Skip to main content

tv   With All Due Respect  Bloomberg  June 12, 2016 11:00am-12:01pm EDT

11:00 am
♪ john: welcome to the latest edition of the best of "with all due respect." our guests take a look back at the highlights of the week. and what a week it was with hillary clinton making history as the first woman to become the presumptive nominee of a major party in american history. clinton closed out the race with decisive wins on both coasts on tuesday. new jersey, and the delegate rich state of california. on the republican side, donald j trump, billionaire, continued to deal with the fallout from his racist comments regarding judge gonzalo curiel. let's begin with a victory speeches by each side's presumptive nominee. mr. trump: secretary clinton even did all of the work on a
11:01 am
totally illegal private server. designed to keep her corrupt dealings out of the public record, hillary clinton turned the state department into her private hedge fund. mrs. clinton: donald trump is temperamentallu unfit to be president and commander in chief. [applause] mrs. clinton: when he says "let's make america great again," that is code for let's take america backwards. mark: speaking in the vernacular of this election, it is crooked hillary versus unfit donald. john: that is correct. mark: those are going to be the negative attacks. i am wondering if you think either of them over time will not wear well unless there is new data. john: the new data point is the key issue, right? the question is right now there is a presumption among democrats that trump will continue to feed his narrative. if trump does not continue to feed the narrative, or that line of attack, it might be reduced in its effectiveness to some
11:02 am
extent. the e-mail thing is the same thing. if nothing happens, if there is no indictment or further story, i think that will run its course. it does not feel to me like that argument that trump is making is one that has legs unless the justice department gives it more legs. mark: last time he said he would give a speech next week, it might be on monday, about the clinton's corruption. there is a new secret service book flagging this. certainly going to get attention and feed into that. the thing about hillary clinton right now, and donald trump, you see it in these attacks, they both feel it. these are not synthetic. these are not manufactured. you think about george bush and john kerry. his attacks on john kerry being a guy who was not constant. flip-flopped. bush believed that. i have to tell you, it is such a big advantage in a presidential race when your candidate believes the line of attack. both of them do. john: the interesting thing about it to me is that these are
11:03 am
the kinds of attacks you normally don't see until october. it is hard for me to quite imagine. it is not hard for me to imagine this level of vitriol continuing throughout the campaign, it is hard for me to imagine that these attacks will be the same attacks that we will still be discussing this stuff come october. let's look at clip number two in our comparison side-by-side. sometimes, when you are running for president, you have to let people know that you feel their pain. and trump and clinton did. mr. trump: i have traveled to many of our states and seen the suffering in people's eyes. i visited communities in new york, new jersey, pennsylvania, connecticut, indiana, and ohio whose manufacturing jobs -- literally, these jobs have virtually disappeared. it is an embarrassment to our country, and it is horrible. mrs. clinton: i have learned a lot about you. i have learned about those persistent problems and the unfinished problems of america that you are living with. so many of you feel like you are out there on your own.
11:04 am
that no one has your back. well, i do. john: so, they're both basically making a pitch -- we haven't heard that much from trump in a long time making that -- both making a pitch for what has been talked about as the forgotten middle class. who do think delivers that pitch better and can carry that forward better? mark: trump is new to it. hillary clinton has spent decades in public life talking about children, families, trying to help people. her detractors who do not think she cares about that, do not understand what her orientation is about. hearing those words from donald trump last night was striking. that is the kind of rhetoric that republicans want him to use. he has traveled around the country. he has spent far less time talking to voters than any nominee in the modern era. but, he does understand the country, and he is running because he does see these large economic factories.
11:05 am
-- large economic factors. it will be interesting if he tries to talk about specific people at the convention or elsewhere. is he able to talk about human beings on a human scale, rather than at 30,000 foot. john: he understands people's frustration and anger in a very deep way and in a very visceral way that has served him very well throughout this campaign. i do think the question is, and i am fine with politicians giving teleprompter speeches, but the question is whether trump can have that conversation off of the teleprompter. whether he can have that conversation at a town hall meeting. you have never really seen that from donald. mark: one more clip. trump and clinton boiling down their key messages in the general election. mr. trump: the beauty of america first is that it brings us all together. every american worker of every background is entitled to the same benefits, protections, and rights, and privileges. we will make our country strong again. ladies and gentlemen, we will make america great again. mrs. clinton: we believe cooperation is better than conflict. -- -- unity is better
11:06 am
than division. empowerment is better than resentment. bridges are better than walls. we are stronger when we respect each other, listen to each other, and act with a sense of common purpose. mark: a lot of presidential candidates have stump speeches. neither of these 2 candidates has done that. it will be fascinating to see, given how well both of them did last night on various dimensions, and how well written both speeches were, which one adopts their speech from last night more frequently as basically their core messages. john: it is funny. i think trump -- hillary's argument is that trump's make america great again is like i want to go backwards. in some ways, i don't think that trump actually, in some ways, would even disagree with that. there is a nostalgic quality. the lost american greatness, which is what trump's campaign is about. her campaign, the things that she is talking about i think will be enduring because of pure intellectual reasons. she so needs the obama coalition. that is a coalition that is all about diversity. i think this will be a theme you
11:07 am
will hear from her throughout. whether that will actually work for her, i don't know, but i think you will hear it all throughout her campaign. mark: trump using a teleprompter, hitting all of the cords republicans want -- it is a metaphor for his recovery to some extent last night. fascinating to see if he keeps it up. john: still ahead, where does the stop trump movement stand, and is there still a way for the republican party to nominate someone else? that, and more, when we come back. ♪
11:08 am
11:09 am
11:10 am
♪ john: for the past week, donald trump's comments about judge curiel has put him on thin ice with a number of different segments of the republican party, including folks like conservative radio host hugh hewitt and steve dietz, who are among what seems to be a growing chorus of people suggesting that maybe delegates at next month's republican convention should
11:11 am
change the rules to stop trump's coronation if he does not change his behavior. how live are those efforts and how realistic are they? to answer those questions, we are joined by 2 of them aging guests. -- we are joined by 2 amazing guests. republican lawyer and msnbc analyst ben ginsberg. right here in the studio with me. and from our d.c. bureau, tim miller, advisor to the anti-trump our principles pack and former communications director for jeb bush's presidential campaign. gentleman, good to see you. ben, you have been on television, rules maestro that you are -- famous electoral thief -- guy who knows how to work the system. you have been on television saying "this can't happen. won't happen.
11:12 am
very unlikely to happen." please explain why you are so pessimistic, even as the voices for a potentially dump trump convention get louder. ben: this is not a pessimism/optimism. this is simply the political reality. the rules change itself, mechanically, not terribly difficult. the political will to make history at a convention is much more difficult. john: forget about the political will, in terms of the rules, what would be required? you are saying that is not the hard part? ben: no. there are a couple of different ways being floated. to me, the easiest way is to take the rule that says you need a majority of delegates, and make that a super majority of delegates for the first ballot. delegates become unbound on the second ballot. simple word change. john: so trump would then need like 2/3 of the delegates to get the ballot? ben: right. john: tim, to the question that ben just raised, the question of political will, i know you have your finger on the pulse of the never trump, and now the dump trump movement, tell me about what you think of that. is there the political will out there to make history at the republican convention? tim: look, i think at this point it is probably unlikely, but there is increasing interest. to ben's point, the mechanics of this are easy enough that it donald trump continues to have a
11:13 am
couple of bad weeks, i expect that his polling to tank over the next few weeks as hillary clinton unites the democratic already and gets bernie -- the democrat party and begins to get bernie sanders supporters into her fold. i think the will could be there. i know at least one or two members of the rules committee have expressed interest in this. look, from my perspective, if you are of the view that donald trump is just a standard republican nominee in the mold of mitt romney or ronald reagan, or whatever, i understand ben's point. this seems too extreme to do. if you are of the view that donald trump is a threat to the party and to the republic -- he is anti-gop platform, anti-constitution -- why would you not want to make a change that would give every delegate the opportunity to vote their conscience? i think if you did that, trump would probably still be the nominee, but i think that is the right thing to do for the party and the delegates. mark: i will engage you guys in a hypothetical. i do not want anyone getting mad. i'm just trying to test the system. ben: no promises. mark: take this away from donald trump and the things that he is -- the things that he has done that has created so much controversy and raised the
11:14 am
question that we are discussing. clearly, if the republican nominee killed a person right now, right, then, the delegates, the people in the committee would say, of course we have to find a way -- even though the person got a majority -- we have to bring the nomination to someone else. right? ben: you mean or if a candidate got indicted? you would expect the convention to do something, i pathetically? mark: something like that. here is my question, leaving aside the political environment, what do you think -- what kind of offense -- could actually be committed i this nominee that might change your judgment about whether it is possible? ben: i am not sure there is one. what i'm talking about is you need the leadership to organize. not only the rules committee at the convention, but the 2472 delegates themselves. that group does not even gather together there until the convention starts. number one, you would need to
11:15 am
see political leadership, and someone who the delegates would actually listen to. i'm not sure anyone has identified who those people are, combined with the need in the hothouse atmosphere of the convention to actually be able to form a with system to get the delegates to do something like that. mark: tim? tim: mark, my answer to that is that i think ben, with all respect, is being kind of limited by what is possible from a mechanical perspective. this has been an unprecedented year. donald trump is an unprecedented candidate. and, i think that if the delegates themselves -- i know ted cruz has over 800 delegates -- they could organize amongst themselves and have enough power to make this happen. in answer to your hypothetical, i think donald trump has already done everything that would need to be done for this to be on the table. the only thing that would have to change for it to become realistic is his viability. i think his poll numbers are basically the only reason why there aren't more prominent people talking about this right
11:16 am
now. john: ben, tim miller just accused you of having a deadly lack of political imagination, basically. is that the truth? that you are basically just totally limited by conventional thinking? ben: i like to think that i see the entire horizon, though perhaps not as bright as tim is seeing right now. i have worked. i've been on the rules committee. i have worked conventions before. i think setting up a whip operation to be able to achieve something historic like that -- it is really difficult. you do need leadership from the top, and a cause. so, i have not seen that either from the leadership of the republican national committee, or enough elected leaders that actually have the influence with who the delegates are. john: tim, let me ask -- tim: i think cruz would be the person that can do it. john: tim, let me ask you this question. let me ask you this question. we have a lot of efforts that went around in the never trump movement to try to find a third-party independent candidate. there was a discussion about romney, a discussion about david
11:17 am
french -- now david french is out. where does that stand right now? put aside the question of dump trump at the convention. is there any renewed interest in trying to go back to other original people that people tried to get in, or to others to tried to get in, or to others to say, we need an independent candidate more than ever now to stop trump? tim: i think that there is interest in it. speaking on behalf of our principles pack, our effort was always focused on the nomination. the ricketts family that funds us, they were never really interested in a third-party bid because of all of the challenges that go along with that. the texas deadline is now an issue, having passed. there are major questions of a third-party bid. never say never in this political environment, but it seems unlikely to me. john: tim miller, despite how rude you were to ben ginsberg, it was great to have you. tim: i love ben ginsberg. john: actually, probably because of how rude you were, it was great to have you.
11:18 am
ben ginsberg, your first time on this set, we love you, and it was great that you were here. coming up, what a donald trump conference call with surrogates this week revealed about his campaign, right after these messages. ♪
11:19 am
it was great to have you.
11:20 am
11:21 am
♪ mark: all rise hear ye, hear ye. this show is now in session. donald j trump, billionaire, is hearing objections from all quarters. the presumptive republican nominee is dealing with more reactions, pretty much all negative, to his comments about the mexican heritage of u.s. federal judge gonzalo curiel, who is overseeing that class-action lawsuit against trump university in california. we will go through who has said what lately on this. first, some breaking news from our colleagues at bloomberg politics. kevin cirelli, mike bender, and jennifer jacobs, first report on a red hot conference call that trump held today with some of his top surrogates, during which the republican presumptive nominee had pretty harsh words about his own campaign's media strategy dealing with this incoming criticism. joining us now to talk more about that conference call and
11:22 am
the dynamics within trump-world is our colleague from washington, jennifer jacobs. jennifer, this was a call that trump got on himself. tell us the nature of the call, then tell us some of the things that trump said on it. jennifer: well, he convened kind of an emergency call to talk to his surrogates, the people that speak for them. he wanted to instruct them on some talking points, what he thinks they should be saying. in this entire phone call, according to the people who told us about it, there was no discussion of backing away from this or apologizing. it was all about counterpunching and figuring out how to attack. it was trump saying, listen, i need you guys to speak for me, let's go hard at this. we have a strong case here. i think we can use this situation to take it to the next level. he thinks this can even help him in the polls. mark: jennifer, just to clarify, the kind of people on the call were what kind of people? jennifer: it was everyone from
11:23 am
top-level people like scott brown, the former senator from massachusetts, jan brewer from arizona, as well as people like a former "apprentice" contestant that was on the call. his pastor, mark burns. various people like that. mark: very unusual for the candidate himself to be briefing surrogates on message, but leaving that aside for the moment, tell us some specific things. if people want to read the story in full, they can go to bloombergpolitics.com. tell us some of the specific things that trump said in instructing them to fight back. jennifer: jan brewer, at one point, interrupted and said, your campaign just sent us a memo last night instructing us not to talk about trump university -- anything connected to trump organization. this memo says you guys are not authorized to talk about. trump fought back and said, wait a second, who sent this memo? i am going to tear that up and throw it in the wastebasket. you guys are fully authorized to talk about this. in fact, fight back hard. what he was telling these surrogates, we will overcome.
11:24 am
he says, i have always won, and i will continue to win. that is the way it is going to be. he says, you guys are the reason why i'm having these calls. sometimes you guys get information that is not very smart. he says you guys are sometimes getting stupid information from people that are not very smart. he promised to have more these calls with his surrogates in the future. he was clearly irritated with reporters, that is not necessarily surprising. he said the people asking these questions, those are the racists. he said, i will go at them. he was doubling down, tripling down, saying go hard on this. john: to be clear, jennifer, about a couple of things, the first is the last point you raised. not only is trump saying that we should not not avoid talking about this, but we should amp up the rhetoric and try to do some kind of jujitsu move whereby he is telling his surrogates to claim that reporters and others that are criticizing him for this are in fact the racists in
11:25 am
this story, correct? jennifer: correct. he also said, i have a hostile judge. he was criticizing the judge again. questioning the judge's credibility. one of the surrogates said we should go after the lawyers on the case. they brought up examples. it was talking points about how to really go harder after this. john: the other thing, you mentioned in one of the quotes, but i want to amplify it a little bit, he said there was this thing about, this is a stupid memo that was sent to them telling them not to talk about it. he says people that aren't so smart. he is referring to people that work for him, people that aren't so smart. he is attacking his own staff with his surrogates, right? jennifer: right. he was saying i need my surrogates out there defending me and talking for me. disregard this memo that was sent to you guys just yesterday. sometimes you guys hear information from people that are not so smart.
11:26 am
he was talking about his own aides that instructed the surrogates that they are not authorized to talk about trump university in the lawsuit. john: so, put that in the context of your other reporting on the state of the trump campaign right now. trump attacking his own staff for being stupid -- there are a lot of questions about whether this campaign is geared up to be a general election campaign. how does that mesh with your other reporting on where they are in professionalizing the trump operation? jennifer: well, we know that they are trying hard to professionalize it. this phone call was one case of trump trying to get everyone on the same page. trying to get everyone coordinated on a message. instructing people on exactly what he wants said. people have talked about, he doesn't really have a rapid response team. he doesn't have people going out there and defending him. he is essentially a one-man person rapid response team. he was trying to, on his own, usually the nominee is not on these phone calls. the candidates are not necessarily on these phone calls with surrogates instructing them what to say. he was on this one. he said, i want to do these
11:27 am
again in the future to make sure everyone knows exactly what you are supposed to be out there saying for me. his quote was, i don't have a voice without you. he is saying he really needs there helping him on this. mark: just a clarify some things before we let you go, first of all, how did our sources on the story characterize the tone of the call? jennifer: the source said that it was a little bit chaotic. people were interrupting each other. it was a conference call. mr. trump was very irritated to hear about this memo telling people that they shouldn't be talking about this. from their description, it sounds like it was a little bit chaotic. he was a little bit irritated. he was trying to act as moderator on this call, trying to get everyone going on the same page. it sounded like it was a very interesting phone call. mark: jennifer, beyond what is published in the story on bloombergpolitics.com, there are additional quotes that you have that i would love for you to read to folks from the call from trump. jennifer: sure. there was a lot of discussion about the judge. he was saying that he is not a good judge. that he is an activist against me. he was accusing the judge of making errors in unsealing documents. and said that he made some very bad errors.
11:28 am
he talked about there was a website that is dedicated to defending trump on trump university lawsuit. 98percentapproval.com. he was urging his surrogates to fight back against interviewers who asked them about this lawsuit, and ask their media interviewer if they have read these 19,000 pages of comments, positive feedback, about trump university. one surrogates said, listen, grill those reporters if they haven't read the comments on this website, ask them why. he was saying, we have a much better case. we have a good case on this stuff. he said, i think we have a much better case on everything. he talked a little bit about going after hillary clinton. he said, that is the next thing we need to do. step it up and really attack hillary clinton on the clinton foundation topic. mark: jennifer jacobs, great story with kevin cirilli and mike bender. it is on the website now. john: when we come back, our conversation with david french, the man who flirted with running
11:29 am
for president as an independent, right after these words from our sponsors. ♪
11:30 am
11:31 am
11:32 am
♪ mark: last week, all the political world was wondering who was bill kristol talking about when he said there might be a third-party presidential bid by someone with a good chance of winning. it turned out, he was talking about our next guest, david french, who is a lawyer, a writer for "national review," a veteran of the iraq war, and a tennessean. french announced on sunday he would not enter the race. he joins us now to talk about all of this. thank you for coming. david: thank you for having me. mark: what was the very first time in your life someone suggested to you, or you thought about, the notion of running for president? david: a little less than two weeks ago, a meeting with bill kristol, and talking about the times we are in. i think there is almost two categories of people that are
11:33 am
emerging right now. those that understand the gravity of the challenge we are facing in politics now. how serious, for example, the threat of donald trump is. not just the politics, but to civil society as we have seen in this judge controversy. and those who think we are seeing some kind of land of politics as usual. just with a little bit more outrageousness to it. i am in the camp that believes and understands this is something else entirely. when other people weren't stepping up and bill asked me if i would consider it, i said yes, i would consider it. mark: did he tweet -- when he tweeted to suggest that it was happening, because he had you in mind, was that with your authorization? did you lead him to believe that you were going to do it? david: that was a surprise, i have to say. mark: surprise, but at that point did he have reason to believe that you are going to do it? david: he had reason to believe i was thinking about it. yeah, absolutely. he would not have just tweeted that out. mark: but, he tweeted that it was happening. not that you were thinking about it. john: he said it will happen. david: it is easy to read an awful lot into 140 characters.
11:34 am
it was a process under consideration. i fully recognize, gentlemen, that i don't have name recognition. i also recognize, and i heard this analogy today, that the demand for an alternative -- it is almost like a pressure cooker. that there is an enormous amount of pent-up demand. even people who are supporting trump are doing so very reluctantly. there is a segment of democrats supporting hillary clinton very reluctantly. there is pent-up demand there. we need the right person to release that demand into our culture and our politics. recognizing the pent-up demand, i wanted to give it serious thought to see if there was a chance that i could be helpful in that process. john: was there one decisive factor? what was the key decisive factors that lead you to conclude this was not something to do? david: i will tell you, it is very simple. i believed, honestly, at the end of the day, even though there was not really anyone waiting in the wings at that time, that i would end up doing more harm than good. that, i have heard a lot of
11:35 am
people saying, you have a good biography. people will like you when they get to know you. in that circumstance, that is a huge challenge. there is a need for a person with an existing constituency. if i went forward and it fizzled, which was a likelihood, then it would give a misimpression to the american people and larger body politic that there are fewer people like me then there really are. people who are disgusted with the status quo. it is better for there to be someone who has that constituency to take advantage of the 65% of american people who are willing to look for a third alternative. john: there are people, friends of bill kristol and others, who are right now back at it -- especially in the wake of the judge curiel comments -- trying to find someone to pick up this mantle. are you actively involved in that process at all? david: i have been involved in meetings where we have been directly talking about that. i know that there will be people that will be approached specifically. i hope that they can consider it
11:36 am
in a different atmosphere then i did. which, is not with everyone talking about it, to take time with their families and think about it quietly. run the traps on it. take a look at the actual numbers, the actual work that has been done. i think they will see it is very viable. john: i assume you are not interested in breaking news about who those people are on the show? david: under the golden rule of i would not like to do to others that i -- the same experience that i had, no. john: what kind of people are you talking about that will be approached? more like you, or more conventionally suited to run for president? david: if there is one thing that we've learned in this process with me, i'm so happy to serve as a guinea pig here, is that number one -- there is demand. there were people contacting me from all over the country. i am willing to quit my job tomorrow to help you. but, if you want to get the $25 million or so that is necessary to really explode out on those ballots, you need that existing constituency. that is something that i lacked. the message that we can give to someone else is pretty clear. if you have that existing constituency, if you have money yourself or access, quick
11:37 am
access, to fundraising, it is there. all that stuff that you hear about a ballot access problem being insurmountable is false. all of the stuff you hear about third-party candidates never have a chance -- since when has this cycle been normal? mark: the french presidential campaign lasted about a week, a little bit less. david: we will call it the potential, yes. mark: i know that you had some unpleasant aspects of it. talk about what it was like for your family to see you on the news everywhere, and people talking about you in a way that had never happened he four. what was that like, the upside -- never happened before. what was that like, the upside of it? david: was there an upside, i'm trying to think. our family has already experienced the downside of being against trump. in that circumstance, not the trump campaign, but the trump supporters. it was a circumstance -- my older kids understand what is going on. my wife understands what is going on. she is opposed to trump and clinton. she knows the gravity of the times. it was a weighty thing.
11:38 am
it wasn't a heady thing. mark: you are a man that thinks of everything. i am sure you thought ahead. what was the zinger you were going to use on the debate against trump. let's hear one of those zingers. come on. david: the zinger that i was going to use? all i was going to do with trump was remind him of what he said. you know, he was going to try to pretend to the american people that he was a serious candidate for president. i was going to remind the american people that he thinks exxon can help beat isis. mark: would you have been nervous in the debates? david: of course. i am a rational human being. who wouldn't you nervous in the debates? i'm sure trump was at least once or twice. mark: you don't seem nervous now. david: you know, i hide it well. mark: i am predicting right now that you are going to be an excellent jeopardy answer at some point. my production. -- my prediction. david: maybe in the $200 category. mark: david french of tennessee. thank you for joining us. john: still ahead, great sports journalist robert lipsyte visits our set to talk about the passing of muhammad ali. we will be right back. ♪
11:39 am
11:40 am
11:41 am
11:42 am
♪ mark: there are legends, and then there are those who are in a class by themselves, like muhammad ali. the three-time world heavyweight champion and political provocateur died late friday night at the age of 74. here to talk to us about the greatest of all time is a great himself. the esteemed sports journalist who wrote the obituaries about ali in both "the new york times" and a special commemorative edition of "time" magazine. bob, thank you for joining us. i want to start with the store -- the story you start your peace with, one of the great moments, probably, in your career. looking back, at least. the day you were there when the beatles met muhammad ali. robert: i wish that i had been more in tune to history, or could look ahead and have appreciated it more. i just remember that these guys were kind of in the way, and i had to interview this fighter. i have been sent down. i got the assignment to cover the first liston-clay fight.
11:43 am
mark: in miami? robert: in miami in 1964. the real reporter did not think it was worth his time. clay was going to get knocked out in the first round. liston was unbeatable. i was told, as soon as i get to miami, rent a car and drive back-and-forth the tween the arena and the closest hospital so that i would waste no deadline time following cassius clay into intensive care. that was kind of what was in my mind. i went to the gym where he was working out. he had not arrived yet. right behind him were these 4 funny little guys with british accents and messy hair. around my age. they were wearing matching white cabana jackets. we were all pushed into a dressing room to wait. what had happened, which i did
11:44 am
not know right away, was they were on their first american visit. they had gone for a photo op with sonny liston. liston took one look at them and said "i'm not posing with them sissies." they were stuffed back into a limo, i guess the last time you stuffed the beatles anywhere. they drove to clay's camp. mark: when you finally meet him, what was it? what happens? robert: the five of us gasp. we had never seen such a beautiful creature in our lives. and, he said, come on beatles, let's make some money. they went into the ring. this is on youtube now. and, as if they had choreographed it. the beatles stood in a row. he tapped the first one. they went down like dominoes. they formed a pyramid. to try to hit him. it was pretty much over. mark: they put on a show. the beatles leave. what does ali say to you? robert: he says to me "who were
11:45 am
those little sissies?" [laughter] so, i don't feel so bad about not knowing who the beatles were either. john: i want to ask you a question about politics. this is basically a political show. ali, in addition to his athletics, was obviously a huge medical figure of the 1960's. you think about him joining the nation of islam, changing his name, then refusing to be inducted into the armed forces. just in the context of that time, how much of a political earthquake did those series of things cause? robert: they were in or mostly -- they were enormously important politically, socially, and religiously. i think what gets forgotten so quickly is here is this emotionally stunted, insecure, 22-year-old kid, but younger, out of an abusive home,, who goes to the nation of islam for some sort of security and father figure. suddenly, he is caught in the
11:46 am
turbulence of what of the most politically charged times in my life. he is against civil rights. he has turned his back on the main religion of america. he has cast off his slave name -- before "roots" came out and we really knew what that meant. he is suddenly representing millions of people, and is a polarizing figure. i don't think he entirely knew what he was talking about at that time. john: how much do you think it had an effect on -- it seems to me it was a hugely important moment for the merger of politics and sports. suddenly, you had athletes who saw themselves as needing to, or wanting to, or being legitimate for them to take these kinds of important stands on these important political and social issues. robert: very few came close. later on, jim brown, the football player. kareem abdul-jabbar.
11:47 am
tommy smith. john carlos at the 1968 olympics, partially in protest, to honor ali losing his title. mark: billie jean king. robert: billie jean king, excellent. yes. but, not to the extent that he seems to have done it. john: incredible story, incredible man. more on the best of "with all due respect" right ahead. ♪
11:48 am
11:49 am
11:50 am
♪ john: since bernie sanders launched his presidential bid 13 months ago, the presidential contest has been something that nobody thought it would be -- interesting. last night when the ap called the race for hillary clinton, it only fueled sanders supporters' distrust of the mainstream media and the political establishment. as this phase of the contest
11:51 am
ends with sanders all but certain to fall short of the nomination, we want to know what the final leg has been like for his voters in california, where he has been barnstorming for the past two weeks. what we found was that just as california is a microcosm of america, the sanders phenomenon in the golden state is a microcosm of the movement he unexpectedly inspired all across the united states. >> senator, in the final days of the primary season, have you found any moments to reflect on everything that this campaign has done for you, and all the people you have met? sen. sanders: what i see when i look out at the crowds of many, many thousands of people. when i go out in farm country here, in california, and i see latino kids, and black kids, and white kids, and working-class people out, and many people who have not been involved in the political process, i see such incredible hope in their eyes. >> that's why we love him, because he sees the people. he sees their faces. >> he knows us. sen. sanders: you think it is
11:52 am
appropriate to tell us they love muhammad ali, but they hate muslims. >> the first time he hugged a muslim with a hijab on tv, i was like, we are in -- we are in deep. we can't go back. >> just an old jewish guy, but his message is what is powerful. >> how am i going to handle june 7? how am i going to handle the results? am i going to be really depressed, disappointed? >> no matter what the outcome of this election is, bernie started a revolution amongst millennials. bernie sanders was shaking everyone's hand. when he came to me, i screamed, bernie! i gave him a hug. thank you so much for giving me a voice. >> a lot of people don't understand how hard it is to go through the immigration system. i've been through it myself. i spent 25 years trying to get legal. so, i understand how complicated
11:53 am
it is. he seems to understand it as well. >> when he first came out, even we were like, all right, i don't know if he will make a huge splash, but he will be able to move people to the left. >> the way he speaks. the way he is able to articulate everything so sincerely. my 11-year-old was able to understand what bernie says. >> i am a member of the onesie percent. bernie is bae. [laughter] >> it is amazing how authenticity sounds really good. he doesn't seem super polished. half the time his hair is unkempt, but i would hear him talk about oligarchy and a rigged system, and i started looking into him may be a couple of years ago before he was running. i couldn't believe he was a career politician. i thought he was some fringe
11:54 am
dude, but he has been doing that for a long time. i trust that message. there is so much momentum going toward bernie. even if it is the third party that comes up out of these next few months -- there are people that are not going to stop. >> so, we have just been really busy. we had lacrosse games, we had prom. >> we had stuff to do today, but we were like, i got to go. sen. sanders: anyone know the average contribution? >> $27. >> the $27 thing, the capitalism, the 1%, the billionaires, the millionaires -- so many kids we know identify with what he says. there is a lot of frustration, at least for me, economic inequality. >> it is hard for people to recognize the privilege they have. he has mentioned that before. >> a lot of kids and teenagers out there who aren't afforded the same opportunities that we are. i would like to know that they would have the same chances to get an education that we do. >> i think it is sad that there -- i do not think it is sad that
11:55 am
there is an end. all of his policies and what he talks about still has momentum. >> when i was a student at berkeley, that is when i first heard about bernie sanders. one of his main campaign points is the whole tuition-free college. people are tired of going into debt just so they can get an education. just so they can get a better lifestyle. that is a huge selling point for college students. it is still taboo in some circles, but he is the one guy who says take weed off of the schedule one list. stop punishing people for smoking weed. guess what, college students smoke a lot of weed. >> my first political rally ever. >> i started in the military, considered myself libertarian for a while, and slowly converted. the first time i could actually cast a vote for a guy that believes what i believe. win, lose, or draw, i cannot pass that up. [chanting "bernie"] >> the little bird that landed on that, this little thing managed to find its way in the middle of all. >> the bird, he is just a cute man. he is a cute old man. >> it was really endearing and really lovable. that was a really cool moment for his campaign.
11:56 am
>> when the bird came out, that destroyed the group chat. it froze. >> you can't script that stuff. >> even though i had an affinity to the clintons before, just thinking about some of the policies that he had and she supported makes me think i should be more independent about it and vote for the issues that are important now. there are a lot. >> if bernie broke off and did independent, would you vote for bernie as an independent? >> no, i don't think he would get in that way. >> we disagree on that a little bit. [laughter] sen. sanders: when i look out on those young people, and working-class people that want change in this country, who are prepared to be involved in the political process, i get very, very inspired. that, in fact, is exactly where i get my energy to go forward. [chanting "bernie"] john: our thanks to the great griffin hammond and his valet, you guys do not tijuana. -- do not go to tijuana. you will never come back. thank you for watching this incarnation of the best of "with all due respect." remember, you can find the latest news and analysis on our
11:57 am
website bloombergpolitics.com. we will see you back here in this space on monday. until then -- sayonara. ♪
11:58 am
11:59 am
12:00 pm
♪ john: hello, i am john mickelthwait. tony blair is the only leader to have won three consecutive general elections. he remains a controversial figure both in britain and the wider world. in an in-depth interview, i asked him at his role, donald trump, about jeremy corbyn, and about brexit. tony: i think we will remain. of course, it is a referendum. if you look at the opinion polls, it is very close.

24 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on