spokesman for chairman nunes telling nbc news, as he has stated many times, chairman nunes will not confirm or deny speculation about his sources identity. He will not respond to speculation from anonymous sources. A lot going on here. A lot of confusion. Kasie hunt is on capitol hill. She was at that Press Conference that adam schiff just held. She asked him some questions. So, kasie, we have that report from the New York Times, what exactly are we hearing from adam schiff, from the top democrat in the Intelligence Committee right now . Reporter confusion, i think, is still the word for what is going on with this investigation, steve. Even the Ranking Member here was asked if he had information he had promised earlier. He said, you know what, this day completely got away from me and like many days on this investigation, i think we all feel that way a little bit. So, if you just want to reset here for a minute, clearly this schiff said today. He said that he just received this letter basically as spicer was talking about it in the briefing. Heres what schiff had to say. On the same day that the New York Times broke a story saying that the source of the materials that were provided to our chairman was, in fact, National Security Council Staff, i was informed in a letter from white House Counsel that white house excuse me, National Security Council Staff found these materials in the ordinary Course Of Business. Now, that timing concerns me. If, in fact, the National Security Council Staff that discovered these materials reportedly in the ordinary Course Of Business or the same National Security staff that provided them to the chairman to be provided to the president , it raises a profound question why they were not directly provided to the white house by the National Security staff and instead were provided through a route involving the chairman. Reporter so, again, another twist in this saga that raises questions about the credibility of this House Intelligence Committee investigation. Now, adam schiff says he wants to maintain the credibility of the investigation, but, again, that he has concerns about it. He also said he is available any time as soon as possible to go down to the white house and view whatever these materials turn out to be. Steve . All right, kasie hunt on capitol hill. A very unexpectedly busy day. Kasie hunt, thank you for that. Reporter story of my life. Lets go to the white house now for that side of the story. Kelly odonnell standing by there. Kelly, this report from the New York Times hit just before sean spicer and his regular Daily Briefing were set to begin in the white house there. What is the white house saying in response to what the New York Times is reporting . Reporter very little. Sean spicer would not confirm anything in that report, would not engage on it, not taking questions that relate to it, but as kasie just outlined and certainly congressman adam schiff also made this nexus between the timing of the New York Times report and this letter inviting the intelligence top officials from the house and Senate Committees to view this material. So, clearly sean spicer, the spokesman for the president , knew this was coming. He was prepared for this. And did not want to take questions that would help us to understand if there is anything to the recording in terms of the white house being willing to confirm or refute elements of that story. One of the Big Questions comes down to not only white house staffers, what may they have done or not done, but the president , himself, after he sort of set up first the tweeted claim of being wiretapped, which has been roundly discounted by officials with the ability to know if there had been any socalled wiretap, when he brought broadened that to more surveillance. In a televised interview, the president said more information would be coming and it would be good stuff. Today our colleague, kristen welker, put this question to the White House Press secretary any potential that the president had a hand or any knowledge of what has transpired. Did the president direct anyone in this white house or in his National Security team to try to find information or intelligence to back up his assertion about wiretapping . I dont im not aware of anything directly. Id have to look into that in terms of again, theres two sides of this. One is the information side, and two is the policy and the activities and the legal piece of what happened. And i dont theres those are big buckets, if you will. So its possible . Im not going to comment on it. Reporter so, one thing the sean spicer was not prepared was to bring in the degree to which the president may or may not have been involved on this question of this incidental surveillance and this Intelligence Product or Intelligence Data that may be now available for review for the intelligence top officials from capitol hill. It will be important to revisit that question later on to see if the president might have had any direct knowledge of this. Certainly he raised the issue, himself, by talking about surveillance, and by suggesting there would be more information brought to the public. He said that on television. And so that question that our colleague, kristen, asked, seemed to have real merit in the moment, and so far, the white house is not able to go into any detail to give us an answer on that. Steve . All right. Kelly odonnell at the white house. Kelly, thank you for that. Lets bring in now david french, hes a writer at the national review. And david, i know you have youre a conservative voice, though, who has been saying republicans and conserve ti ati need to be taking this issue of russian interference in the election very seriously. Im just wondering what you make of the events today. We have this report in the New York Times saying, hey, there were people at the white house, two people in the administration, who played some role, according to the times, in getting this information to nunes. We know nunes took the information to the president , we know democrats on the Committee Said he should have shared it with us. We have the white house offering this letter now saying, hey, theres some information gleaned in the ordinary course of work by the National Security council, we want you to come view it. What do you make of all the pieces that are suddenly floating around out there . Heres the problem. The origin of this confusion lies with the trump tweets. Where trump has said, he was wiretapped, its as bad as watergaets, its a huge scandal, then began to seek external validation for this tweet. For this argument. He didnt come forward with evidence. And so heres the fundamental problem. Theres two fundamental problems with what nunes did. Fundamental problem number one, its looking increasingly like the white house fed Him Information that he turned around and fed back to the white house in a manner that led everyone to believe independently discovered it and it was information that didnt confirm trumps tweet but he was able to use to say he felt validated. Thats a problem. Thats not his role as chairman of the committee. Heres the second problem. Hes not sharing that information with his own committee. Instead, hes talking in these vague terms like he doesnt disclose source and methods, sources and methods like hes a member of a spy agency, himself. Like he had some sort of clandestine meeting that nobody needs to know about. But, again, lets remember, hes the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He is not an employee, he is not a lawyer for the president. Its not his job to make the president s tweets look better. And so when you take all of these reports together, it creates an impression of a chairman of a House Committee essentially working to backfill the president of the United States tweeting and that is not his role and its created an enormous amount of confusion and has caused further loss of confidence in the work of the committee. And we know by all appearances, the work of that House Committee right now seems stalled. There was talk there from adam schiff, the ranking democrat, that proposed Witness Lists are being passed back and forthright now. There have been some proceedings for this week that were put off. Going forward, based on everything you just said right there, can you see a scenario where nunes recovers his credibility with the democrats on the committee . Recovers enough sort of standing to proceed with this investigation and have the results, whatever they may be, accepted by both sides . Well, i mean, you know, theres a lot of second acts in American Politics. And i cant imagine a course correction, one where he says here is the information that i viewed. Im going to make it available to my committee, which is all clear to view secret information, topsecret information. So he does what hes supposed to do. He apologizes for going outside the normal Course Of Business. And then he rolls forward. I havent seen any indication that thats happening, instead, you know, the news is changing every five minutes, but my last understanding is hes still not even sharing with his own committee what he found, what he saw, and how can you be a Committee Chair of an Intelligence Committee when youre not sharing with your own committee the intelligence that youre viewing . And thats a core problem and i do think that there is a way for him to move through this and move out of this. I just dont see that thats happening. All right. David french with the national review. Thank you for joining us. Appreciate the time. Thanks so much for having me. Okay. Again, a very busy day here. Weve been pulled in all sorts of directions trying to cover politics today. Were going to cover all the bases throughout this hour. Please stay patient and bear with us as we take a very quick break here. On the other side, President Trump also today, this would normally be the major headline in politics, but so many other things happened today. President trump all but declaring war on members of his own party who he says are standing in the way of his plan to repeal and replace obamacare and maybe much more. How far is the president willing to go to try to get these republican s on . Were going to take you through all of that in just a moment. Plus, also this, new controversy out of the state of North Carolina. Over that controversial bathroom law down there. The state Assembly Just voted to repeal part of it. Measure now awaiting the governors signature. Some opponents still arent satisfied. This isnt a victory for anyone, but most especially not for the lgbt community. Grown man now. I dont want to pry. Dad. But have you made a decision . Im going with the 1000 in cash back. My son. A cash man. Dad, are you crying . Nah, just something in my eye. The volkswagen 3 and easy event. Where you can choose one of three easy ways to get a 1000 offer. Hurry in to your volkswagen dealer now and you can get 1000 as an apr bonus, a lease bonus, or cash back. Had helped the pig with homeowners insurance. He had replacement cost coverage, so his house was rebuilt, good as new. The big bad wolf now has a job on a wind farm. Call geico and see how easy it is to switch and save on homeowners insurance. Obamacare. With republican legislation. Trump now issuing a threat on twitter this morning. Take a look at this. The president tweeting out, the Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire republican agenda if they dont get on the team. And fast. We must fight them and dems in to 2018. The house Freedom Caucus, very conservative wing on the republican side, now as much in the eyes of trump the enemy as the democrats at least if they dont get behind his agenda. Sean spicer, white house spokesman, suggesting that House Members may still fall in line. Theres a few members of the Freedom Caucus prior to last fridays vote and since then who is expressed a willingness to want to work with him, rather than necessarily as a bloc. And i think that there continues to be some promising signs in that with with that. So, again, i think part of it is i think people are more concerned with voting as a bloc, then, in whats the best interest to their constituents and American People, hes hoping people will see the Bigger Picture, the goals that we outlined and sometimes not let the really good be the enemy of the perfect. We talked about this earlier this week with the Freedom Caucus being resistant on health care, potentially doing the same thing on future big fights, it leaves trump with two possible courses of action. One, can he freeze out the Freedom Caucus . Can he write them off if . If he does that, he would have to compromise with democrats. Option two, he would try to essentially break the Press Conference<\/a> there on capitol hill. Adam schiff the ranking democrat on the House Intelligence Committee<\/a>, of course, the House Intelligence Committee<\/a> had been pursuing interference of the status of that committees investigation now some quwhat i question. Theres been all sorts of controversy about actions, about statements from the republican chairman, devin nunes, in that\rstatement you just heard there, that Press Conference<\/a>, rather, that you just saw there, from adam schiff coming on the heels of an explosive report a few hours ago from the New York Times<\/a>, a report that has all of washington talking right now. The white house saying nothing. What is the times reporting . The times naming two Trump Administration<\/a> officials that it says played a role in providing information to devin nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee<\/a>. That Information Leading Nunes<\/a> to announce that President Trump<\/a> may have been surveilled by the Obama Administration<\/a> before he took office. Now, those officials, again, according to the reporting of the New York Times<\/a> here, this is not reporting from nbc news, but according to the New York Times<\/a>, as the senior director for the intelligence at the National Security<\/a> council, he was appointed he was brought in, rather, by ousted National Security<\/a> adviser michael flynn. Also named by the times, michael ellis, a lawyer who\rworks on National Security<\/a> issues at the white House Counsel<\/a>s office. Now, he previously worked for devin nunes. Remember, key to point out here, the announcement from nunes set off a firestorm of controversy around him and around his committees investigation into russian interference. Nunes had briefed the president before sharing that material with his democratic colleagues on the Intelligence Committee<\/a>. Of course, those colleagues supposed to be working hand in hand with him here. That led to accusations that nunes was working with the white house and lending some to lend some credibility to trumps claims that he was wiretapped. This new report from the New York Times<\/a>, if true, could certainly inflame those accusations. We should say this reporting from the times based on sources described only as several current american officials. As i mentioned before, nbc has not independently confirmed the report. The report also says that these officials, played a role in providing the information. That they assisted in the disclosure of the intelligence reports. It is not clear what precisely that entails or how precisely they would have been involved. In a statement, a spokesman for chairman nunes telling nbc news, as he has stated many times, chairman nunes will not confirm or deny speculation about his sources identity. He will not respond to speculation from anonymous sources. A lot going on here. A lot of confusion. Kasie hunt is on capitol hill. She was at that Press Conference<\/a> that adam schiff just held. She asked him some questions. So, kasie, we have that report from the New York Times<\/a>, what exactly are we hearing from adam schiff, from the top democrat in the Intelligence Committee<\/a> right now . Reporter confusion, i think, is still the word for what is going on with this investigation, steve. Even the Ranking Member<\/a> here was asked if he had information he had promised earlier. He said, you know what, this day completely got away from me and like many days on this investigation, i think we all feel that way a little bit. So, if you just want to reset here for a minute, clearly this\rschiff said today. He said that he just received this letter basically as spicer was talking about it in the briefing. Heres what schiff had to say. On the same day that the New York Times<\/a> broke a story saying that the source of the materials that were provided to our chairman was, in fact, National Security<\/a> Council Staff<\/a>, i was informed in a letter from white House Counsel<\/a> that white house excuse me, National Security<\/a> Council Staff<\/a> found these materials in the ordinary Course Of Business<\/a>. Now, that timing concerns me. If, in fact, the National Security<\/a> Council Staff<\/a> that discovered these materials reportedly in the ordinary Course Of Business<\/a> or the same National Security<\/a> staff that provided them to the chairman to be provided to the president , it raises a profound question why they were not directly provided to the white house by the National Security<\/a> staff and instead were provided through a\rroute involving the chairman. Reporter so, again, another twist in this saga that raises questions about the credibility of this House Intelligence Committee<\/a> investigation. Now, adam schiff says he wants to maintain the credibility of the investigation, but, again, that he has concerns about it. He also said he is available any time as soon as possible to go down to the white house and view whatever these materials turn out to be. Steve . All right, kasie hunt on capitol hill. A very unexpectedly busy day. Kasie hunt, thank you for that. Reporter story of my life. Lets go to the white house now for that side of the story. Kelly odonnell standing by there. Kelly, this report from the New York Times<\/a> hit just before sean spicer and his regular Daily Briefing<\/a> were set to begin in the white house there. What is the white house saying in response to what the New York Times<\/a> is reporting . Reporter very little. Sean spicer would not confirm anything in that report, would not engage on it, not taking questions that relate to it, but as kasie just outlined and\rcertainly congressman adam schiff also made this nexus between the timing of the New York Times<\/a> report and this letter inviting the intelligence top officials from the house and Senate Committees<\/a> to view this material. So, clearly sean spicer, the spokesman for the president , knew this was coming. He was prepared for this. And did not want to take questions that would help us to understand if there is anything to the recording in terms of the white house being willing to confirm or refute elements of that story. One of the Big Questions<\/a> comes down to not only white house staffers, what may they have done or not done, but the president , himself, after he sort of set up first the tweeted claim of being wiretapped, which has been roundly discounted by officials with the ability to know if there had been any socalled wiretap, when he brought broadened that to more surveillance. In a televised interview, the president said more information would be coming and it would be good stuff. Today our colleague, kristen\rwelker, put this question to the White House Press<\/a> secretary any potential that the president had a hand or any knowledge of what has transpired. Did the president direct anyone in this white house or in his National Security<\/a> team to try to find information or intelligence to back up his assertion about wiretapping . I dont im not aware of anything directly. Id have to look into that in terms of again, theres two sides of this. One is the information side, and two is the policy and the activities and the legal piece of what happened. And i dont theres those are big buckets, if you will. So its possible . Im not going to comment on it. Reporter so, one thing the sean spicer was not prepared was to bring in the degree to which the president may or may not have been involved on this question of this incidental surveillance and this Intelligence Product<\/a> or Intelligence Data<\/a> that may be\rnow available for review for the intelligence top officials from capitol hill. It will be important to revisit that question later on to see if the president might have had any direct knowledge of this. Certainly he raised the issue, himself, by talking about surveillance, and by suggesting there would be more information brought to the public. He said that on television. And so that question that our colleague, kristen, asked, seemed to have real merit in the moment, and so far, the white house is not able to go into any detail to give us an answer on that. Steve . All right. Kelly odonnell at the white house. Kelly, thank you for that. Lets bring in now david french, hes a writer at the national review. And david, i know you have youre a conservative voice, though, who has been saying republicans and conserve ti ati need to be taking this issue of russian interference in the election very seriously. Im just wondering what you make of the events today. We have this report in the New York Times<\/a> saying, hey, there were people at the white house, two people in the administration, who played some\rrole, according to the times, in getting this information to nunes. We know nunes took the information to the president , we know democrats on the Committee Said<\/a> he should have shared it with us. We have the white house offering this letter now saying, hey, theres some information gleaned in the ordinary course of work by the National Security<\/a> council, we want you to come view it. What do you make of all the pieces that are suddenly floating around out there . Heres the problem. The origin of this confusion lies with the trump tweets. Where trump has said, he was wiretapped, its as bad as watergaets, its a huge scandal, then began to seek external validation for this tweet. For this argument. He didnt come forward with evidence. And so heres the fundamental problem. Theres two fundamental problems with what nunes did. Fundamental problem number one, its looking increasingly like the white house fed Him Information<\/a> that he turned around and fed back to the white house in a manner that led everyone to believe independently discovered it and\rit was information that didnt confirm trumps tweet but he was able to use to say he felt validated. Thats a problem. Thats not his role as chairman of the committee. Heres the second problem. Hes not sharing that information with his own committee. Instead, hes talking in these vague terms like he doesnt disclose source and methods, sources and methods like hes a member of a spy agency, himself. Like he had some sort of clandestine meeting that nobody needs to know about. But, again, lets remember, hes the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee<\/a>. He is not an employee, he is not a lawyer for the president. Its not his job to make the president s tweets look better. And so when you take all of these reports together, it creates an impression of a chairman of a House Committee<\/a> essentially working to backfill the president of the United States<\/a> tweeting and that is not his role and its created an enormous amount of confusion and has caused further loss of confidence in the work of the committee. And we know by all appearances, the work of that House Committee<\/a> right now seems\rstalled. There was talk there from adam schiff, the ranking democrat, that proposed Witness Lists<\/a> are being passed back and forthright now. There have been some proceedings for this week that were put off. Going forward, based on everything you just said right there, can you see a scenario where nunes recovers his credibility with the democrats on the committee . Recovers enough sort of standing to proceed with this investigation and have the results, whatever they may be, accepted by both sides . Well, i mean, you know, theres a lot of second acts in American Politics<\/a>. And i cant imagine a course correction, one where he says here is the information that i viewed. Im going to make it available to my committee, which is all clear to view secret information, topsecret information. So he does what hes supposed to do. He apologizes for going outside the normal Course Of Business<\/a>. And then he rolls forward. I havent seen any indication that thats happening, instead, you know, the news is changing every five minutes, but my last understanding is hes still not even sharing with his own committee what he found, what he\rsaw, and how can you be a Committee Chair<\/a> of an Intelligence Committee<\/a> when youre not sharing with your own committee the intelligence that youre viewing . And thats a core problem and i do think that there is a way for him to move through this and move out of this. I just dont see that thats happening. All right. David french with the national review. Thank you for joining us. Appreciate the time. Thanks so much for having me. Okay. Again, a very busy day here. Weve been pulled in all sorts of directions trying to cover politics today. Were going to cover all the bases throughout this hour. Please stay patient and bear with us as we take a very quick break here. On the other side, President Trump<\/a> also today, this would normally be the major headline in politics, but so many other things happened today. President trump all but declaring war on members of his own party who he says are standing in the way of his plan to repeal and replace obamacare and maybe much more. How far is the president willing to go to try to get these republican s on . Were going to take you through all of that in just a moment. Plus, also this, new controversy out of the state of North Carolina<\/a>. Over that controversial bathroom law down there. The state Assembly Just<\/a> voted to repeal part of it. Measure now awaiting the governors signature. Some opponents still arent satisfied. This isnt a victory for anyone, but most especially not for the lgbt community. Grown man now. I dont want to pry. Dad. But have you made a decision . Im going with the 1000 in cash back. My son. A cash man. Dad, are you crying . Nah, just something in my eye. The volkswagen 3 and easy event. Where you can choose one of three easy ways to get a 1000 offer. Hurry in to your volkswagen dealer now and you can get 1000 as an apr bonus, a lease bonus, or cash back. Had helped the pig with homeowners insurance. He had replacement cost coverage, so his house was rebuilt, good as new. The big bad wolf now has a job on a wind farm. Call geico and see how easy it is to switch and save on homeowners insurance. Obamacare. With republican legislation. Trump now issuing a threat on twitter this morning. Take a look at this. The president tweeting out, the Freedom Caucus<\/a> will hurt the entire republican agenda if they dont get on the team. And fast. We must fight them and dems in to 2018. The house Freedom Caucus<\/a>, very conservative wing on the republican side, now as much in the eyes of trump the enemy as the democrats at least if they dont get behind his agenda. Sean spicer, white house spokesman, suggesting that House Members<\/a> may still fall in line. Theres a few members of the Freedom Caucus<\/a> prior to last fridays vote and since then who is expressed a willingness to want to work with him, rather than necessarily as a bloc. And i think that there continues to be some promising signs in that with with that. So, again, i think part of it is i think people are more concerned with voting as a bloc,\rthen, in whats the best interest to their constituents and American People<\/a>, hes hoping people will see the Bigger Picture<\/a>, the goals that we outlined and sometimes not let the really good be the enemy of the perfect. We talked about this earlier this week with the Freedom Caucus<\/a> being resistant on health care, potentially doing the same thing on future big fights, it leaves trump with two possible courses of action. One, can he freeze out the Freedom Caucus<\/a> . Can he write them off if . If he does that, he would have to compromise with democrats. Option two, he would try to essentially break the Freedom Caucus<\/a> to make them fall in line with him and to pass legislation with only republican votes based on that tweet now, it appears the president is going with the latter option. The question, if he does go down that road, can he actually strong arm dissenting members of his own party into getting onboard with him in the future . Want to bring in michael steele, msnbc political analyst, former chair of the Republican National<\/a> committee, and howard dean, msnbc contributor, former governor of vermont, also former chair of the dnc. The two former chairs here. Michael steele, i will start with you. The Freedom Caucus<\/a> has been bedevilling Republican Leaders<\/a> In Washington<\/a> for years, doing this before donald trump was president. What donald trump is suggesting in that tweet today, could he have any success in strong arming them . I, you know, its kind of hard to say. I dont think that thats the best tactic to take with these guys. These folks have a principled orientation. They have a very strong view on Government Spending<\/a> and Government Programs<\/a> and the role of government. Thats how they got elected. I know firsthand because i helped get them elected in 2010. So i understand very much where theyre coming from and this idea that theyre just going to roll over is just its d disingenuous to believe that. Its not something thats going to happen. Instead of fighting with them, figure out how you create the sweet spot. One thing the ryan team could have done was instead of going down the road with the legislation they did, was just reintroduce the bill that all republicans signed off in the\rhouse and signed off in the senate and presented it to president obama, they presented that bill to this white house, it would have moved forward and then youd be in a different Operating Space<\/a> at this point. Instead of creating a relationship built around tension, you would have had one built around cooperation right from the start. If you wanted to pursue health care first. The threats have a limited purpose here, i think, and in the long run, does not serve the administration, nor the party any good. Now, the house speaker, paul ryan, hes somebody, hes had his own frustrations trying to deal with the house Freedom Caucus<\/a>. He said today he understands where the president is coming from, essentially said he thinks the president was venting with what he said. But of course, if the president does not find a way, if Republican Leaders<\/a> like ryan do not find a way to get all republicans on the same page, the only way to pass legislation would be working with democrats, but on that possibility of reaching out to the other side, heres what paul ryan had to say this morning. Wouldhat i worry about, noraf\rwe dont do this, hell go work with democrats to try and change obamacare, and thats not going thats hardly a conservative thing. By the way, Paul Ryan Sniffing<\/a> at the idea of working with democrats prompted this unusual reply, bob corker, republican senator from tennessee, he went on twitter, he said, weve come a long way in our country when the speaker of one party urges a president not to work with the other party to solve a problem. Howard dean, i read what paul ryan was saying there in the interview, though, essentially as a threat to the house Freedom Caucus<\/a>. Hey, if you i guys dont get onboard, were going to have democrats writing our own legislation. Is that how you interpret it . Yeah, this is really complicated. I dont agree with michael. I dont think they can pass the same bill because they cant do it in reconciliation, theyre never going to pass that through the senate. This bill is toxic. I mean, this bill is not just the in some ways the Freedom Caucus<\/a> saved the Republican Party<\/a> in 2018. If you had done this, you would have put out a put a whole lot of people who voted for donald trump and voted republican the last election out of their Health Insurance<\/a>. You would have had people dying of cancer because of what the republicans did. So its just as well for the republicans that this thing didnt pass. I have no idea ive never seen anything like this, of course, weve said that about a lot of things drup druonald tru done. I have no idea what theyre going to try to do. I think it would be fine if they work with the democrats but would get a position thats much more mainstream as far as the American People<\/a> were concerned. The American People<\/a> do not support what paul ryan wants. Michael steele, another question, a Bigger Picture<\/a> question about the house Freedom Caucus<\/a>, it seems to me watching them over the last few years part of their appeal to their base, part of the appeal to the voters who sent them there, is this idea that they are standing up not just to democrats but to their own party, and does that create its own obstacle, the idea theres an incentive there for them to oppose anything the president , anything Republican Leaders<\/a>hip tries to do just to show that they are standing up . No. Not really. I mean, they dont oppose this for the sake of opposing. They oppose on principle. They oppose on the fundamental value system that republicans have articulated for over a generation. Certainly going back to Ronald Reagans<\/a> time. And a lot of these folks feel that we moved away from that. Big government republicanism has no place with these people. And so this idea that youre going to spend your way into prosperity on the backs of future generations is an athema to them. They push back because they were asked to be in the room to make sure that government is responsive to the needs of people and to howards point about the health care bill, i think thats a valid point. About that particular bill. Which is why over the last seven years of the wasted opportunity to actually craft a bill thats not only anchored in these principles but actually would be received well by the american\rpeople, if your true intention was to replace obamacare. Another piece of news we are just getting right now, and howard dean, i want to get you to respond to this, joe manchin, senator, democratic senator from west virginia, just announcing in last few minutes he plans to vote yes on the confirmation of neil gorsuch to the supreme court. The backdrop, you have this, Chucklead Ers Hinting<\/a> at the pocket of mounting a filibuster against the nomination, trying to force republicans to come up with 6 f f 0 votes. Hes one of the more announcement by the democrat, joe manclihin, what does this d to the question of a filibuster on the democratic side . Nothing. Thats baked in. I expect two or three or four democrats to vote for judge gorsuch. What their constituency wants. I can tell you right now, if gorsuch is confirmed by democrats, that is unless we force mcconnell to exercise the nuclear option, if hes\rconfirmed straight up with 60 votes, 10 of which are democratic, the Democratic Senatorial Committee<\/a> might as well hang it up because theyll never raise any money from our base. All right. Howard dean, former governor of vermont, former dnc chair. Michael steele, former rnc chair. Thank you to both for joining us. Appreciate that. Were going to take a quick break here. On the other side, amid all that turmoil among the House Intelligence Committee<\/a> and its chairman devin nunes, the senate Intelligence Committee<\/a> held its first public hearing on russia today. Americans should be concerned because right now, foreign country, whether they realize it or not, is pitting them against their neighbor, other political parties, ramping up divisions based on things that arent true. More on that hearing next. Plus, response from russian president Vladimir Putin<\/a> today when asked about his countrys interference in the election. Ady when growth presents itself . American express open cards can help you take on a new job,\ror fill a big order or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. Find out how American Express<\/a> cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open. Com. Time now u for a check of the headlines at the half hour. A very busy hour In Washington<\/a>. The senate just in the last few minutes voting 5150 to overturn an obamaera rule that prevents states from Defunding Planned Parenthood<\/a> clinics because they provide abortion services. 5150 because it was a 5050 tie then Vice President<\/a> mike pence acting as the president of the senate cast the tie breaking vote. Also In Washington<\/a>, the senate Intelligence Committee<\/a> holding its first hearing today on allegations of russian interference in last years president ial election. One witness telling Committee Members<\/a> that russia targeted all of the republican president ial candidates. Were going to have much more on that hearing, what was said in just a minute. Also, the Justice Department<\/a> says it will continue to fight for President Trump<\/a>s temporary ban on travel to the u. S. By people from six predominantly muslim countries. This coming after a federal judge out in hawaii granted the states request to extend an order blocking the government\rfrom implementing that travel ban. And the white house says President Trump<\/a> and the chinese president will hold its first meeting at trumps maralago report april 6th and april 7th, expected to discuss trade, north korea and tensions in the north china sea. Federal investigatorors searching for the cause of yesterdays deadly bus crash in central texas, 13 members of a church were killed when the small bus they r traveling on collided head of hn win with a truck when heading home for a church retreat. Lawmakers in North Carolina<\/a> voting again in the last hour to repeal the controversial and costly bathroom bill. Excuse me, voted earlier today and governor roy cooper announcing just moments ago that h he has now signed that legislation. This is legislation that repeals the original law. It leaves lawmakers in charge of bathroom policies for public buildings and temporarily bars local governments from approving\rnondiscrimination ordinances. Governor making a Public Statement<\/a> just moments ago. This was more than about sports and jobs. It was about discrimination and it was about North Carolina<\/a>s reputation and it was about wanting us to work toward ending discrimination and i could not tolerate having house bill 2 be the Law Of The Land<\/a> in North Carolina<\/a>. Governor mentioning sports and jobs there because of the boycotts that were that came as a result of this law being passed and signed last year. The ncaa said that it would not hold any of its College Championship<\/a> events in the state of North Carolina<\/a> until and unless the law was removed from the books. The nba also pulled this years allstar game from charlotte, companies had pulled back on plans to invest in the state as well. Mariana is standing by in the State Capitol<\/a> in raleigh. So, mariana, obviously the backdrop to all of this, Big Sort Of Money<\/a> at stake here in terms of boycotts from the state. Is this legislation going to satisfy, do we know, those boycotts . Reporter we dont know, steve, and actually the ncaa had a previously scheduled Press Conference<\/a>, thats happening at 6 30 p. M. Eastern today, so well be looking out for reaction from them to this Replacement Bill<\/a>. But as you mentioned, this Replacement Bill<\/a> 142 is kind of like a compromise bill. Neither side seems particularly happy with the outcome. On the one hand, you have Lgbt Activists<\/a> who still feel that this Replacement Bill<\/a> leaves room for discrimination because of the issues that you mentioned. And then on the other, you have conservatives here who didnt want to repeal hb2 in the first place. But, again, as you said, the States Economic<\/a> interests took\rprecedent. Thats the feeling that we got here today. The state had already lost so much. You mentioned the nba championship, paypal also pulled out of North Carolina<\/a>. They were supposed to build a big facility here that would create hundreds of jobs. You had arists like bruce spr g springsteen canceling their concerts. When that happens, its the Working Class Person<\/a> in North Carolina<\/a>, the person who was going to work in the hotel or sell pretzels at the concert that gets affected. We got a feeling today that that was really in some lawmakers minds today when they voted to repeal hb2 and put in this Replacement Bill<\/a>. No doubt, however, that the big winner here today was democratic governor roy cooper. He, of course, campaigned against hb2, won the governorship, you know, Razor Thin Margin<\/a> and then today he, you know, was basically one of the architects that credits himself with repealing hb2 and\rputting this Replacement Bill<\/a> in place. He tweeted about the repeal, he said, today we repealed hb2. It wasnt a perfect deal, or my preferred solution, but an important first step for our state. So in that tweet, hes even admitting that this was a compromise bill. That hb2 might be gone, but the issue still remains here in North Carolina<\/a>. Steve . All right. Mariana in raleigh, North Carolina<\/a>. Thank you for that. Lets go back now to the nations capitol, capitol hill, leaders of the senate Intelligence Committee<\/a> today renewing their promise to conduct an independent and nonpartisan or bipartisan investigation into alleged russian interference in the president ial election, and potential ties between the Trump Campaign<\/a> and russia. This comes amid all of those questions about whether the separate Investigation Being Run<\/a> by the House Intelligence Committee<\/a> can remain on course in light of a visit that republican chairman devin nunes\rmade to the white house. Now todays Senate Hearing<\/a> focusing on alleged russian interference, heres what some of the Committee Members<\/a> and some of the witnesses had to say. The takeaway from todays hearing, were all targets of a sophisticated and capable adversary. This is not fake news. This is actually what happened to us. Deception and active measures have long been and will remain a staple of russian dealings. Has russia conducted other similar campaigns in other countries . Yes, the commander in chief has used russian active measures at times against his opponent. He claims that the election could be rigged. That was the number one theme pushed by r. T. s news, outlets all the way up to the election. Was this an act of war . Its definitely a part of the cold war system that we knew 20, 30 years ago. And joining me now, michael crowley, Senior Foreign Affairs<\/a> correspondent for politico. The timing on this is interesting because you have the\rcontroversy around the house investigation for the moment. That seems stalled in terms of actually calling witnesses and sort of the traditional investigative measures theyd be taking. Now the senate sort of getting in on this. What is the key difference you see between how that Senate Committee<\/a> is functioning and how the House Committee<\/a> is sort of maybe not functioning right now . Well, i mean, ts looks like partisanship and professionalism, competence. Those are the two key things and i think they go somewhat hand in hand. On the house side, you really have kind of a partisan fight and it does look like, you know, devin nunes has handled this a little less than like a pro. Hes already had to apologize to his colleagues once for the way hes gone about this, and the two sides on that committee, particularly nunes and his couldn counterpart, adam schiff, are dug into separate bunkers. It has a partisan veneer. Nunes has not conducted it competently, professionally. The story line further clouded today with the revelation it appears two National Security<\/a> staffers at the white house may have helped provide him with documents that he talked about before, talking to his colleagues on the committee about surveillance of Trump Officials<\/a> being picked up in secret surveillance of foreign diplomats and on the senate side, briefly, what you seem to have is comedy, professionalism, a smooth process. The chairman and the Ranking Member<\/a> are getting along. Its kind of like the adults finally showing up. It was interesting watching some of that testimony before the Senate Committee<\/a>, though, today, it did strike me that in piecing this together in trying to draw, ultimately trying to draw conclusions about the level of russian interference, the effect of russian interference in the election, that sort of thing, it might be a less precise question than maybe we assume, and what i mean in particular, one of the witnesses there was talks about an instance where donald trump on the Campaign Trail<\/a> had cited a fake news article you could\rtrace back to russia, but then in the same sort of line of thought, he got all the way to birtherism and claims of a rigged election saying these are things russians would like people in the United States<\/a> to be talks abouing about. It seems that may be true. Seems there could be a million other reasons trump got into birtherism in the first place or got into sort of claims about rigged elections to make the case that this was from russia, that this is the direct connection to russia. It seems like there may be some gray area in this, a lot of gray area. Yeah, steve, i follow these english language russian news outlets pretty closely. You have a chicken and egg issue. Trump will Start Talking<\/a> about something and these outlets will pick up on it and run with it so its not clear to me, you know, where it came from. So that is a pretty Heavy Inference<\/a> at this point and i think the idea that, you know, trump was intentionally parroting russian propaganda\rloins, that would be at the far end of the range of possibility of what happened in this election. Its a pretty dramatic interpretation of the possibilities. I think that right now, you know, the focus of the investigation seems to be at a lower level, trump associates, did they have meetings in European Countries<\/a> with people who had ties to the kremlin . You know, was julian assange, was there some intermediary between wikileaks and roger stone . How did that work . So to go to the idea that trump, himself, was sort of relying on russian propaganda is a pretty big leap. Again, as you say, this committee, this hearing today was trying to set the context, lay the groundwork. I think a useful way, steve, because the coverage has really gotten bogged down in the blowbyblow process questions that are important, but reminding people of the First Principles<\/a> here, the major core issues at stake which is the potential interference in the election. And i want to make sure to get this in as well, Vladimir Putin<\/a>, he was asked about this idea of russian interference. This is what Vladimir Putin<\/a> is saying. You and the russian government did never try to influence the outcome of the u. S. President ial election and there will be no evidence found . Translator Ronald Reagan<\/a> once debating about taxes and addressing the americans said, watch my lips, he said, no, watch my lips, no. Wow. Reagans Vice President<\/a> george h. W. Bush who said that. Putin im curious behind the scenes, do we have a sense, if Vladimir Putin<\/a> was trying to influence the election in this country, if trump was his preferred candidate, if he had high hopes for what a Trump Presidency<\/a> would mean for the american russian relationship, just given how this has become the allconsuming controversy in American Politics<\/a> right now, does he feel hes going to get the benefits of the Trump Presidency<\/a> that he was looking for . Yeah, you know, an interesting point that ive heard made, you know, if this was the sort of most dastardly effective russian operation of alltime, it actually was too\reffective, too blunt, too blatant because theres a backlash now. Its going to be really difficult for donald trump to do some kind of deal with Vladimir Putin<\/a> that putin might have been hoping for. You know, if trump had kind of come in not talking so much about russia, these ties had not been exposed, he could have flown under the radar and cut some deals and would have been people who were upset but wouldnt have had the public outcry youre going to have now. The prospects for a new relationship with russia are really back burnered. By the way, i want to point out, that famous quote, read my lips, no new taxes which was uttered by george h. W. Bush, of course the most famous thing about that, he broke that promise. It was not a very binding promise and not a wise one to cite, steve. But, look, i think that Vladimir Putin<\/a> probably is frustrated right now. He probably felt that donald trump was somebody who could give him some things he wanted like Lifting Sanctions<\/a> over ukraine and some things to do with nato on its eastern flank near russias border and now i just dont think its very likely that much of that is\rgoing to materialize. In fact, you can see a scenario where trump and putin have to kind of puff out their chests at one another. You could get in a dangerous cycle of escalation. I talked to some experts, its actually possible the relationship could get worse from here. Michael crowley of politico. Thanks for the time. Thank you, steve. Okay. President trump, now paul ryan, both suggesting they may be willing to revisit health care after that colossal failure last week. There is a lot of uncertainty, obviously, about what a final bill might look like if they choose to revive it. Up next, were going to show you what a possible obamacare replacement could mean for millions of americans. Per roll\rfrom engineering and manufacturing. To stealth bombers. To nextgeneration fighters. To landing an unmanned vehicle on a carrier for the first time in history. Just wait till you see whats next. Thats the value of performance. Northrop grumman all right. Legislatively, it was an absolute debacle last week. Republicans withdrawing their plan to repeal and replace obamacare. Now, though, President Trump<\/a> suggesting he may revive the\rissue. House Speaker Paul Ryan<\/a> suggesting republicans may still come up with a plachb n of thein and replace the existing law. Which options would republicans have, which options might democrats have if there were a chance to work with republicans . What are the options for Health Care Reform<\/a> from this point forward . Jolene kent takes a look. Hey, steve. Here In Washington<\/a> at the Health Care Drama<\/a> continues as politicians are grappling with what would come next, whats on the cable . At the same time, americans all across the country of every political persuasion are waiting to find out whats going to happen with them when they visit the doctor next. President trump threatening the future of health care. Just minutes after the gop bill was pulled last week. Ive been saying for the last year and a half that the best thing we can do politically speaking is let obamacare explode. It is exploding right now. Reporter now this week, an aboutface. I know were all going to make a deal on health care. Thats such an easy one. Reporter all of this back and forth In Washington<\/a> has left consumers and the Health Insurance<\/a> industry desperate for answers. The exchanges are stable icing, according to the nonpartisan cbo. But could health care for an estimated 11 million americans americans other rely on these exchanges actually explode . It depends on what the government does next. President trump recently said that he expects obamacare to explode. He thinks over the next year or two, out of Pockets Premiums<\/a> and deductibles will get so high that increasingly, exchanges will be thrown into a death spiral. Do i think that is at all feasible and likely to happen . No. I think the exchanges will stabilize. Option two. President trump undercuts the law by halting subsidies or stopping enforcement of the mandate to buy insurance the secretary in hhs has a lot of discretion. They can decide how much theyll spoken advertising. They can decide whether or not theyll challenge the cost sharing subsidies, if they\rpersian gulf them. Which they have the ability to do. It will have a very bad effect on the exchanges and thats within their power. If that happens, many who depend on the subsidies may no longer be able to afford Health Insurance<\/a> whatsoever. And another scenario. Uncertainty and pullout regardless of what the government does. We went inside this meeting of Insurance Underwriters<\/a> scrambling as some are facing a summer deadline. We need on stabilize the marketplace now. Because we have so many insurance carriers that are either leaving the states that they participated in, or they have raised their premiums to such levels that it has become very difficult to find decent coverage at a decent price. If insurers keep losing confidence in the system, more companies could exit the market with one or perhaps zero\roptions. Thats already the case for greg in tennessee where insurance coils are dropping out sflfl we just want the opportunity to buy Health Insurance<\/a> thats affordable to us. Thats all were asking. It is not a liberal or conservative issue. The bottom line, Insurance Companies<\/a> are scratching their heads about whats next leaving millions of patients wondering if theyll have health care at all. Theres a new reuters poll that shows 80 of republican dozen want their party to try repealing and replacing once again but President Trump<\/a> has yet to outline any specifics on how to succeed or how exactly the second attempt will differ from the first. All right. Lets get a check on what happened on wall street. We gains over wall street. The dow gaining 69 points. A record close for nasdaq climbing 16 points. Today we had banks, financial shares leading the rally coming\rback from the worst week weve seen so far this week. And it is all corporate profits. They should be jump Bush Administration<\/a> quarter in this season. Thats the latest from cnbc, first in business worldwide. So how old do you want to be when you retire . Uhh, i was thinking around 70. Alright, and before that . You mean after that . No, im talking before that. Do you have things you want to do before you retire . Oh yeah sure. Ok, like what . But i thought we were supposed to be talking about investing for retirement . Were absolutely doing that. But theres no law you cant make the most of today. What do you want to do . Id really like to run with the bulls. Wow. Yea. Hope youre fast. I am. Get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. Investment Management Services<\/a> from td ameritrade. To landing an unmanned vehicle on a carrier for the first time in history. Just wait till you see whats next. Thats the value of performance. Northrop grumman people dont take with to being bullied. Do you think, is this an actual negotiating tactic by the president . Is this a constructive way to do it . Its constructive in fifth grade. It may allow a child to get his way. But thats not how our Government Works<\/a> of. Just in, amash there, a republican member of Congress Calling<\/a> the republican president childish and why is it . Because of this tweet that donald trump sent out saying the Freedom Caucus<\/a> will hurt the entire republican agenda if they dont get on the team and fast. We must fight them, and dems, in 2018. The president suggesting he wants to fight members of his own party who are in the Freedom Caucus<\/a>. Amash is in the Freedom Caucus<\/a>. And the president is saying if they dont get on board, im ready to go after them politically. That takes us to todays most important number of the day. There are 27 republican whos are members of the house Freedom Caucus<\/a> who we know are members of the house Freedom Caucus<\/a>. Has the group that doesnt actually release a list of its members names. But there are 27 who we know are members and who are not at the\rtime the Health Care Vote<\/a> was coming due last week. And who were not publicly yes votes. Some of them were no. Some of them were still undecided. Some said they were leaning no. The point is when it all came to a head, these 27 members of the house Freedom Caucus<\/a> were not yet on board. So these the people presumably donald trump is really talking about when he says they have to get on board or maybe well come after them. So if donald trump were to come after some or all of these Freedom Caucus<\/a> members in the elections next year, in 2018, what would that mean . Something to keep in mind, most come from very safe republican districts. Districts where in the general election, they win by blowouts. Heres a comparison. In their districts, in these 27 districts last november, when donald trump was running against hillary clinton. How did he do . He won by an average of 25 points. Not a shock. Generally very republican districts. How does that 25the point\raverage margin for trump compare to how the 27 republican members of congress did . He won by 25 on average in their district. What were they winning by . On average, they are winning their own districts by 31 points. So they did a little bit better than donald trump in their districts. Keep in mind, what does that mean . It was a general election. Maybe they just attracted more democratic votes than donald trump definitely we dont really know. The key is, when theyre both winning by that much, the real threat would be the republican primary. If there was a republican primary, some of these guys would be running. How many votes in the primary could he sway . We dont really know for sure. Donald trump won most of these districts in the republican primary. Not all of them. In some cases, by big margins, some by small margins. The primary is where the primary would be if there is a threat. Our most important number, 27","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"https:\/\/vimarsana.com\/images\/vimarsana-bigimage.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240618T12:35:10+00:00"}

© 2025 Vimarsana