tv With All Due Respect Bloomberg August 23, 2016 8:00pm-9:01pm EDT
>> tonight, on "with all due respect", a special investigation, one woman, one nation, one pickle jar. was the lid loosened? were there even pickles inside? >> i must say i have trouble. >> what kind of pickles are we talking about? tonight, all your pickle questions answered. has she crossed the line? the investigation of dillary
clinton. ♪ john: we will try to keep things kosher tonight. obama tours a flood zone. a rigged system road trip stops in austin, texas. it is part of his retooled campaign tactic to shift this race onto hillary clinton, her e-mail controversy, and her foundation. >> the clintons made the state department into the same kind of
pay for play operation as the arkansas government was. think of what happened back then. the amounts involved, the favors done, and the significant number of times it was done require and extradited investigation by a special prosecutor immediately, immediately, immediately. john: today, the ap reported that more than half of hillary clinton's meetings were with individuals who gave money to the clinton foundation in some way, and yesterday brought a new troubling batch of e-mails. it showed messages between bill clinton's longtime aide and hillary clinton's longtime aide. they include requests for meetings between state department officials and individuals who have donated large sums to the clinton
foundation. the documents raise questions about whether special access was granted to folks who gave to the foundation. in terms of substance, my question for you, how troubled are you in terms of good government versus substance, and what is the potential political fallout of this unfolding controversy? >> when the american public is tuned to the idea that the government is not representative of the people, that it is rigged, that there is cronyism, this could not come at a worse time. this is something that is not good for american transparency and democracy. i am flabbergasted that this is not a problem they had seen coming for years. the activity of the clinton foundation has been criticized by the media in a peripheral way.
you would think you would want to get your foundation activities on the straight and narrow. john: first of all, we have to give that the clinton foundation does a lot of wonderful work around the world. they are trying to distract, but those aren't the issues. the issues are access of rich people to people in policymaking positions. if it's established the state department changed policy, it will be explosive. we don't have that yet. there is still something steamy and seedy, but it's not the way either party would want business to be done in our government.
alex: you can't get past the number that the ap is reporting. those numbers are a problem. john: let's be clear about this. clinton met with representatives of 16 foreign governments that donated $170 million to the clinton charity. there is no quid pro quo proven or asserted, but this is what the obama administration was worried about, and now it has the potential to be a huge distraction. alex: donald trump has been largely disciplined in his new quest to keep pressure and focus
on hillary clinton, which says you are grading him on a curve, he has not done anything to sideline his message in more than a week. if donald trump keeps this up, what can the clinton campaign do to flip the script? john: lalala, look over there! look over there! she will give a speech on thursday about -- the trump campaign is full of people with news reports about people on the trump staff that plays into the bad parts of this campaign. clinton is really good at misdirection. they will try to distract as quickly as possible and focus on that. alex: there was a massive new york times piece that detailed donald trump's own web of connections to foreign
governments, foreign banks, $650 million in debt, complex web of financial transactions that involve foreign entities undisclosed, that seems like a good opportunity for the clinton campaign to play defense. john: we will talk with our guest about donald trump's lack of transparency. on top of everything else, you have vladimir putin, and everyone seems to has forgotten paul manafort, ukraine, which is even more troubling than anything going on with the clinton foundation. there are plenty of other things to say. alex: and we did not even get to talk about the pickles. john: after more than a week after the flooding, president obama visited baton rouge. >> sometimes once the floods
pass, people's attention spans pass. this is not a one-off. this is not a photo op issue. this is said to make sure that a month from now, three months from now, six months from now that people are getting the help they need. one of the benefits of being five months short of leaving here is that i don't worry too much about politics. john: he may not worry too much about politics, but it is political season, and the matter has become a source of controversy. donald trump has been hitting barack obama and hillary clinton for not going to the flood area sooner. democrats say that what matters are the relief efforts and not the optics.
it is political season, a campaign, so who is getting the better of this argument right now? john: i think the president is under exaggerating. he has not cared about politics and optics for a long time. this is part of the obama playbook. he continues marching forward, favorables rising, and he will be an effective surrogate for hillary clinton. i do not think this is something she will have to address on the campaign trail. john: if you go back further to the longer unfolding political drama, the bp oil spill, 50 days after the beginning of that catastrophe, you had barack obama who did an interview that exemplifies what his attitude has been about this question of
substance versus optics. >> they are saying here is a guy who likes to be known as cool, calm, and collected, and this is not the time. this is a time to spend more time in the gulf and kick some -- >> i'm going to push back hard on this. this is an idea and the media has run with it. i was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the gulf, a month ago i was meeting with fishermen and talking about what a potential this crisis could be. i don't sit around and talk to experts because this is a college seminar. we talk to these folks because they know who potentially has the best answers so i know who's -- to kick. john: at the time, the
rationalism would not plug the hole in the ocean floor faster. at the same time, people look to the american president for leadership. he has stuck to that. these many years later, it seems like in this case now, everyone is saying, stay away, mr. president. alex: ish. i'm going to give you an ish on that. i do remember writing in some piece that the administration "had its boot on the throat of bp." there was a call for indignation from the white house, and it was delivered from the press secretary. we were getting the indignation
>> i just want to follow the law. the first thing we would do is we will get rid of all the bad ones. we have a lot of people that have to get out of this country. the police know who they are. we don't do anything. they go around killing and hurting people, and they will be out of this country so fast that your head will spin. we have existing laws that will allow you to do that. what people don't know is that obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country. bush, the same thing. a lot of people were brought out of the country with it the existing laws. i would do the same thing, and i just said that. >> i don't think you can put it in a soundbite or rush through a speech, let alone a plan. it is such a novel concept to people in washington. public opinion shows that the vast majority of americans want
to enforce laws and not add more laws. alex: this sounds a lot like the current immigration policies we have in place. what is going on here? john: he still says he will build a wall. that is not obama. no wall under obama. but donald trump's deportation plan seems to be the same as obama's, except obama does it terribly and he will do it terrifically, humanely, and more tough. i don't know. we discussed this a little bit yesterday. i think that kellyanne conway is freaked out about hemorrhaging white suburban women in battleground states and is trying to find some way to get donald trump in a place that will reassure some of them who otherwise are kind of freaked out by the racist and nativist
sort of stuff. alex: it is tight rope ballet, give them the whistle that it will still be the harsh deportation policy that we have been talking about citing dwight eisenhower, but reassuring moderate republicans that it's not going to be the harsh deportation thing that we've been talking about for the last few months. john: bill o'reilly said you liked operation wetback. i said i was not --, which is a lie. in the world we now live, pivots are harder for everybody.
>> have you considered using facetime instead of e-mail? [laughter] [applause] >> actually, i think that is really good advice. john: that was hillary clinton looking amazingly comfortable and relaxed on "jimmy kimmel" last night. this is stuff you study. what did you think? >> she is so much more relaxed than she used to be. it is obviously something she really worked on. there was an infamous appearance on the "stephen colbert show" in 2008. >> are you telling me that there is no one in this theater who can fix this mess that we are in? [laughter] [applause] >> i can. how are you feeding this?
try toggling the input. >> ok. >> i just love solving problems. call me anytime. >> really? >> sure, call me at 3:00 a.m. john: why is that infamous and what is bad about it? >> it played to all her weaknesses. she is trying to be funny rather than letting comedy come to her. she is worried about getting a message -- it was right after the debate, i can fix it. i am the fixer. comedy by definition is not supposed to be on message. that was clearly the problem with it.
she went to colbert and said we will be on your show if we can cover these talking points, and she is clearly stumbling over them. alex: she is scripted there versus non-scripted. john: let's play "jimmy kimmel" and talk about why it is better. >> on one hand, it is a serious chance for americans to tune in, and if they have not made up their minds. i want to take it seriously and talk about what we can do and how important it is, but you have to be prepared for wacky stuff that comes at you. i am drawing on my experience in elementary school. [laughter] [applause] >> you know the guy who pulled your ponytail. >> but that meant he likes you really. maybe donald trump has a secret crush on you.
are you in good health? >> well, this has become one of their themes. take my pulse while i'm talking to you. >> ok. >> make sure i'm alive. >> there's nothing there. john: ok, so that's obviously better, but just unpack why that is better. what is she doing differently that makes it more effective and natural? >> she is not trying so hard. she's being reactive rather than proactive. she has loosened the reins a little bit. she is more comfortable in this situation letting the professional take the lead. she was on "broad city," a comedy central show, and she just blended into the atmosphere of that show. she went in and let them be funny and served as their comedic prop that allowed her to
be relaxed and in on the joke rather than trying to force the joke. alex: can i hazard a wild theory? donald trump has created an atmosphere of unscripted real talking that is unique to american politics. i wonder if you think the unbuttoned clinton is a reaction to that. he has created an atmosphere of off the cuff, unscripted that she is picking up on. >> he's an easy guy to react off of. all you have to do is -- her goal is to be a normal human being. i am a sane person. i am a regular person. you might not want to have a beer with me and hang out, but look, i have grandchildren. that joke about the guy pulling the ponytail is a great joke. that is exactly how they think of donald trump.
that is a terrific line and probably not the last time we have heard it on the trail. john: there is an element where people think she is not good in spontaneous situations. i find her better in these situations now rather than "saturday night live." >> they have a broad idea of what they will talk about, but they are not strictly scripted. it works out well for her. take my pulse says you go along with this and then she gives a relaxed answer. that is good. whereas a script that says you have to be here, talking to a bartender, but it was funny because -- and donald trump says he is the center of everything.
definitely done. abc, nbc and cbs will be out of his this by the end of the decade and cable is on its way out because of the expense of the infrastructure. you can go and watch info wars online. they simulcast with a hundred radio stations and there will be about 5.5 million people watching. the cost to get on the internet, nothing whatsoever. future.the way of the alex: well, well, well, that was trump advisor roger stone delivering a speech about whether trump has plans to build a media empire after the election. joining us is mike feldman, democratic strategist and former chief of staff to al gore. and coming to us live from los angeles is mike murphy.
mike and mike, good to be book ended by both of you on this tuesday. what is going on with roger stone talking about the demise of cable news? is he laying the groundwork for the trump news network? mike: you are not going to find me that the end of broadcast television is near for a number of reasons. it is clear that there is a backup plan. it is clear that there are a number of people come right up to the top of the campaign thinking about how to harness this group of constituents who have rallied behind donald trump and my guess is that can take on a number of forms. john: mike murphy, here's my question for you -- we have seen donald trump's behavior -- you are famously never trump and think trump is a disaster. we see his behavior in the
controversy he has had. we now see himself surrounding himself with steve shannon, roger ailes, sean hannity -- as trump baxley trying to win this election or does he have some longer-term endgame that is more hollywood than washington d c? mike: before i do that, my old friend stone was protecting the end of television on am radio. morse code is the only thing older than that. [laughter] things change slower than they think. trying to tell the future of trump is a risky business because it is so dramatic. but he appears to be better at least at constructing the next great streaming business than a winning presidential campaign. he now has the pieces that could lead to something akin to what glenn beck did when he traded his own pay streaming network, which is getting a smaller
audience but generating revenue. i don't know if it will be a heist for money rather than a presidential campaign, but there's no question the presidential campaign is having real. alex: we're hearing news reports today that donald trump has pumped to the -- has upped the rent on all of his copies now that the campaign is being funded by small donations and not trump's dockets. what do we make of that? mike: they saved because they are expanding their staff any more square footage, but i think they would hold themselves to a higher standard. between the airplane and rental space, there's a lot of self-dealing going on here. i think it's not a coincidence trump decided to up his overhead the minute he got his hands on an income stream from his donors.
john: we have talked a lot -- i'm going to get to hillary clinton a few minutes, but let's talk about a few things from donald trump -- he has not releases tax returns, disclose almost nothing about his health records, that out the law zoo, wazoo, indebted to the bank of china. he is by far the least transparent presidential candidate of our lifetimes. will he ever start to pay a price for that? mike: i would argue he is paying the price for it. we're having this conversation now on a week when the conversation could have been about secretary clinton and e-mails in the foundation, he's largely step on that message with his own actions and questions about his own campaign. i think he has been paying a price. there's a sense that people are
not being told the full story and people are looking at both candidates trying to figure out can i sleep well at night knowing they are my president? i don't think he has gotten away scott free but mr. murphy's point, he may be undergoing a not at preventing him from releasing his tax returns -- i would be interested to read the fec report. alex: i asked both of you these question -- this question -- is there such thing as a pivot in american politics in this day and age? mike: i think you can evolve a bit at you cannot be the man of thousand faces. part of the problem trump has is that he has pivoted so many times, when is he not pivoting? he is like a real time pivot machine. it creates a number of trust issues for his voters. it's it has political interest to be less terrifying on the
immigration issue but if he ever starts to gain traction, he will pay the price when it comes to his supporters that are very nativist. i think he has checkmated himself on that. you will see lots of pivoting optics, the occasional kinder adjectives. they will start putting soccer moms behind him at the rallies, but the core message never changes because it affects trump. i don't think any campaign management team can put it in the box. john: i'm not going to let you answer the pivot question because we are running short on time, but i want to get to the hillary clinton question. you are a supporter but not affiliated with the campaign. how big a problem is the
foundation for her and how are they handling it? mike: it's a question about whether people can trust and believe in her. as all of us know, there's a cottage industry of clinical industrial media complex that has then focused on this for a long time. it's interesting to note that the trump campaign has been focusing on this and i'm sure mike is wondering how with 17 candidates in the race they nominated the one who actually donated to the clinton foundation, which is an odd thing. [laughter] it is something they have two manage through. i think the foundation has done incredible work and it is hard to deny it. i hope people focus on that a little bit.
it is unusual that the foundation which would normally occupy a certain protocol for a former president than how the secretary of state came president -- i get the appearance problem, but i think it is a political issue and is very much seen in the political context. people watching the campaign with them you that non-and people who have to decide who they want to lead this country in the fall get that fact. alex: we have to leave it there. the magisterial mike murphy and the majestic mike altman. -- mike feldman. check out mike murphy's podcasts called radio free gop. mike: it is good. alex: we will turn from the state of trump to the fourth estate after these words from our sponsor. ♪
john: who in the world would be better to talk about donald trump's love/hate relationship with the press than my next guest? thank you for coming on the show. jim: glad to be here. john: sean hannity owes the campaign what? jim: he's not only a very supportive television host, he's also an advice giver. he would reject the advisor label, though not entirely. he would admit he has a lot of interaction with the campaign and people around the candidate and his son, don junior, that he is a supportive tv has to is not a journalist. john: if you called him a trump whisper, what he reject that? jim: i think you would like that.
alex: there's so much talk on the campaign trail about liberal media bias and you have two former news had that are active advisors to a campaign and someone who is currently on tv advising a political campaign but there's no discussion about that. jim: the tail that wags the dog is now the dog. alex: a very large dog. john: we just talk to murphy and feldman about this -- do you buy the conspiracy theory that he knows he's going to lose the election but between them he is setting himself up to run a media empire after he loses in november? jim: i buy it halfway. i believe he wants to win the presidency. i believe that. i have no reason not to. is nothing definitive. that said, he's had amazing success and he has drawn ratings and we have heard him complain why am i not getting a cut of that money? i don't doubt he's interested in making a media play. alex: to what agree has a
support he has been getting from bite -- from breitbart been in the news? that it is an editorial breach? the support for those policies and a kind of political campaigning? jim: i think at breitbart, it was the reporter who was allegedly manhandled roughly by his manager and breitbart sided with the trump campaign over its own reporter. john: i think that's true. it looks increasingly like trump might want to make a media play. does there come a moment where fox says we are propping up a potential competitor? alex: cozy up with hillary clinton? john: we have seen murdoch do this before with tony blair -- alex: fox was created to specifically be an answer to
what was seen as liberal bias in the media. jim: there were stories about this during her senate campaign that there was some friendliness. i don't know because the fox audience, part of it loves trump. when megyn kelly fought with trump earlier this year, that was a problem with segments of their audience. it is intriguing and i would not rule it out, but they are running a business and need to keep their ratings. john: gawker is dead and there are so any eulogies that one of our millennial staffers has installed a gawker blocker. should we care? the new york culture, media culture, us in the business -- alex: the fourth estate.
jim: even the fifth estate. we should care on two levels. gawker was part of the media culture, the modern iteration of spy magazine. it was a reverend -- it was irreverent and went too far. it offended me, sometimes a lot, but it stood for internet era journalism. but to me, much more importantly is that a billionaire put out of his is through lawsuits and people say how can you defend gawker? who's next. alex: with all due respect, i was a long time tween reader of spy magazine. magazine. was no spy jim: i agree. it's the bratty year younger brother -- john: you take the notion that gawker may have been irresponsible but they did not bring this on themselves. the story is a ruthless billionaire put a publication out of his this. -- out of business. end of story. jim: even if they did bring it upon themselves, a billionaire
putting media out of business because he did not like what they were writing, who is that -- what's to stop and oligarch from russia coming over? probably a lot of things. [laughter] john: a word of advice for you. don't piss off peter thiel. coming up, trump movement and what it means for the election. if you happen to be watching us and washington, d.c., you can listen to us on the radio radio ad bloomberg 99.1 fm. we will be right back. ♪
"washington post" political reporter. great to have you with us. from the piece that you wrote, trump's legacy is predicated not just on whether he loses, but the margin by which he loses. talk about that. karen: if there was any doubt on the part on the part -- if there was any doubt on the part of traditional publicans that what trump has created is going to indoor after trump win or lose, his decision to bring in a new campaign chairman who represents the entire antiestablishment media environment put that to rest. so now the question for a lot of them is they are assuming he's going to lose. if he loses big, they think it may repudiate everything he has stood for.
that might lay the groundwork for the party to do a traditional rebuilding effort, but if it is close, trump is him -- trumpism is not only going to indoor, but there will be a major battle in the party over who is to blame for this loss. is that the people who nominated donald trump or is it the one to did not get on board? john: there's a downside risk to trump losing big, which is they could lose the senate or house conceivably. in washington dc, among republicans you know, is there more fear that trump wins somehow or that he loses? karen: the much hated inside the beltway republican establishment, i think they would like to see if he is going to lose, to do it cleanly so that there's not a lot of doubt as to what was to blame. they don't want it to be so big that it takes down a lot of
senate candidates. most republican incumbents are running better than trump in their home state that if the bottom flat out drops out, he's going to take a lot of republican incumbents with him. alex: before the appointment of stephen bannon to the campaign and roger ailes as an formal advisor, i've talked to a couple of never trumpers who believed the coalition would evaporate or more into the -- morph into the broader electorate. does anyone think that's possible at this point? karen: i think not. what they would argue is this is not ever going to be a share of the electorate that can get to 51%. the fact is it has gained a lot of market share in the republican party.
donald trump himself is not going anywhere. he will probably still be on the stage as well. john: you quote ed rollins in your piece where he talks about how the republican party came the chamber of commerce party and is no longer the party of small business. that goes to the question of populism. trump has unleashed these forces of populism. and they are very powerful. is there anyone in the republican party who imagines a future in which the republican party is populist, more populist than it has been over the past few cycles at least, but not nativist, xenophobic am a sometimes racist? is there a way to incorporate the good parts of populism and leave out the bad parts? karen: it would depend.
interestingly enough, it would depend on substance and policy. how do they navigate free-trade? how do they navigate immigration after this election? how do they navigate a set of policies that have become so dogmatic in their conservatism, so wedded to things like tax cuts that largely and if it's the wealthy that they don't really feel responsive to the everyday concerns of people on main street? that and this frustration with the party that seems to be benefiting everyone else is one of the things that fuels this. alex: when you look at donald trump, a lot of people will say the groundwork was laid by sarah palin who rose to the national stage on an unlikely character for republican politics. what about folks is a donald trump's policies could actually win a greater role in the american democracy were it not for donald trump? if there were a better messenger, maybe this is a winning platform for the republican party.
our daily newsletter. it is brilliant. while you're there, please check out a great new story for more insight into donald trump's obama-like immigration plan. will you be here tomorrow? alex: i will be here tomorrow if they let me in the door. i haven't done anything to disqualify myself. go in peace and pickles. john: i say sayonara. ♪
♪ rishaad: it is wednesday the 24th of august. i am rishaad salamat. this is "trending business". ♪ rishaad: we will be visiting singapore, sydney, and beijing this hour. asia-pacific markets extending wall street gains. investors are waiting the fed. off, record profit in the first dividend in seven years. the turnaround plan is seemingly working.