tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN March 4, 2019 8:00pm-9:00pm PST
>> you know, occasionally. right? >> holy cow. >> all right. thanks, chris. we'll be here all week. and this is "cnn tonight." i'm erin burnett, in for the one and only don lemon, who is off today. the house judiciary committee launching a broad investigation into president trump. taking a look at his administration, his campaign, his transition, his businesses, pretty much everything there is about the guy. the committee sending out letters to 81 people and entities. so that includes the white house, justice department, senior campaign officials, trump organization officials, the president's sons. tonight i asked the chairman of the committee what all this is about, what does he want to learn. >> our goal is to hold the administration accountable for the obstruction of justice, the abuse of power, and the corruption. our goal is to vindicate the rule of law, to protect the rule of law in this country. and that's our core function as a judiciary committee of the congress. and we have to find out what's been going on and we have to lay out a case to the american people and reveal it.
>> lay out a case and reveal it. today at the white house while meeting with college football players the president brushed it all off. >> mr. president, are you going to cooperate with mr. nadler? >> i cooperate all the time with everybody. and you know the beautiful thing? no collusion. it's all a hoax. >> the white house put out a statement slamming the judiciary committee's investigation. the press secretary sarah sanders saying in part, quoting her, "today chairman nadler opened up a disgraceful and abusive investigation into tired false allegations already investigated by the special counsel and committees in both chambers of commerce. chairman nadler and his fellow democrats have embarked on this fishing expedition because they're terrified that their two-year false narrative of russia collusion is crumbling. their intimidation and abuse of american citizens is shameful." in just a moment i'm going to be speaking with a member of the judiciary committee. also tonight, though, another big development. possibly important for the
mueller investigation. the new attorney general bill barr announcing he will not recuse himself from overseeing special counsel bob mueller's investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election. now, in a sense taz not a surprise, but some democrats had concerns because of a memo that barr wrote last year, a very detailed memo where he argued that the firing of former fbi director jim comey did not constitute obstruction of justice. and joining me now, congressman ted lieu, congressman who sits on the judiciary committee. thank you so much for being with me, congressman. let's start with this. 81 people getting letters like these. i've been looking through them today. i got mr. kushner's and donald trump jr.'s here. what's your response to people who say look, all you're doing is fishing? >> thank you, erin, for your question. let me first say that i hope our investigation turns up no wrongdoing because i don't want to think that we have a criminal in the white house.
but i fear that our investigation is going to expose some wrongdoing. we're going to leave no stone unturned. we're going to connect the dots if they are to be connected. and we want to hear from these individuals and get their documents and at the time american people what happened. >> so chairman nadler was telling me you're going to subpoena, you're going to do whatever it takes. if any of these 81 don't comply, you're going to go all the way to the mat? >> that's correct. and a number of them did not work in the white house or they were not senior white house advisers. so they can't claim executive privilege. there really is no reason that they shouldn't produce these documents. we expect to get most of the documents. and we've asked for an expedited investigation. so we're asking for these documents twon weeks. >> wow. within two weeks. we don't have a lot of time to do this. when i spoke to chairman nadler he was saying, look, this is not a preimpeachment hearing. that was the words he used. that's not what this is. so i guess what i'm wondering is if it's not preimpeachment, what do you say to people who say okay, fine, but this is death by a thousand cuts, you're just
trying to bloody the president with blow after blow after blow because you don't think you can succeed with impeachment? >> well, let me first say that the special counsel investigation is narrow in its scope, which is basically did anyone commit a crime in relation to russian interference. the house judiciary's oversight responsibility is far broader. there are three things we want to know. did donald trump, his associates or his family members commit any crime? second, did they do anything that was unethical or misconduct, whether or not it rises to a level of a crime? and third, how do we show this to the american people? so we're just exercising our oversight responsibilities. we all took an oath of office. we're part of a separate and co-equal branch of government. and we're going to act like it. >> so sarah sanders has just come out with a statement tonight. congressman lieu. and she describes this investigation as disgraceful and abusive. your allegations as tired and false, that have already been investigated by the special counsel. so obviously taking issue with your description of it as being
narrow. and she references committees in both chambers. she calls it a fishing expedition. what's your response to the press secretary? >> many of these issues we're look into have not been investigated by the special counsel because it's not within his mission. and if you look at what happened in watergate, nixon was impeached not because he did the substantive crime of stealing from the dnc. he was impeached for the cover-up. a totally separate offense. and that's what we want to know. did donald trump engage in corruption, abuse of power or obstruction of justice? and want to take the facts wherever it may lead us. and we hope to get these documents soon. >> so when sarah sanders says the democrats are not after the truth, they are after the president, you say no? >> we haven't been able to investigate because for the last two years the republican-controlled congress stopped us from doing so. this is really the first time the house of representatives is conducting investigations to seek the truth. and the white house and sarah sanders and donald trump did nothing wrong, they would not
fear what the truth is going to show. >> congressman, i want to ask you also about the developing news on the mueller investigation, or at least it certainly appears very well to it, the justice department officially announcing our new attorney general bill barr will not recuse himself from overseeing the mueller investigation. obviously, the ethics panel had looked into it, they had not recommended that he recuse. do you see any reason why he should? >> well, buill barr did write a pretty lengthy memo saying he didn't think the president could commit obstruction of justice. he then reversed himself at the senate hearings. i will take him at his word that he reversed himself and he will look at these facts objectively. but one reason the house judiciary committee has to go forward with these investigations is because the department of justice has taken the position that a president cannot be indicted. i disagree with that but that is their internal decision. and if a president can't be indicted and then to have this separate policy that says well, you can't say any bad things
about someone if they haven't been indicted, it's going to turn out we aren't going to get any information from the special counsel's investigation. that's@judiciary committee has to go forward. >> i'm curious whether you think we're going to get information or not. the former fbi director jim comey's just come out with an op-ed in the "washington post," i don't know if you saw, it but he's arguing for transparency from mueller. and the operative quote i think congressman is "providing detailed information about a completed investigation of intense public interest has long been a part of department of justice practice. it doesn't happen often but department tradition recognizes that transparency is especially important. where polarized politics and baseless attacks challenge law enforcement's credibility." so it is now going to be barr's call ultimately whether the american public sees this. are you saying you don't think he will allow us to see it? >> i hope attorney general barr allows congress and the american people to see the full report. especially, again, if they take the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted.
then really congress is the only institution that can hold the president accountable. and if we don't have the information, we can't do that. so either they have to reverse their policy that a president can't be indicted or they've got to give a full report to congress. >> so i also want to ask you about another committee you sit on, foreign affairs, along with oversxiet intelligence. you're requesting communications between president trump and vladimir putin, president of russia. now, of course president trump has been trying to hide these communications from his own team, right? when it comes to what his translators actually heard. do you think you'll actually get access to this information? >> i hope we do. first of all, it's bizarre that the american president would have a meeting with the russian president and former kgb agent with no american staff in the room and then second, to not tell his staff what happened. and third, to try to prevent any documents from coming out as to what happened at that meeting. i hope we do get those documents because those actions are very suspicious.
>> all right. thank you very much, congressman. i appreciate your time tonight. >> thank you, erin. >> all right. well, tonight the white house is slamming the judiciary investigation, all those 81 letters, calling it shameful. is the committee's focus too broad? well, we're going to talk about that next. the right gear... matters. introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger, it's the right gear. with a terrain management system for... this. a bash plate for... that. an electronic locking rear differential for... yeah... this. heading to the supermarket? get any truck. heading out here? get the ford ranger. the only adventure gear built ford tough. at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your retail business. so that if your customer needs shoes, & he's got wide feet. & with edge-to-edge intelligence you've got near real time inventory updates. & he'll find the same shoes in your store that he found online
he'll be one happy, very forgetful wide footed customer. at&t provides edge to edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & if your customer also forgets socks! & you could send him a coupon for that item. breathe freely fast, with vicks sinex. my congestion's gone. i can breathe again! ahhhh i can breathe again! ughh.. vicks sinex, breathe on
itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix. you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking,
with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry. fixodent and forget it. the chairman of the house judiciary committee told me tonight that president trump has attacked the core functions, those are the words he used, of american democracy. congressman jerry nadler vowing that democrats will hold the president accountable. today the committee opened a sweeping investigation. and i want to talk about it with shimon prokupecz, juliette kayyem and john dean. everyone watching knows who all of you are. shimon, let me start with the overall thing here. when you print out these letters they were kind of long. and all these -- they wanted it all in two weeks. you just heard ted lieu talking about it. we've got 81 people and entities. the nra is on the list. the inaugural committee. you've got all kinds of venn
diagram overlap too. sons, son-in-law, campaign officials. so when you look at this, shimon, is this all the same stuff that mueller and the sdny have already or are in the process of investigating? >> certainly these names don't come as a surprise to any of us who have been covering this investigation from the mueller team, you know, up to new york where they're now involved in a pretty hefty investigation of really perhaps the trump organization. a lot of these names are not new to us. the difference here is that this perhaps could ultimately put a lot of this into the public space. right? there's a lot of concern that the mueller team, that what the sdny is doing we may never know publicly. but this may give the opportunity for a lot of this information to eventually become public. i know they're asking for a lot of this information to be submitted in two weeks. it's going to take months to get all this and put this all together when you think about it. but some of this is already available. right? because some of these people have already provided a lot of this information to
investigators. certainly under subpoena. some have been requests by the mueller team, by the sdny. so we'll see how long all of this takes. but i do think the one difference is that this ultimately could become very public, which of course a lot of the people that have been involved in this investigation probably don't want it to. >> right. and i guess in that sense john dean, this could be all right, well, if we don't see mueller we get this. although i don't know, i can't imagine at this point we're not going to see mueller in some way, shape or form. but do you think they could find something new, john, or are you concerned? and biey the way, i want to mak it clear, chairman nadler made it clear to me this is an initial list of 81. so there's going to be more lists which actually may be different topics and maybe new topics. but so far this seems to be more of what we've seen. >> i think we'll learn publicly a lot of new information. we'll put -- we have skel tann information right now, erin. and this will put flesh on it and we'll begin to see a bigger picture of what's going on here in this administration. so i think this is very
important. i can't -- it's been decades since the house judiciary committee has really gotten down into this kind of oversight investigation. and with this president it's very important. in fact, the democrats won the congress on the mandate that this was a president that needed to be checked and balanced. so they're doing exactly what they were sent to washington to do. >> so juliette, you've been calling this new phase, the 81 phase as i'm going to call it tonight, you've been calling it's bloodline scenario. what do you mean by that? >> so this is the first sort of public reckoning potentially for the children. it's been noted all day that ivanka trump is not on the list, although we think she might be. but i've always worried i think publicly, not that donald trump's reactions have been anything but tame so far, but to the extent that the children are on the list, the sons excuse me, are on the list-k a, and jared kushner and they are not protected by the olc memo saying
you can't indict a sitting president, this is a scenario that cuts much closer to home than trump, who clearly views all of his associates as sort of expendable as we've seen. all these men who sort of went to bat for him and are now in jail or facing jail. this does seem different to me in a very, very pointed way that i suspect as we're seeing tonight his reaction will be hostile. >> right. and you know what's interesting, shimon, to juliette's point. the boys on, this as they call them. right? donald jr. and eric and of course jared as well. but ivanka trump isn't. but i think it was very clear from the conversation i had with chairman nadler that she is going to be. maybe they see her as part of another investigation, emoluments or something else. but let me play what he said when i asked about ivanka. >> she's not on the initial list. that's what we can say. we're also saying that all the people on the list have given information already to either the special counsel or the southern district or somebody
and all we're asking for at this point is information they've already turned over so that it can be done quickly and without questions of privilege. >> i'm just trying to understand. you're saying everyone on this list has gotten requests before from various places. so that might be one way you sort it. but is she eventually conceivably on -- >> conceivably, certainly. i can't say. quite conceivably. >> so we shouldn't read anything into anybody not being on this list. >> that's right. >> conceivably certainly. i would say certainly, juliette, is how i heard that. >> yeah. i mean, look, i do think -- i'm sorry. go ahead, juliette. >> i was just going to say that's how i interpret it, is this is a first list. for? reason ivanka is sort of protected, as is -- this kellyanne conway, which i never get this. i mean, she was the campaign manager. i don't know. these women are at the center of this. and it's an odd thing. >> it certainly is an odd thing.
all right. john dean, let me ask you about something else that just is coming out this hour. the "wall street journal" reporting that lawyers for michael cohen approached trump's attorneys about a pardon. right? a presidential pardon. and they did so after the raid. right? of cohen's hotel room and office. remember when they came and door-stopped the door and took all the phones and everything else. and now the house judiciary is look at that as well. right? according to document requests today. what's your reaction to this, john? do you think this could be significant? >> well, i don't know how serious the request was. apparently, it came up when they were inspecting the documents that the fbi had obtained in the raids and they were going through them with trump's attorneys and michael cohen's attorneys to determine what might be attorney-client privilege. and it was in this context that this issue came up.
and apparently ryan raised the fact would the president consider pardoning michael cohen. so that's kind of remote and doesn't seem like it was too serious a request. of course cohen testified that he had never asked and would not accept. >> so let me -- yeah. sorry. >> i just don't see it as a serious matter. >> but the one thing about it that could be serious, shimon, i'm trying to understand whether it should be, would be that cohen did testify that he never has asked for a pardon. right? but if it is true that his lawyers asked for a pardon, that would appear to be a lie. i mean, certainly you and your lawyers, it doesn't really matter who it is doing the requesting to try to say i didn't actually do it would seem to hurt cohen's credibility yet again. >> that would certainly hurt cohen's credibility. but understand also there have been other questions raised about whether anyone, remember, whether lawyers for paul manafort had reached out to the white house in seeking a pardon as well for him. what's interesting in this cohen
thing is remember when he testified before congress he said there was communication with the president or an agent of the president. it wasn't very clear what he was referring to. but they asked him when was the last time you communicated with the president. and then he basically said he couldn't talk about it because that is now something that is under investigation by the southern district of new york. so i don't know where this fits in there but it seems like they were trying to paint a picture there certainly. perhaps there was something going on here. and then we don't have -- again, in a lot of situations with michael cohen you don't always have a complete picture. and perhaps we'll learn, you know, in due time what exactly he was referring to. but that was something that stuck with me from the hearing. when they started asking him questions about his recent communications, when was the last time you had communications with the president, he said it was post the raid, about two months or so after. so i don't know if they were conversation that's were ongoing about a pardon or something else. but certainly the fact that he's
going to raise that with the southern district of new york i think is interesting. >> all right. all of you, please stay with me. jim comey is calling for transparency when it comes to bob mueller's report. is he really right? blended with purpose, for fragile hair. with revitalizing ginger, known to recover strength, and golden honey. as a whole blend, it provides twice the breakage protection. to make hair stronger instantly. blended makes us better. whole blends. by garnier, naturally. with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry. fixodent and forget it. what do you look for i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that.
free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. everything you want. one low price. td ameritrade. ♪ ♪ t-mobile is always happy to see you. when you join t-mobile you get two lines of unlimited with two of the latest phones included for just one hundred bucks a month. need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites - even our competitors - so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. kayak. search one and done. the communal feast. potluck. this parade of dishes will soon be yours to scrub. and they're not even... yours. new and improved dawn ultra can finish off this buffet. each drop now has even more grease-cleaning power. so you can scrub 50% less,
and get done faster. next month, their place! a drop of dawn and grease is gone. so, you're open all day, that's what 24/7 means, sugar. kind of like how you get 24/7 access to licensed agents with geico. hmm? yeah, you just go online, or give them a call anytime. you don't say. yep. now what will it take to get 24/7 access to that lemon meringue pie? pie! pie's coming! that's what it takes, baby. geico®. great service from licensed agents, 24/7.
all of you. how you live, what you love. that's what inspired us to create america's most advanced internet. internet that puts you in charge. that protects what's important. it handles everything, and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi, this is xfi. simple. easy. awesome. xfinity, the future of awesome.
all right. decision tonight by the new attorney general bill barr. he will not recuse himself from oversight of bob mueller's investigation. shimon, juliette, john are all back. shimon, obviously this is a beg decision. and you know, there had been an ethics recommendation which we all know for whitaker went one way, for barr went another. they said go ahead, we don't recommend recusal. but obviously this could be significant for mueller's report. this now means bill barr is the one who will make the decision as to whether or how much of it is public. >> right. and it's official now. we can say that bill barr is now overseeing the mueller investigation and that any decision that's going to be made is going to come from him. you know, we have been expecting it obviously to wrap up, things to come to an end, where the report would be submitted to bill barr any day now, and this could have been holding it up.
bill barr could have come into the department of justice and wanted to do efg on the up and up and said i want an ethics review before i make any kind of decision. so perhaps this is what we've been waiting for. this ethics review now that he's been approved and he can take over the investigation. it could be we could see this report in a week or two, maybe sooner. it's so hard to kind of guess and we've kind of stopped trying to figure this out. but i do think it's significant because this could have been the one final step bill barr needed before he takes any kind of action in relation to the mueller investigation. >> john dean, though, obviously the big question of course is whether this is going to be a good thing in terms of transparency or not. right? barr had written a 19-page memo in which he went into detail why trump's firing of comey shouldn't constitute obstruction of justice, which as we know is one of the core pillars of areas of investigation for the mueller report. and barr testified you know what, it's not going to interfere with how i act as attorney general or if i'm
overseeing the investigation. but what do you think now? >> i suspect the attorney general has walked away from his memo. he did so in his hearings. he had bad citations. he didn't have the correct statutes involved in his memo. it was not something i think he'd be terribly proud to hang on to. so i think he's moved on from that. and now he'll have to make a real decision as the person who controls this investigation and what's reported on it. and i think he will probably report more than less. from all reports i know, that he's an establishmentarian and he doesn't want to end his career as his second run as attorney general on a sour note of suppressing information. i just don't see that. i think we'll eventually one way or the other get the information. >> juliette, you know, jim comey writing an op-ed. and some people say kind of roll
their eyes, here goes jim comey again getting on his high horse. but okay, here we go. in the "washington post" he says republicans are wrong when they claim department of justice rules forbid transparency about the completed work of the special counsel. "it's harder to imagine a case of greater public interest than the one focused on the efforts of a foreign adversary to damage our democracy in which the president of the united states is a subject. sometimes transparency is not a hard call." you know, juliette, there are a lot of republicans who agree, right? that are 100% on board with this thing being fully released. is this just such a force in that direction that we should at this point assume bill barr is going to release it or do you think he could shock us all and say no, it's highly redacted or not at all? >> well, we have to remember which part -- there's going to be a counterintelligence side to this investigation that ought not be made totally public because of sources and methods having to do with the russian ppz so when people say we need to see it all they actually need to think about what that means. there's going to be pieces of it
that will be public regarding what the investigation showed. and let's be honest here, we're seeing a huge part of the publicness of it in these indictments. we are seeing the mueller report right now. as for comey, you know, the comey redemption tour just i find tiresome at this stage. i believe in rules. and i believe in rules for the president. i also believe in rules for the fbi director. and so while i support comey's conclusion, we should have as much transparency as possible, he spends the entire editorial defending his decision coming out and criticizing hillary clinton. and like you know, that reasoning does not hold. i mean, in other words, he broke the rules that he should have abided by, which has sort of unleashed this whole mess right now. and basically, no one -- you know, no one asked comey and maybe he should realize it's -- you know, sorry. i just don't think he has that
moral clarity that others who support transparency might. >> all right. thank you all. all right. quote, "rupert wants donald trump to win." how with this one sentence a reporter was told to quash her breaking story, that donald trump had an affair with none other than stormy daniels. and the many other ways that fox news is so intimately tied into the trump administration. that's next. naysayer said no one would subscribe to a car the way they subscribe to movies. we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪ your digestive system has billions of bacteria, but life can throw them off balance. re-align yourself, with align probiotic. and try align gummies, with prebiotics and probiotics to help support digestive health
little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ready to treat differently with a pill? otezla. show more of you.
♪ new wok fired shrimp, another american chinese creation from panda express. ed gets copays as lowlily go to as zero dollars on new wok fired shrimp, another american chinese creation medicare part d prescriptions. ed gets labels clear as day. and, lily.... lily gets anything she wants. ed knows he could just have us deliver his prescriptions. but what's the fun in that? switch to cvs pharmacy. a new report in "the new yorker" says president trump
personally ordered his chief of staff to make sure the justice department blocked the merger between at&t and time warner. the president also reportedly asked his chief economic adviser at the time gary cohn to intervene months before the justice department filed a lawsuit to block the deal. now the doj ultimately lost the legal battle and appeal with at&t and time warner. the parent company of cnn. which i guess is now warner media. i want to bring in brian stelter, elie honig, and margaret hoover. let's start with the possible significance here. the president says to john kelly with gary cohn in the office and here's the quote "i've been telling gary to get this lawsuit filed and nothing's happening. i mentioned it 50 times." probably 50 times. okay. "and nothing's happened. i want to make sure it's filed. i want that deal blocked." i laugh at the 50 times. but obviously making a serious point. if it's saying that it's something he had pounded the table on and put pressure on someone to do. how significant is that exchange
in that context? >> if cohn or kelly will confirm this on the record perhaps under oath it's a clear abuse of power. it's not only unethical. it moves into this realm of abuse of power that the democrats are going to be very interested in. we've already heard today several top house democrats say they are interested in this, per concerned about this, and they want to get to the bottom of it. >> elie, tonight the chairman of the judiciary committee, who could be investigating this, said to me that it was an abuse of power. i don't want to talk about an impeachable act or not an impeachable act. would it be an impeachable act? anything could be legally. >> i look at it from a criminal perspective contradiction it be obstruction of justice? it could would not be your textbook obstruction of justice case. but if you break it down it would be. first of all it's an attempt. didn't succeed in blocking the merger. what it leads to is corrupt intent. it would be an abuse of power. it's corrupt intent if you're asking out of personal or
political animus. >> which he was. not liking cnn and not liking its coverage. >> he's made that perfectly clear. >> it with can apply to any major proceeding. civil or criminal. the classic example is bill clinton. it was obstruction of justice of a civil deposition. the only comeback would be this idea of the unitary executive, that because he's the president he can do whatever he wants relating to the executive branch. that's something that we've heard from brett cav kavanaugh, from william barr, from matthew whitaker. i don't think that holds. our system tells us nobody can be above the law. >> fox chairman rupert murdoch was opposed to the deal. we know murdoch and trump spoke often and we know the whether you want to call it a revolving door or just an open door between fox and this administration is a pretty incredible one. right? you've got a whole lot of people that have gone one way or the other, whether it's john bolton or bill shine. >> the line that really stood out in this piece that hit in
the "new yorker" that jean may wrote was that there's never been anything quite like this in the history of television, media, and presidency, and that is that it is the closest thing to state-controlled television. right? you have this -- and by the way, i say this as a former fox news employee. i was a commentator at fox news from 2008 to 2012 before i came to cnn. fox news was different then. fox was run by roger ailes, who we all know had a dramatic fall from grace. but there was still in its own way a sense at least in some quarters to have certain lines in terms of reporting and what would be appropriate in terms of -- for example, hannity was chastised for going to a rally, a tea party rally, by roger ailes because he viewed that as an inappropriate and improper place for news media to go into a political rally. okay? those lines have completely blurred. they're entirely gone after
roger ailes's demise. and you have not only a revolving door -- >> now he's on stage. >> -- but you have the former president of fox news directing communications at the white house and as the number two deputy assistant to the president. that is the equivalent of a two-star general in the white house in terms of rankings. there is -- the fox news apparatus, the base, and the consumer base are all the same thing. there's a total blending. >> i mean, joe, is there any precedent for an administration being so tied to a media outlet? >> there's nothing even close. i'm old enough to remember when there was outrage that george will, the conservative commentator, went to debate prep with ronald reagan in 1984. and this was a big story. there's nothing close to this. and i think, you know, jane really puts her finger on something important, that fox is no longer the conservative alternative to the so-called liberal media. she focuses in on why there is such a symbiotic relationship because they're the network that
plays on people's anger, fear, insecurity, disenfranchisement. they're sort of a network that wants to make everybody angry. and it works. and that works with trump. >> and it warps the public debate. there's this new nbc journal poll that finds most fox viewers think the president's be's honest about russia. most cnn viewers know the president's lied for two years about russia. but most fox viewers think he's telling the truth. as a result fox warps the public debate. i think ultimately the hannities of the world actually do a disservice to the viewers by misleading them about what's going on. because if trump is impeached, if a year or two from now trump is out of office fox viewers are going to be so confused. they're not going to realize what happened. they're not going to realize all of these scandals are what led to his downfall. maybe that won't happen. but if it does then fox viewers have been misinformed. and the details about at&t and about cohn, it's just one of many examples of scandals and controversies that fox viewers are in the dark about.
>> right. we talk about this revolving door. there's also of course the echo chamber. we know hannity and the president speak all the time. >> yeah. >> just to give everyone an example of what we're talking about, this -- let me play it. >> president trump is now getting tough on russia. the mainstream media is spinning in circles. didn't they claim he'd never get tough on russia? >> there's been nobody tougher on russia than president donald trump. with the media no matter what i did it's never tough enough because that's their narrative. >> there was no collusion. everybody knows that. everyone's always known that. >> there has been no collusion. they won't find any collusion. it doesn't exist. >> this migrant caravan, it's not a caravan, it's an invasion. >> large, well-organized caravans of migrants are marching toward our southern border. some people call it an invasion. it's like an invasion. >> they're coming with diseases such as smallpox and leprosy and tb that are going to infect our people in the united states.
>> people with tremendous medical difficulty and medical problems are pouring in and in many cases it's contagious. >> the migrant caravan marching toward the u.s. border. >> as we speak large organized caravans are on the march to the united states. >> okay. it's humorous. and yet it's not humorous. okay? because you have a president of the united states, right? access to all the intelligence from the cia. which he scoffs at. right? he regularly demeans and says, you know, he'll take a dictator's side instead of the cia. and instead he's getting his talking points it sounds like from talking heads. >> yeah. and if i was advising the president and fox news, i'll give some free legal advice, when the news media starts to get too close to the newsmakers lines get crossed and the news media before they know it are going to become witnesses. look at sean hannity. last week he announced michael cohen told me he acted alone on the hush money payments. if i'm looking at that's a
prosecutor he's getting a subpoena. there's a lot of privileges under the law. attorney-client privilege, doctor privilege. there's no media versus covered privilege. all those late-night chats the president reportedly has with hannity those are open game to investigators. >> is that what's happened in the past with liberal commentators, someone you know isn't a journalist but has your yltd ideology and is going to -- >> i think if you go back to before in prewatergate days, there's legions of stories from the kennedy administration about ben bradlee and kathleen graham having the kennedys into the parlor and joe albright and all these people. i think there is some precedent for media having influence and being cozy with the president. i think that all changed around watergate. and trust me, there's -- as much as i'm troubled by this, i'm also jealous. if i had these instruments where i could just call up people and say here's what you're doing tonight or if i had some
brilliant tv person calling saying here's what you should do tonight. but it is dangerous. it is dangerous because it has become state-run tv and it has become propaganda. and if you go back through history, you find that all of the terrible tragedies where governments have gone too far have a strong arm of propaganda because the people believe what they see. and if you're watching fox right now, you believe the president's tough on russia, there's no collusion, and in fact the real scandal is hillary clinton and the democrats. and you can have a rational conversation with a regular viewer of fox and they'll tell you that 100 times out of 100. >> the problem is that what it does, and to put a finer point i think the on the point you're making, brian, is it weakens our institutions. and the institutions of democracy that are so fundamental. for that portion of the electorate that believes everything trump is saying and that the press is saying and isn't willing to have it contradicted. to the extent that a former cnn
contributor who is now working for the president's re-election campaign, kayleigh mcenany said in a statement tonight that the campaign of donald trump simply will not face a legitimate challenge and if it doesn't win its re-election it will have been an illegitimate presidential campaign. sowing the seeds of fundamental distrust in our electoral process. by the way, not from russians but from our own -- that is a partisanship that corrodes freedom. and that is why we have to -- >> kayleigh's got to apologize for that. it's shameful to talk that way. >> that is an official statement from the president's election campaign. >> let's remember that donald trump himself said the same thing when he thought he was going to lose. so he won't apologize. she won't apologize. >> thank you all very much. republicans are turning against president trump on one very important thing, his national emergency for the border wall. will he lose his biggest campaign promise? that is next.
with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry. fixodent and forget it. can really get you going. but mania, such as unusual changes in your mood, activity or energy levels, can leave you on... shaky ground. help take control by asking your healthcare provider about vraylar. vraylar treats acute mania of bipolar i disorder. vraylar significantly reduces overall manic symptoms, and was proven in adults with mixed episodes who have both mania and depression. vraylar should not be used in elderly patients with dementia, due to increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks.
high cholesterol and weight gain; high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death; decreased white blood cells, which can be fatal; dizziness upon standing; falls; seizures; impaired judgement; heat sensitivity; and trouble swallowing may occur. you're more than just your bipolar i. ask about vraylar. the republican-controlled senate now has enough votes to block president trump's declaration of a national emergency at the southern border. now, they're going to plan to vote on the resolution this month. mark mckinnon is with me now. okay, so now, when it comes to this vote, this is obviously significant, this is the republicans telling the president to cut it out, rand paul now the fourth republican senator to come out to block the national emergency declaration. so, what do you think, are these just four single acts of defiance or the beginning of something bigger? >> well, they are, but they're important acts of defiance. and it's so refreshing for
somebody to say, we can't have one standard when president obama was president and then have another. let's have the same standards for both presidents no matter who they are, no matter what party they are. listen, trump is going to come back with a veto and override, most certainly, but we have republicans now standing up and saying -- >> they won't be able to override it. >> no, no, almost certainly not. but they've begun to lay down some markers to say, we have some precedent here. we have to be careful about what we do here, because by allowing this to happen, we say that when there's a democratic president, we can't contest when they decide to call a national emergency on gun control or climate change or whatever it might be. >> i was with chairman nadler tonight, and obviously well were talking about the investigations, but after the interview, we were talking about this, and he said, here's the problem. it's precedent. he said, what's to stop the next democratic president from
saying, 39,000 people died from guns this year. so, guess what? we're going to go and seize individual guns what are you going to do about it? do republicans realize that is the precedent that they could be setting? >> i don't think they do realize it. they can't see beyond the next election, and they're just worried about retaining power and they're under the thumb of a president who is very popular within his own party. and they're worried about that. they're worried about being primaried in a re-election campaign. so, they can't see out that far and they rarely do. >> and now they clearly see their fate tied with his. >> completely tied to his. >> completely. which is a stunning turn of events when you think about -- >> also, that's the case for now, but republicans are tied to him because he has political muscle, not because they like him, not because they think he has an ideological framework they agree with. it's not kinship. it's just political power. if that political power begins to evaporate, then it becomes a man who would be king, you see blood and then it's gone.
>> they'll be like sharks in the water. all right, i want to play a clip from the latest episode of "the circus." your colleague alex wagner sat down with the house intelligence exit tee adam schiff to talk about the investigations and maybe he's going to be next, and let me just play the clip. >> the names that came up a lot today include allen weisselberg, who is the cfo of the trump organization and has been there for a very long time, and donald trump jr. do you imagine we're going to see subpoenas for those gentlemen in the coming months? >> well, in terms of mr. weisselberg, i think it's going to be necessary to bring him in. and don jr., we are obviously looking carefully at his prior testimony. we now know additional information and it may very well be necessary to bring him back before the committee. those are decisions that we'll make in consultation with our members. >> so, what camp are you in right now, if you were betting?
death by a thousand cuts or actual impeachment proceedings? >> oh, i think death by a thousand cuts, and it's not just these cuts. it's mueller, it's the southern district of new york. this could go on for years. and it goes back to the o, sometimes the most simplest explanation is the most obvious one. there's this argument that i have with a lot of friends of mine who say, special counsel has only a certain jurisdiction, they shouldn't go beyond that. any time anybody's committed a felony, whether they are president or not, should be accountable for that, especially if you are president. if you are committed high crimes and misdemeanor, you should be accountable for that. >> well, we'll see if more people agree with you. a lot of republicans certainly don't right now in congress. all right, thank you so much. great to see you. and "the circus," sunday nights, 8:00 on showtime, and it is awesome. okay, thanks to all of you for
watching. we appreciate you. see you back here tomorrow. our coverage continues. parts of me i didn't even know. i find out i'm 19% native american, specifically from the chihuahua people. what?! that's... i find that crazy. it traces their journey in the mid-1800s from central mexico to texas. learning about the risks they took for a better life... ...it gives me so much respect and gratitude. it just shed so much light in my past that i never even would've known was there. 20 million members have connected to a deeper family story.
neighbors...loved ones. living with diseases like cancer, epilepsy, mental health conditions and hiv. maybe you're one of them. but new medicare rules could deny access to the latest, most effective therapies... therapies that keep them healthy. are medicare cuts that save less than one percent worth the risk to millions of patients? call and tell congress, stop cuts to part d drug coverage medicare patients depend on. stop cuts to part d this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows.
click, call or visit a store today. good evening. today, the house committee responsible for impeachment proceedings sent the president a message. 81 letters to nearly every person, institution and business entity connected to donald j. trump, signaling the president is about to face more scrutiny on more fronts than any president ever has. we're putting them up on the screen. and as you can see, eric and donald trump jr. are on the list, david pecker, who runs the "national enquirer's" parent company, the karen mcdougal payoff guy, trump organization