tv State of the Union With Jake Tapper CNN October 8, 2017 9:00am-10:00am PDT
latest on the investigations into russian linked ads that targeted american voters on facebook. watch the interview reliable sources.com and our media team's reporting on the harvey weinstein's scandal trump's attacks against the media and last night's "snl." reliable sources.com. and we'll see you back here next week. investigation ramping up. one week since the worst mass shooting in modern american history, investigators are still searching for answers. >> we do not still have a clear motive. we have looked at everything. >> we'll have the very latest. and gun control debate. as a nation remembers those killed and wounded in the las vegas massacre -- >> our souls are stricken with grief. >> there's a new reed call for -- renewed call for further restrictions on guns. >> congress continues to do nothing, mass shooting after mass shooting. >> reporter: will this tragedy be the impetus to change the nation's gun laws.
we'll talk live with senators chris murphy and ron johnson. plus, is rexit looming? as ru mrs of a rift between president trump and secretary of state rex tillerson swirl around washington -- >> i'm not going to deal with petty stuff like that. >> -- president trump insists there's no drama with his top diplomat. >> total confidence in rex. i have total confidence. >> but are secretary tillerson's days numbered? hello, i'm jake tapper in washington where the state of our union is still searching for answers. this morning, new information about a handwritten note left behind in the las vegas shooter's hotel room. a law enforcement source telling cnn the note contained calculations related to the distance and trajectory from the shooter's 32nd floor window down to the innocent crowd he targeted for slaughter below. one week after the massacre authorities are still combing through evidence and leads for any indication of what may have
led the shooter to commit such a horrific act. as investigators search for answers, lawmakers in washington are broaching the debate over gun control. this time with small signs of agreement, republicans have expressed openness to a measure that would ban or restrict ownership of bump stocks, the mechanisms used by the las vegas shooter to turn his semiautomatic rifles into something more closely resembling an even more rapid-fire automatic weapon. even the nra endorsed tighter restrictions on the device though the gun group wants to avoid doing this. through any new legislation. one senator at the center of this debate is democrat chris murphy. of connecticut. he represented newtown in congress at the time of the sandy hook shooting in 2012 and he is now calling on congress to, quote, get off its ass and do something about gun violence in america. senator murphy is joining us live from connecticut. senator, thanks for joining pusp a growing number of republican lawmakers say they're open to regulating or
banning bump stocks that allows a legal semiautomatic rifle to mimic the rapid discharge of an automatic weapon. are you willing to advance a clean bump stocks bill or will you insist on a broader gun control package? >> i am willing to move forward with republicans on banning these bump stocks that as you mentioned subverts legislation that has been long on the books, banning automatic weapons. i think you have to walk before you run and i think this is an important moment. the nra, at least in the time i've been in congress, has never been willing to change u.s. gun laws. i think they see that they were likely going to lose this fight in congress and so now they're trying to get it done through administrative action. this is the first time the gun lobby has shown willingness to come to the table and i think that's in part because americans don't accept mass shooting after mass shooting happening and congress doing absolutely nothing. but this is a fairly small change and if we want to have a
downward trajectory on the number of mass shootings you have to go far beyond just clarifying that people shouldn't have automatic weapons in this country. >> the atf, it's been reported, approved the bump stock during the obama administration. was that a mistake? >> well, the underlying language is ambiguous and that's what the atf's conclusion was in 2010. now i wish the atf had banned this technology then but their point is that with a statute that is unclear, it's up to congress to change it so ultimately i think that we have to have a bill before the house and senate that makes it completely clear that if you own an automatic weapon, if you've converted a semiautomatic weapon to an automatic weapon that that is illegal and ultimately it's best done by congress rather than through administrative action. >> more broadly, there was a pew
survey that found there's been a sharp drop since the year 2000 in overall support for gun control, the philosophical debate about gun control versus gun rights. back in 2000, 66% of americans thought gun control was more important than the rights of gun owners, today only 5 1% of americans come down on the gun control side, 47% on the gun rights side. why do you think that is? why do you think your side is losing the larger philosophical debate on this issue? >> well, i mean, this is one of those questions that comes out differently depending on how you ask it. there is no choice to be made between gun control and gun rights so that question is flawed from the outset, i am a second amendment supporter. i don't want to take away any gun rights that are held through constitutional protections for gun owners in my state. but polls also consistently show that 90% of americans support universal background checks, including gun owners, including
nra members. so people can support gun rights and support common sense restrictions to make sure that dangerous people don't get guns and that people don't get dangerous weapons. there is no inconsistency between the two. this is really one of the most unique issues in american politics where you do have broad agreement on these measures like universal background checks and you can't get them passed through congress. i ultimately don't think democracy allows for that very long. >> you said earlier that you would be willing to allow a clean bill in congress that bans or regulates bump stocks without having a further -- sorry pump stocks without requiring more broader gun control to be attached to the bill. is universal background checks the next step, though? you said you'd be willing to separate it. is universal background checks closing the gun show loophole requiring background checks for
private sales? is that the next step for people in your philosophical camp and senate? >> it should be the next step in large part because it's the most popularly accepted change. and it has the biggest effect. what we know is that in states that have universal background checks, gun crimes reduced by as much as 40%. there's a fiction that the gun lobby tries to perpetuate that there are no laws that could stop evil doers from perpetuating the kinds of crimes we saw in las vegas and chicago and that's not true. what we know is that states that have tougher gun laws, that keep criminals from getting guns, that keep those dangerous weapons like ar-15s out of the hands of civilians have dramatically lower rates of gun violence so we have plenty of data to tell us that if you have tougher gun laws you will have less gun crime and we know the most important intervention is background checks. it's the intervention supported by the largest numbers of
americans so that would be the clear next step that should be our north star. as we try to figure out how to proceed. >> but with all due respect, this horrific shooting in las vegas, the gentleman passed his background checks, there didn't seem to be any reason to prevent him from purchasing firearms, there were no mental health issues we've been told about so far that would have allowed anybody to block him from buying a gun. i understand the regulation you're talking about in terms of bump stocks but what about the fact that none of the laws you seem to be talking about would have prevented the shooter from shooting, it's just that it might have prevented him from shooting as rapid fire as he did. >> i think one of the traps the gun lobby wants you to get into is being able to only talk about a legislative intervention that would have addressed the last mass shooting. on that day that that shooter
turned his guns on civilians in las vegas, 80 people died in other parts of the country. many of those deaths could have been prevented by background checks. so we need to recognize that though these mass shootings are the up withes that get all of the attention, there's no other country in the world has the level of daily mass gun violence that we do and we have a responsibility to address that as well. now laws i think would have dramatically changed what happened in las vegas. in newton, as you know, we constantly ask ourself whether adam lanza would have walked into the school at all had he not had a tactical weapon that gave him some kind of bizarre perverted confidence that he could pull off a crime of that magnitude. you have to ask the same thing about this guy as well. so, yes, maybe getting assault weapons off the street would have lowered the number of people who died but that would have been consolation, that would be consolation to many of the families' victims who would still have their loved ones
still alive, but maybe he never would have walked into the hotel if he only had a pistol if he didn't have the semiautomatic or automatic weapons. >> stand by, we have more to talk about including explosive new sexual assault allegations against big-time hollywood producer harvey weinstein. president trump says he's "not at all surprised." what should democrats do with the hundreds of thousands of dollars weinstein donated to the democratic party. that's next. "state of the union" is sponsored by fisher investments. it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments.
clearly better money management. ♪ hungry eyes ♪ one look at you and i can't disguise ♪ ♪ i've got hungry eyes ♪ applebee's 2 for $20. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. (avo)it off with contrave. applebee's 2 for $20. it's fda-approved to help adults who are overweight or struggle with obesity. contrave is believed to work on two areas of the brain: your hunger center... i'm so hungry. (avo) to reduce hunger. and your reward system... ice cream. french fries. (avo) to help control cravings. one ingredient in contrave may increase suicidal thoughts or actions in some children, teens, and young adults in the first few months.
serious side effects are mood changes like depression and mania, seizures, increased blood pressure or heart rate, liver damage, glaucoma, allergic reactions and hypoglycemia. not for patients with uncontrolled blood pressure, seizure history, anorexia, bulimia, drug or alcohol withdrawl, on bupropion, opioids, maois, allergy to the ingredients, or pregnant. may cause nausea, constipation, headache and vomiting. reduce hunger, help control cravings with contrave. now you can talk to a doctor online and get free shipping at getcontravenow.com it's ok that everybody ignores me when i drive. it's fine, 'cause i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident-free. and i don't share it with mom. right, mom? right. safe driving bonus checks, only from allstate.
switching to allstate is worth it. only from allstate. t-mobile's unlimited now includes netflix on us. that's right. netflix on us. get 4 unlimited lines for just $40 bucks each. taxes and fees included. and now netflix included. so go ahead. binge on us. another reason why t-mobile is america's best unlimited network.
my ci can worry about it,ine. or do something about it. garlique® helps maintain healthy cholesterol naturally. and it's odor free. and pharmacist recommended. garlique.® welcome back to state of the union. i'm jake tapper. here with us is democratic senator from connecticut senator chris murphy. president trump is expected to announce next week he's going to or this week that he's going to decertify the international nuclear teal with iran. the president offered a preview of his thinking earlier last week. take a listen. >> the iranian regime support terrorism and exports violence, bloodshed and chaos across the middle east, that is why we must put an end to iran's continued aggression and nuclear ambition they have not lived up to the
spirit of their agreement. >> on the issues president trump raised, he's right, iran does support exporting terrorism, it does export violence across the middle east. was it a mistake on the part of the obama administration to not require iran stop its support for terrorist groups as part of this deal? >> absolutely not. the president is right. there are all sorts of other misbehaviors of iran in the region but what we came to the conclusion -- we came to the conclusion those behaviors would have been more dangerous if iran was a nuclear weapons country so we made a decision to take away from iran a path to a nuclear weapon. and the reality is the president is about to impose on himself and this country a dramatic self-inflicted wound because by pulling out of this agreement. iran will go back on to a path to develop a nuclear weapon, the
other partners that were with us on sanctions the last decade won't reimpose them and iran looks like the victim in this situation, they will get everything they want, they will be able to restart their nuclear program, they will continue to get sanctions relief and they will look like the aggrieved party. it is just absolute fantasy to think that this president is going to be able to get them back to the negotiating table when they ultimately will get everything they want if we were going to -- if we ended up violating this agreement. >> let's turn to harvey weinstein, the oscar winning producer and major democratic donor who took a leave of absence from the weinstein company after it was revealed in the "new york times" that he has quietly settled at least eight sexual harassment complaints over three decades, a variety of democratic senators are returning contributions from him. you have not gotten contributions from him, i should note, but a variety of democrats are returning them or giving them to charity but the democratic national committee, the dscc the senate arm and the congressional
arm, house arm, are not giving all the weinstein money back. do you think that all that weinstein money, talking about more than $400,000, needs to be returned or donated to charity by all the arms of the democratic party? >> yeah, i think that probably makes sense. this is a pretty bad guy who did some really awful things and if people need for that money to be returned in order to make it clear to the entities that receive them want nothing to do with him and his behavior that's probably a smart move but let's be honest, we take tens of thousands of contributions. i don't require a background check to contribute to my campaign so there are probably lots of people with unsavory backgrounds who have given to democrats and republicans but this was a high profile individual who did some truly awful things and people that took money from him should probably give it back. >> secretary of state rex tillerson is on thin ice
this week according to sources in the administration after we all learned that he referred to president trump in a private meeting as a moron. by all accounts tillerson is pushing for president trump to stay in the paris climate agreement, he's been trying to deescalate tensions with north korea. he is seen by many in the foreign policy community as a moderating force. if tillerson were to step down, are you worried about who might come next as secretary of state? >> i am worried and i think whoever would replace secretary tillerson would be in a no-win situation. the fact of the matter is we had two different foreign policies in this country which is catastrophic for us. we have one foreign policy that comes from the state department and the department of defense and we have another that comes from the president's twitter feed. the president was undermining secretary of state tillerson at the exact moment that he was in china trying to negotiate with the chinese to get tougher on the north koreans and their
nuclear weapons program. so there is no way that you are going to unwind these big foreign policy crises if nobody knows whether the secretary of state speaks for the president and i have a feeling that whoever replaces tillerson would suffer the same problem that president trump would never give them the authority to ultimately try to speak on their own. yes, if you've been accused of calling the president a moran you should probably clarify you didn't do it but this problem is not going away so long as the president has his own foreign policy through social media. >> do you think tillerson should resign? >> again, i don't think that that solves the problem. i think the president should stop undermining the people in his administration. i think he should stop doing hurtful things to the country's national security like telling the north koreans that there is no diplomatic path for them to give up nuclear weapons. i have big disagreements with secretary tillerson, i don't think he's been a good secretary of state but i'm not sure there
is anyone that can succeed in that position given the absolutely catastrophic dysfunction of this white house. >> senator chris murphy, democrat of connecticut, thank you so much, appreciate your time. >> thanks, jake. president trump issuing a cryptic warning about the calm before the storm. what could the ominous comments mean? the chairman of the senate homeland security committee will be in here to weigh in. stay with us.
so we sent that sample i doff to ancestry. i was from ethnically. my ancestry dna results are that i am 26% nigerian. i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.
and finding us dates. phones really have changed. so why hasn't the way we pay for them? introducing xfinity mobile. you only pay for data and can easily switch between pay per gig and unlimited. no one else lets you do that. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit or go to xfinitymobile.com. you guys know what this represents? well, maybe it's the calm before the storm? >> reporter: what's the storm? >> it could be the calm before the storm. >> reporter: what storm, mr. president? >> you'll find out. >> the calm before the storm. a critic and possibly ominous message from president trump that the white house has yet to clarify. on saturday, president trump put out a new warning to north korea tweeting "presidents and their administrations have been
talking to north korea for 25 years, agreements made and massive amounts of money paid. hasn't worked. agreements violated before the ink was dry making fools of u.s. negotiators. sorry, but only one thing will work." here to discuss that and much, much more is the chairman of the senate homeland security committee republican senator ron johnson. >> thanks for joining us. >> good morning, jake. >> is that your view? there's only one way to solve the north korean problem and it's not the path pursued by previous presidents which includes diplomacy and sanctions? >> well, what's been tried in the past hasn't worked, that's obvious. from my standpoint the only thing that will work is get china fully engaged, use their influence. probably regime change because kim jong-un is all about maintaining his power and just thinks a nuclear program, nuclear weapons with ballistic missiles will guarantee that. >> how do you feel -- >> there is no viable military option. it would be horrific and i don't
think anybody wants to contemplate that so we must get china recognized that they have to get fully engaged. it's not in their best interest either to have kim jong-un with these types of weapons destabilizing the south pacific. >> just to clarify -- >> south asia. >> regime change, but not through military means, through diplomatic means in china? >> that's what i would like to see, yeah. >> i want to turn to the horrible massacre in vegas. the question of what to do about the sale and possession of bump stock equipment, the devices used by the las vegas shooter to basically allow somebody to take a semiautomatic weapon and convert it to an automatic weapon. you said this week you would support a bill banning bump stocks from purchase. the nra says they don't want a new law, they want it done through atf regulation. would you be willing theoretically to vote against the nra on this by voting to legally legislatively ban bump stocks? >> again, automatic weapons are illegal, converting another weapon into an automatic weapon is illegal.
most of us -- i never heard of a bump stock until this tragedy. so however that gets fixed, i'd probably support it. >> it doesn't matter -- it matters to you it's legislative over just regulation? >> it is interesting the obama atf apparently ruled these were not illegal, so i mean that -- we need to take a look at it. so i don't know how it will come down whether through regulation or a specific bill. >> the republican party's latest effort to repeal and replace uber collapsed two weeks ago. your bill, the graham/cassidy bill was not able to -- >> just ran out of time. i won't say collapsed but we need more time. >> president trump just reached out to democrats and tweeted "i called chuck schumer" the democratic leader of the senate" to see if the dems want to do a great health care bill. big premiums. who knows. does that concern you that senator schumer is talking to the president? >> no, because we have premiums that have doubled nationally. four years ago premiums were
half of where they were nationally on the individual market. so it's the faulty architecture of obamacare i've been suggesting since last may that we should fund the csrs because the alternative is higher premiums -- >> tell people what csrs are. >> cost-sharing reductions, which is money paid into the insurance companies. the problem is if we don't do that insurance premium wills increase and they'll get the insurance -- insurance companies will get their money either way. advanced premium tax -- >> through the government or charging more? >> and people working hard that can't afford obamacare policies on the individual market get further priced out of the market. i understand it's a legitimate point of view not to put money into the collapsing markets but i kind of take a look at the reality of the situation. now we should get something in return for that. from my standpoint, let everybody buy a catastrophic plan, the short-term limited plans. they work 364 days, now they're 90. let's at least return them to 364 days, i would like them for a full year. there are things we can it do. make hsas more usable as well.
so there are a number of things i would agree to. i've been talking about funding csr for days. since may. if people want do a deal they will have to come through a republican house and senate. i've been talking to house members to get what we would require to fund what we've all believe are collapsing markets under obamacare. >> you just got back from puerto rico, part of a bipartisan group of five senators, six members of the house traveled to the u.s. commonwealth saturday, 36 people dead as a result of the storm, 44% of puerto ricans still without water, 88% not on the electrical grid. from what you saw on the ground, do you agree people who are complaining are there just "politically motivated ingrates?" >> no, this is a massive hurricane, three in a row. i was relieved to see the devastation, it wasn't what i was expecting. i had seen pictures of st. martin, it gets described that way, more than 70% of grocery stores and gasoline stations are open. there's no rationing in terms of gasoline. i saw all kinds of cars on the
road. you got 34% of the roads open. if you look at -- we were up in the air. probably saw 25% to 33% of the island, i would say more than 90% of the roads are clear but just have chokepoints with some of the trees down. lot of the buildings -- most of the buildings are intact. some have been totally devastated but there's a lot of the structure there. here's the main problem, the electrical grid. >> yeah. >> it was weak to begin with, that's why there are so many generators being used to open up hospitals. >> why they were there already. >> the number one priority of the federal government is repair the electrical grid. don't hold -- no holds barred. we have to stand up the electrical grid as quickly as possible and the greatest thing we can do for puerto rico is if we're going to spend resources, stand up a resilient electrical grid that will satisfy the needs of their economy. >> you bring this up but you don't talk about puerto rico's debt, you don't talk about the
other things president trump brings up, you just want -- these are american citizens and you want them taken care of? >> the debt is a problem because those are private bonn holders -- bond holders, unless we do a complete bailout, i would suggest we'd be better off spending american taxpayer dollars standing up a resilient grid that satisfy the needs of the economy. if we don't get the electrical system going you will see an ever-increasing crisis in terms of the economy businesses can't start up, people can't work, they can't pay to keep the economy going so beyond anything else the number one priority re-establish the electrical grid. >> senator ron johnson, always good to see you, sir, thank you for joining. >> thank you. after the deadliest mass shooting in american history, republicans are signaling they may be open to a modest gun control measure. will congress come together and take action? that story is next. sleep number setting. does your bed do that? and right now queen sleep number beds start at just $699. save $200. with free home delivery on select beds
[woman 1] huh. can't find my [woman 2] oh no... [woman 1] oh, it's fine. [woman 2] yeah, totally. it's fine. but like...is it fine though? because, i would maybe be worried...really, really, really worried. uh...do you want me to go back and look for it? i will. i mean a lot of bad things could happen. you need to call the bank. i don't know how else to tell you, you need to shut that card off-- [woman 1] it's off. [woman 2] what? [woman 1] i can turn it on and off in my wells fargo app. [woman 2] huh! i feel better already. [woman 1] good.
>> we all know and believe that fully auto weapons are illegal so is this big a big gap that needs to be closed and if so, how to close it. >> i think there will be bipartisan support coming together to pass a bill to make it illegal to sell those. paul ryan and nancy pelosi in an apparent rare moment of agreement there. let's talk about it with our panel. former senator rick santorum, you are a big gun rights proponent when you were in the u.s. house and senate. where do you think bump stocks are going? are they about to be banned? >> i have to tell you, i've never heard of a bump stock until this took place. >> so you're okay with banning it? >> well, i'm against fully automatic weapons being available and if this turns something into a fully automatic weapon, it should be regulated. it's illegal to modify a weapon to make it automatic and if this is what it does it should be banned and regulated. >> ding, ding, ding, we actually have agreement here.
>> i think you'll find the nra and most gun owners in the same position which is we don't need fully automatic weapons, there are laws in place. the obama administration did not enforce that law when these bump stocks came to light in 2010. they probably should have. the obama administration is very easily -- easily ignores the law on things like daca which is against the law and says we'll ignore the law -- >> okay, okay. >> but here's where the 50-50 chance -- >> we had a moment. we had a moment. >> it's unclear whether -- >> we only get moments. >> whether we can regular and they don't in an administration that says they're against gun violence which is amazing. >> in other words, you think there should be a statute rather than an interpretation by the atf? that's what i read into what you're saying? >> i think whether -- we should fully automatic weapons or anything that makes things fully automatic are illegal and they should enforce that. >> good. do you think that --
>> i think you're not going to see a ton of pushback on this. the nra has advocated putting that as part of a regulatory structure. that's possible and legal likely under the atf and firearms regulation structure. i think if you did it by statue it would be hard to overturn. i think you probably would have bipartisan agreement on that. here's where it gets politically sticky for democrats. their base is going to ask them to go much further and be more loud about going much further. even if the actual bill is a narrowly tailored thing that actually is pertinent to this particular crime and shooting, there's going to be a lot of loud signaling about other things they want to do which i do not think will go well with american voters. >> we heard democratic senator chris murphy, one of the strongest gun control supporters in congress and he said he would be okay just with a narrow piece of legislation you have to walk before you can run. but the democratic base is going to want much more. >> i don't think it's the democratic base. i think there's a majority of
americans want this to stop, these mass shootings that are happening. just think about it. there's a statistic that says there's been 521 mass shootings in 477 days since the orlando shooting. we have an epidemic on our hands, 11,000 people have died this year alone from just guns. 23,000 people have had injuries from guns so we really need to -- this is america. we have to figure out how to get to the solution but it can't be just a regulatory thing. it needs to be law. >> can i say i think we have to think about this. the reason why congress's approval rating is so low is this is such a common sense thing. we have 30,000 people every year killed in car accidents and 33,000 by guns. >> just to clarify, about two-thirds of those are suicides, which is not to take away from the tragedy. >> absolutely. but all i'm saying that we decide in order to drive a car that you have to have a child car seat, you have to go a certain speed limit. nobody is talking about
confiscating cars. all we're saying is let us put reasonable restrictions on it. we don't allow people who are out of their mind to be driving cars. why would we not put reasonable restrictions on like 90% of americans want? >> two parts of this discussion that are characteristic about gun control discussion. one, wanting to stop gun deaths and then also like agreeing with the left solution for that, those two things, they're miles apart which is why americans push back on gun control because they don't believe people want to go further and it will actually work to fix gun control. >> i disagree with that. >> a discussion about the violence on television and video games. a mountain of evidence out there psychological evidence about what we're doing to our young people with the video games, violent video games and you never hear the left trying to go after hollywood or the gaming market. never involved in the discussion. >> that's not true. that's not true. >> where is your solution? here we are, where is your solution? >> as senator murphy
mentioned -- >> knee-jerk reaction is always gun control. it's never about the violence in our society or what hollywood's, you know, contribution to that is. >> we have all of the means to kill people. that's the problem. >> i was going to say. there was a point that senator murphy made that the states that have had strict gun control laws there has been a drastic drop. so there is something that when you put it into law it works. >> that's not true. >> it is true, there's data out there that proves that. >> there's absolutely stats. japan is 125 million people. they don't have any restrictions on the other stuff but they don't allow the level of guns. they have one gun death in 2015. >> fundamentally different country. >> well -- >> the -- >> the strictest gun control laws. >> we are exceptionally dangerous. >> the cities that have the gun control laws have some of the worst crimes. something that happens in norway to america is apples and oranges. >> there was an assault weapons ban statewide in connecticut at
the time of newton which you important to point out when talking about these things a panacea, they're not. >> but that's the point, you need a national law because they go state to state. they're traveling. >> and the idea that there are no sensible regulations already in place, this idea that we're just sort of a blank slate on guns is total nonsense. >> do you think people on the no-fly list should have access to guns? >> the no-fly list in many cases have shown to have people who have nothing to do with any of those crimes. so it's a liberty issue. do you think their liberty is important? >> what about the liberty of the people at that concert? is very important. their freedom. 58 people are dead. they don't have any freedom. what about them? >> one law isn't going to fix every problem and you can't do that trick. >> all these laws -- >> that will not solve the whole -- >> you say impose on people's freedoms. >> i want the freedom to live. those people wanted the freedom to live. >> 120 million guns.
>> enjoy a concert -- >> less than 0.001 commit crimes with guns. >> 3% own half the guns. 3% of the 300 million guns -- >> i said this to chris murphy, this shooter, in las vegas, was on nobody's radar. >> right, right. >> nobody's radar. had no criminal record. he had not been litigated as a mental problems. >> take the -- the point is the bump stock thing might have affected this. a background check might solve it for another particular either mass shooting or regular -- >> but that's what i'm saying. one law is not going to fix the whole problem. and you -- >> why do you know cuss on guns and not on the other things -- >> we want to focus -- >> like violence. >> we don't talk about mental health -- >> that's exactly what we're talking about. >> i was going to say we're the ones talking about mental health and get pushed back when we talk about these things. you have to do something.
just because this one particular horrible person who took 58 souls a week ago, one law would haven't worked for him, you still have to do something because it's going to continue. >> one thing, i think the bump stock thing is something. >> i agree with you. i totally agree with you. >> unlike many proposals after these things is pertinent to this particular crime so it's morally and logically defensible and i wonder why people think you want to go further when you have both said many times over one law is not enough. we need a bunch of laws. >> we will take a quick break and keep going here. secretary of state rex tillerson is on thin ice according to administration officials after mounting tensions with president trump. will the secretary of state be able to keep his job after reportedly calling president trump a, quote, moron. that story is next. ♪ hungry eyes ♪ one look at you and i can't disguise ♪ ♪ i've got ♪ hungry eyes
hi. so i just got off the phone with our allstate agent, and i know that we have accident forgiveness. so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight... four weeks without the car. okay, yep. good night. with accident forgiveness, your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it.
your rates won't go up just because of an accident. thisto a hilarioushing baudiobook on audible.g and this woman is laughing because she's pretending her boss's terrible story is funny. still actually laughing. no longer making a human noise. experience the comedy, not your commute. dial star-star-audible on your smartphone to start listening today.
>> could you address the main headline of the story that you called the president a moron? >> i'm not going to deal with petty stuff about that. this is what i don't understand about washington. i'm not from this place but the places i come from, we don't deal with that petty nonsense. >> no offense to the secretary, but calling your boss a moron is a big deal anywhere you live. steve schmidt, a former campaign -- mccain adviser tweeted when you're forced to deny you called your president a moron at a news conference, there's a 100% chance you called him a moron." senator santorum, can this relationship be saved? between tillerson and trump? >> donald trump is an interesting character. i mean, i always find that the people that are closest to the president, the people that he
really has invested his time and energy and guys like a jeff sessions he gets much more offended when they offend him and do things that he doesn't like than people he's not close to. he actually tolerates people that are not close to him or he doesn't really have that kind of relationship, much better than he does people that he has that trust with. i would say in an odd way the fact that he and rex are not buddies and tillerson is not in the inner circle probably allows him to survive much more than someone close to him had done this. >> governor, are you worried about who comes next if rex tillerson steps down? that it might be a john bolton type? or somebody who is more -- >> oh, my god. >> that was awesome. >> that would be horrible. >> the senator would love it. >> i think tillerson probably won't last beyond the end of the month because i don't see how he can do his job as secretary of state in the world because the world has seen this now. how do you trust he's speaking for the president especially
when you know he fundamentally he disagrees with the president on iran north korea, trade, whatever. but yes, i totally worry about who would be coming next because with what the president has been tweeting lately, especially yesterday's tweet which had the spector of war -- >> only one solution to north korea. >> there's only one solution and it's not a diplomatic solution, so you put someone in who doesn't like diplomacy like john bolton and yeah, it's terrifying. >> so cnn reported this week that president trump was so furious at tillerson apparently insulting his intelligence that white house chief of staff john kelly was forced to navigate between the two and kelly suggested at one point to president trump in a nuanced way that if rex tillerson were to leave on his own or with president trump forcing him out kelly's own ability to do his job could be at risk. president trump was asked about this and had this to say. listen.
>> john kelly is one of the best people i've ever worked with. he's doing an incredible job and he told me for the last two months he loves it before than -- more than anything he's ever done. he's a military man but he loves doing this more than anything he's ever done. he's doing a great job. he will be here in my opinion for the entire seven remaining years. >> that's president trump being asked about chief of staff kelly, not the cnn story, but about tensions. first of all, this is kelly's favorite job ever? second of all he's going to be here for seven years? >> i would believe general kelly enjoys a challenge and this is a challenge and there's not a lot of people who have learned to do this dance with trump outside of his immediate family. that's a problem you will continue to run into. with the tillerson story, for instance, look, the story became public, he had to go on tv to make the statement because trump
requires you make those amends in public on tv, but we heard reporting that trump was upset he was on tv too much. but there is this fine line to walk both on policy, and personality and this visibility question and it's a really hard thing do in this workplace which makes it very hard to do your job. i think it will for the nexter. too. maybe it's a job for mitt. i don't know. >> i think john kelly has like the mission impossible, trying to control someone who doesn't want to be controlled. let's not forget, donald trump has burned through senior staff during the campaign. and now in the administration. he has an impossible task at hand. just a general chief of staffs do not stay very long so i can't imagine him lasting for seven years especially under someone who doesn't want to be controlled. >> i want to change the subject quickly to harvey weinstein, president trump was asked about harvey weinstein, obviously the movie mogul who according to the "new york times" has been sexually harassing women for
decades. there were eight out-of-court settlements paid. the president was asked about his behavior and how it compares to the access hollywood tape. take a listen. >> i've known harvey weinstein for a long time. i'm not at all surprised to see it. [ inaudible question ] >> well, he says they were inappropriate. >> reporter: a year ago, that video that came out -- >> that's locker room. that's locker room. >> reporter: the rnc chairman seized on the weinstein revelations to go after hillary clinton. she tweeted "whose side is hillary clinton on, harvey weinstein or his victims? governor?" >> this is ridiculous. let's talk about what the president just said. it takes one to know one. let's just say. this is a president -- it's ironic the republicans are ginning up this stuff around harvey weinstein when the president himself has been accused of sexual harassment or sexual abuse 15 times, including lawsuits. come on.
>> the bottom line is these powerful guys are all part of the same gross complex. like and -- >> including the president. >> >> it's problematic. you can say it's problematic >> that's what i'm saying. >> and it is problematic without it being a partisan thing. there's an open question about who speaks out about it and when and like people who were close with him should speak out about it. >> i agree with you on that and i think it speaks to why we should have more women in positions of power. >> amen to that. >> we have a mostly women panel here. >> i appreciate that. >> thanks for being here. today, of course, marks one week since the horrific shooting in las vegas. before we go today, we want to take a moment to remember the 58 innocent lives who were lost last sunday.
♪ can i kick it? ♪ yes you can ♪ can i kick it? ♪ yes you can ♪ can i kick it? ♪ yes you can ♪ well i'm gone like paperless, multi-car,e and safe driver, that help them save on their car insurance. any questions? -yeah. -how do you go to the bathroom? great. any insurance-related questions? -mm-hmm. -do you have a girlfriend? uh, i'm actually focusing on my career right now, saving people nearly $600 when they switch, so... where's your belly button? [ sighs ]
i wanti did my ancestrydna and where i came from. and i couldn't wait to get my pie chart. the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. just to know this is what i'm made of, this is where my ancestors came from. and i absolutely want to know more about my native american heritage. it's opened up a whole new world for me. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.
this is "gps." welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. today, the massacre on the las vegas strip. yet another stark reminder of america's extraordinary gun problem. the time to talk about it is now and that is what we are going to do for this entire show. what can we learn from other