tv Meet the Press MSNBC November 29, 2015 11:00pm-12:01am PST
this sunday, campaign 2016 and this burning question -- can anything stop donald trump? even the truth? >> i watched in jersey city, new jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering. >> we'll ask donald trump about that and other claims. also, ben carson travels to jordan to bone up on foreign policy. he joins me this morning with a report on his trip. plus, there may be no bigger republican endorsement than the one from the new hampshire union leader. > and this morning's pick could be a game changer. and that attack in colorado, planned parenthood says it is
hateful rhetoric that led to this kind of violence. joining me for insight and analysis are eugene robinson of the "washington post," molly ball of t at listhe "atlantic" , radio talk show host hugh hewitt. welcome to sunday, it's meet meet. good sunday morning, no leftovers for this show, i promise you. this is one of those moments in the presidential campaign where you realize everything is about to happen. in just the next few weeks, we'll see a republican debate, two democratic debates the, christmas new year's break and before you know it iowa and new hampshire will be here in early february. we begin with a question that has confound it had political class for month -- can anything stop donald trump? even the truth? hillary clinton, ben carson, chris christie have been called out for what stephen colbert once dubbed as truthiness. but no one has had more
controversial statements questioned than the man who will join us in a moment, donald trump. >> the truth? you know what? he may, but he's still going to get things done. >> this week, donald trump appeared to do more than merely bend the truth. >> i watched when the world trade center came tumbling down and i watched in jersey city, new jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering. >> that 9/11 claim was widely debunked by city officials, factcheck.org and nbc news. politifact gave trump a "pants on fire" rating. still, trump doubled down. >> they were dancing in the street and they were dancing on roof tops. i'm not making that up. >> and fact checkers have not been able to stop trump from saying this again and again. >> now i hear we want to take in 200,000 syrians, right? and they could be -- listen, they could be isis. you know 200,000? that's like an army. >> actually, the obama
administration plans to accept 10,000 syrian refugees over the next year. do voters care? >> when the media asks questions about him bending the truth, what's going on in washington right now? there's never been more truth bending in our lives. >> just 19% of americans say they feel they can trust their government most or all of the time and trump supporters, like his overall message, even if he strays from the facts. trump is not the only candidate stretching the truth. ben carson said this on syria. >> we also must recognize it's a very complex place. the chinese are there. later, carson's campaign tried to clarify saying he meant chinese weapons and equipment were in syria, not the chinese military. then there's hillary clinton and her evolving explanations about her e-mail server. >> it was fully above board. the people in the government knew that i was using a personal account. >> but many of those people, including the president, have said they did not know she used it exclusively for government business. just 27% of all voters and 52%
of democratic primary voters give clinton a good rating on being honest and straightforward. despite their problems with the truth, trump and clinton remain their party's front-runners. >> if diogenes were looking for that honest man, once they got past bernie sanders in the presidential election they'd be looking for a long time. the voters can't find that honest person in 2016. >> i'm joined on the phone by the republican presidential front-runner right now donald trump. mr. trump, welcome back to "meet the press." >> good morning. >> let me ask you about these claims this way. you demand and you've demanded of me pinpoint accuracy when i report on things about you, including, for instance, your net worth. why shouldn't we demand the same pinpoint accuracy in the claims that you make? isn't it hypocritical of you calling us out if we're not calling you out when you stray from the truth? >> well, now people have got my net worth right and they're saying what my real net worth is for a long time. you know, as a private company
they weren't doing that but now they're doing it, largely, i guess, due to the big filing that i made with the federal government, with the fec. as far as all of these claims, i believe it's the obamas' intention. they said 10,000 people, syrians, we don't want them because we don't know who they are and i love the idea of building a safe zone someplace in syria but they said 10,000 and yet the democratic debate they said 65,000 to the best of my recollection. hillary said it and so did bernie sanders. you're saying bernie sanders is so honest, i doubt that very much. but bernie sanders said it and hillary said it. i think they were talking in the democrat debate. i think they were talking about 65,000. i have it upon a certain amount of knowledge. i'm very friendly with people on both sides that obama's plan is 200,000 to 250,000. so he said 10,000, the debate said 65,000 already before we even start and i think what he really has in mind is 200,000 people and maybe even more than that coming into our country and we can't have it. we don't know who these people are, they're undocumented
totally. and by the way, even if it's 10,000, we can't have it. we can't have people coming in that we know nothing about. there is no paperwork. and for good reason. but there's no paperwork and this is going to be or has the potential to be one big fat trojan horse and we can not have that. >> all right, well, let's back up here a minute. let's go to this jersey city comment. you said you saw this. nobody can find evidence of this. and, more importantly, the article that you tweeted out that says -- that this backed you up, that in itself there were three or four different reports that month in new jersey that said it was a myth that was spread, that it was a false rumor, fbi, you name it. where did you see this? >> chuck, i saw it on television. so did many other people. >> in jersey city? you saw -- >> in the area. i also heard paterson. i've heard jersey city, i've
heard paterson, it was 14 years ago but i saw it on television, i saw clips and so did many other people and many people saw in the person. i've had hundreds of phone calls to the trump organization saying "we saw it. it was dancing in the streets." and, by the way, the "washington post," now he tried to pull back, but the "washington post" reported tailgate parties and reports of tailgate parties. tailgate parties mean, like, for a football game where you have hundreds and hundreds and maybe even thousands of people having tailgate parties. i saw it at the time. i stick by it. hundreds of people have confirmed it. >> this didn't happen in new jersey. there were plenty of reports and you're -- >> chuck, it did happen in new jersey. i have hundreds of people that agree with you. >> they want to agree with you, that doesn't make it true. >> chuck, you have a huge muslim population over there and that's fine. that's fine. but you have a huge muslim population between paterson and different places in jersey city and unbelievable large population. if they're going to be doing it
at soccer games, if they're going to be doing it all around the world that was being done, it was -- when the world trade center came down it was done all around the world and you know that because that has been reported very strongly. why wouldn't it have taken place? i've had hundreds of people call in and tweet in on twitter saying that they saw it and i was 100% right. now, the "washington post" also wrote about tailgate parties. we're looking for other articles and we're looking for other clips and i wouldn't be surprised if we found them, chuck. but for some reason they're not that easy to come by. i saw it. so many people saw it, chuck. and so why would i take it back? i'm not going to take it back. >> just because somebody repeats something doesn't make it true. and i guess that's actually -- >> hundreds. i don't mean i had two calls, chuck. even yesterday i was in saras a sarasota, florida, and people were saying they lived in jersey -- >> people were saying. mr. trump, if i say "well,
people have said mr. trump is not worth $10 billion" you would say that was crazy. >> but that's based on -- >> based on retweets and hearsay. >> this is much different. >> you're running for president of the united states. your words matter. this truthfulness matters. fact-based stuff matters. >> take it easy, stuff, just play cool. this is people in this country that love our country that saw this by the hundreds they're calling and they're tweeting and there's a lot of people in sarasota, people were telling me yesterday they used to live in new jersey, they remember it vividly, they thought it was disgusting. so these are people that saw it, too. the "washington post" reported it. other people -- many, many people have seen it. so i believe that -- i have a very good memory, chuck, i'll tell you, i have a very good memory. i saw it somewhere on television many years ago and i never forgot it and it was on television, too. >> let me ask you about your
reaction to what happened in colorado. >> okay. well, i think it's terrible. i mean, terrible. it's more of the same and i think it's a terrible thing. and he's a maniac. he's a maniac. >> a spokesperson for planned parenthood says -- is concerned the heated rhetoric around the planned parenthood debate could have had an adverse affect basically on this mentally disturbed individual. you think the rhetoric got out of hand on planned parenthood? >> no, i think he's a sick person and i think he was a -- probably a person ready to go. we don't even know the purpose -- i mean, he hasn't come out to the best of my knowledge with a statement as to why it happened to be at that location. >> well, we have reporting -- >> he lived in a different area. >> we have reporting that he was talking about baby parts and things like that from law enforcement officials. >> well, i will tell you, there is a tremendous group of people that think it's terrible all of the videos that they've seen with some of these people from planned parenthood talking about it like you're selling parts to a car. i mean, there are a lot of people that are very unhappy about that. now, i know some of the tapes
were perhaps not pertinent. i know that a couple people running for office or are running for office on the republican side were commenting on tapes that weren't appropriate. but there were many tapes that are appropriate and in terms of commenting on and there are people that are extremely upset about it. it looks like you're talking about parts to some ma celinech something. >> so you're not surprised that someone might taken a extreme reaction to this? >> well, this was an extremist and this was a man who obviously -- and they said prior to this he was mentally disturbed so he's a mentally disturbed person, no question about that. >> but it does sound like you understand why people might react this way? >> well, there's tremendous -- there's tremendous dislike, i can say that. because i go to rallies and i have by far -- and you will admit that, i think, but i have by far the biggest crowds, nobody even close and that includes bernie sanders. by the way, whose crowds are going down, down, down, like a rock ever since he gave hillary a free pass on the e-mails? but i see a lot of anxiety and i
see a lot of dislike for planned parenthood. there's no question about that. >> is there a way you could lose this nomination and feel as if you were treated fairly by the republican party? >> yes, there is. and there's also a way i could lose the nomination and feel that i was treated unfairly by the republican party. >> and right now you feel the republican party is doing what? >> right now i have no opinion: i just know that i'm winning by a lot. i really have no opinion. i have no opinion right now. i can say many, many people think i'm not being treated fairly. where these guys that are down at 1% and 2% want to take negative ads. i can say fox came out with a poll where i'm easily beating hillary clinton. i'm beating her by a lot and that just came out so that's a good sign. but the mainstream media and the republicans -- i have no real feeling as to whether or not i'm being treated fairly but i promise you i will let you know at some point. i hope i'm being treated fairly.
because honestly, chuck, that was my deal. my deal -- i signed a pledge, my deal was that i would be treated fairly and i hope that's going to be the case. >> well, we are long overdue for a face to face, we're putting it in the works hopefully before christmas. mr. trump, thanks for coming on. >> i look forward to it. let's bring in panelists. eugene robinson, andrea mitchell, molly ball and hugh hewitt, radio talk show host who has been a must stop for the republican candidates. i can't wait until you and hillary clinton tussle. >> i look forward to it. >> i think she ought to do it. it will be interesting. hugh, let me get your reaction to this. you saw in the the piece, trump supporters don't care if he gets fact checked and don't care if the fact checks prove to be false. >> trump supporters are like lincoln chafee -- blocks of granite and they are not moving easily and they're not going to move over the 9/11 story and fact checkers are themselves
perceived to be agenda driven in many respects and they would like to see an equal amount of time give on the hillary clinton's claim to being under sniper fire in bosnia or trying to join the marine corps or any of her -- as are given to donald trump. but here's the key thing, elizabeth loftus, professor at the university of california irvine has given a talk on memory. memory is different than facts. you cannot fact check memory. >> you can't crawl inside his head. >> but you can fact check events. the events he's talking about did not happen other than the reporter whose work he cites says they were unconfirmed reports. gee, i don't remember anything -- >> and by the way, three weeks later the newark "star ledger" rereported the rumors and said it was a vicious rumor. >> and the then-attorney general of new jersey says, no, we checked it out, it was a false report. it did not happen. >> it's not only that that didn't happen. 200,000 syrian refugees are coming. it's not only that the facts are wrong, it's that what he is
saying is so emotionally and politically powerful. he is lighting fires. he is turning people against people. he is misstating the facts of what's happening domestically, what's happening with islmuslim. the kinds of facts he is misstating are so much -- >> incendiary. >> here's the political genius of donald trump. what he is doing is different. all politicians say things that are technically true but a little bit misleading or a lot misleading. that i say whatever they can get away with and if they're called on it they'll walk it back a little bit, they'll trim their sails. >> truth is conditional, as we found out. half true. >> reasoning, they'll talk about the definition of "is." donald trump doesn't do that, he creates an entire alternate reality and he does not back down. >> he pays no price for it. >> it's seductive to people because it's the world they want to live with. >> are we living in a post-truth world in what's interesting
here, what do voters want? do they want honesty or something else? let me put up two different poll comparisons that we did in our last poll about the honest and trustworthy question between trump and hillary clinton and the temperament question between trump and hillary clinton. look at this. trump is seen as more honest and straightforward among all voters than hillary clinton is. that would be quite alarming if you're hillary clinton. now look at the temperament question. and this number is reverse. it's hillary clinton that is seen as viewed as having the better temperament versus donald trump. peter hart contends, hugh, it's better to be seen as having the right temperament than being the most honest and straightforward. >> i think both of those will be eclipse bid who can deliver safety. after paris, the axis of the race shifted and people are looking for who will make them safe. we mentioned in the green room, there's a "new york times" piece today on libya by david kirkpatrick and eric schmidt about the fact that libya has become isis 2.0 and there will be another terrorist attack and if there is one in the united states like paris, whoever promises safety, regardless of
their trustworthiness, regardless of anything else and can deliver wins. >> well, in fact, two weeks ago here right after paris i posited that trump was going to benefit more than anyone else because he is big and strong and it was counterintuitive and i was nervous about saying it but look at the numbers. and the way carson has slid, which we can talk about. but the fact is that trump is positing that he can take care of people and raising people's fears as you said is incendiary and i think that the fact of truthfulness doesn't matter, especially when people like us are the people doing the fact checking. >> it's funny you talk about this. politifact put this up and i have to show you this. on the candidates that have had the mostly false or false ratings, three have had a majority of the facts that have been fact check bid politifact have been traded as false or mostly false and the top three candidates on the republican side. carson, trump and cruz. the fact checkers are viewed as having an agenda so the more they say "you're wrong" the more
the supporters say "they're right." >> and the fact checkers did fact check hillary clinton on her under fire claims, they fact checked -- it's not as if they haven't done. >> it just intensity, eugene, just intensity of coverage. >> well, there's a republican campaign going on now so who are you going to fact check? >> good point. good point. >> i think you are right that safety and strength are the scene for this phase of the campaign. i am not sure that one can say right now that they are the -- they are indeed the main themes of the entire campaign. >> hillary clinton -- when hillary clinton says the reset button worked because medvedev was in power, that's palpably false. even time she tries to explain away the reset button, that's why republicans don't trust fact checkers because they allow her to slide with something like "the reset button worked." >> but we're selectively -- but the whole point of -- it's about the fact, period, right?
and i think that's ultimately what i think we're wondering why voters aren't demanding that. >> and it's because the media are less credible and fact checkers. >> all right, we'll pause here. i'd like to think we have some credibility left. back in a moment with the man who until recently was leading in most iowa polls. it's ben carson and he's joining us from amman, jordan. just about anywhere you use sugar, you can use splenda®... ...no calorie sweetener. splenda® lets you experience... ...the joy of sugar... ...without all the calories. think sugar, say splenda®
on foreign policy after paris than ben carson. he's already slipped from first place in two iowa polls. but to bolster his foreign policy credentials he's viz sing syrian refugee camps in jordan and his campaign released this online video. >> president obama attack med for not wanting syrian refugees to enter our country. we need leaders who stop whining and start winning. >> i'm pleased to say dr. carson joins me now from the jordanian capital of amman. dr. carson, let me just start with the basic question, what did you learn on this trip? >> well, you know, it was always wonderful to see things firsthand and to have an opportunity to actually go to the refugee camps and to some of the medical facilities. and i actually talked to the people, not only to the jordanians who are incredibly generous in terms of their support of refugees, and that's been the case for decades now, but also to the syrian refugees themselves to find out what they think about the whole situation, whether their wants and desires.
the syrians want to be in syria. they want to be repatriated in their own country. and they are looking for a mechanism to get there. but in the meantime, the facilities that have been offered to them here in jordan are very satisfactory and when i asked them what americans could do they said "if americans could support those facilities to a greater degree because they have much more capacity here in jordan and i suspect in some of the other countries as well. >> let me just play something here. here's how you described the syrian refugee crisis, some might say in an inartful way a couple weeks ago. here it is. >> if there's a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you're probably not going assume something good about that dog and you're probably going to put your children out of the way. it doesn't mean you hate all dogs.
>> given -- after meeting these syrian refugees, do you regreat language? >> well, you know here's the interesting thing, chuck. the syrians and the people here completely understood what i was saying. it's only the news media and our country that thinks you're calling syrians dogs. they understand here that we're talking about the jihadists, the islamic terrorists. and it's very obvious to most of them. the reception is quite warm. so maybe they can teach us a little bit about how to interpret language. >> you said something else in your facebook post. you said "we must find a political end to this conflict." meaning you don't think there is a military solution to the syria situation? >> well, i think the military solution, obviously, is to try to exterminate isis. and the other radical jihadists who will not allow peace to occur under any circumstances until they achieve their goals. but in terms of a place like
syria, you have to recognize that the likelihood of an assad regime maintaining peaceful control is extremely small and the likelihood of al nusra or any of the anti-assad factions maintaining control is also very small. so you need to be working on some type of mechanism to keep it from being a perpetual turmoil. >> so it sounds like you think this strategy is the right one, you would keep pursuing it. does it mean you'd speed it up? intensify it? help me out here. >> i think the most compassionate thing when you're fighting a war is to do it quickly. the longer you drag it out, the more people are hurt. and i think we need to work in close conjunction with our department of defense, with our experts. ask them what do you need in order to accomplish this? and let's make a decision. are we going to give that to them? or are we going to keep giving
them things piecemeal. >> and let me ask you a quick domestic issue. i know you've been traveling. there was a shooting in colorado springs and overnights there's been reports the shooter was yelling about baby parts, planned parenthood put out this statement "we've seen an alarming increase in hateful rhetoric and smear campaigns against abortion providers and patients over the last few months. that environment breeds acts of violence, americans reject the hatred and vitriol that fuelled this tragedy." that was from a planned parenthood spokesperson. are you concerned that the rhetoric may have motivated a mentally disturbed individual? >> i think any hateful rhetoric directed at anyone from any source is too much. it's something that we need to get away from. we have to stop allowing ourselves to be pushed into different corners and then throwing hateful barbs at each other. you know, all you have to do is go to the internet and read any
article and you go to the comments section, you don't get five comments down before people are calling each other idiots and all kinds of names. when did we become so immature? we must somehow manage to regain the high ground and understand that we're not each other's enemies even though we may have some differences of opinions about things. let's stop trying to destroy each other and let's work constructively. let's put things on the table. let's have a conversation about the rationale for our approaches. >> that's a good way to end things. dr. carson, appreciate you coming on "meet the press" and travel home safely, sir. >> thank you. >> you got it. coming up, more on whether it was hateful rhetoric that led to that attack in colorado. as i told you, planned parenthood indicates yes. but first, there are 63 countries in the coalition taking on isis. why does it seem as if no one is actually helping the united states? we'll ask the former secretary of defense robert gates right after this.
welcome back. the isis paris terror attacks have increased the urgency of efforts to build a meaningful coalition to defeat this terror group. there was some encouraging news on thursday when russian's vladimir putin seemed to signal he was open to cooperating with a u.s.-led coalition. however, this came two days after a russian jet had been shot down by an american ally, turkey, for allegedly violating turkish airspace, which complicates efforts by the u.s. and others. to coordinate a common international approach to taking on isis, i caught up with robert gates who served under both presidents bush and obama and i asked him for his reaction to the downing of the russian jet. >> i think the biggest concern really is the overall relationship between russia and turkey and what this says about the prospects for a broader
coalition in the region. i think the russians were embarrassed, frankly, by their planes getting shot down. it's been a long time since a russian fighter, combat aircraft, was shot down by hostile fire. and especially by a different country and so i think it is going to complicate coordination in syria, maybe it will accelerate it, who knows? but i worry the overall relationship between russia and turkey has turned so sour and neither of these strongmen, putin or erdogan, are willing to become down. >> we've heard a lot about this coalition and if you ask them they tell you there's 63 members of the coalition. we've been able to come up with 14 countries that have in some form or another contributed to air strikes and it's a loose definition of contributed.
it doesn't seem as if this coalition is anything more than name only. am i being too cynical? >> i think to a little degree. it's better to have dozens and dozens of countries supporting what you're trying to do even if it's only diplomatic support. we had 38, i think, countries in the coalition for the first gulf war and the truth is only four or five of them did any fighting. so it's front a diplomatic and political standpoint to have a large number but the reality is, the truth is, if you had all 60 in there trying to do something militarily you would have chaos on your hands so in some ways having four or five or sthix th have real military capabilities, being involved, makes it easier to manage. >> can we make any progress against isis if turkey and saudi arabia are not sort of following the u.s. strategic goal here? >> well, i think those two really do have to be on board or we have to be on board with them. in terms of priorities and i think we need to look at what
they are trying to accomplish. what their goals are. as i said. most of these countries have another agenda. the saudis are worried about iran, the turks more about the kurds and so on. but they're both united in the fact that assad has to go before you can make progress against isis. i think we need to listen to them if we want them to be active and aggressive members of the coalition. but the reality the you hear people talk about sending combat formations from arab nations into iraq to fight isis, that's just not going to happen. first they are not going to send their troops, not willing to send their troops but second the iraqis probably wouldn't allow them to come anyway. you've gotten a iranian influenced government in baghdad and the notion that they would invite saudi or gulf state troops into their country to fight what is an internal fight in their eyes i think is very
unrealistic. >> whether you realize it or not or only what i'm hearing you seem to be painting a picture that says well, the u.s. is going to have no choice to if not totally go it alone but to the point where they may as well be going it alone because the other countries won't be falling in on our priorities. >> i don't think we have to go it alone. we obviously have strong allies like france. but what we do need is to have some allies in the region where we're on the same page and where we have the same strategy. and i get it about the negotiations in vienna and so on. but we need to understand who is going to be critical to what is happening in syria itself. the president's strategy, is it -- should he speed it up? speed up the implementation of the strategy or completely change it? that seems to be among the
debates. while the strategy is the right strategy, it just needs to be set up. >> i think it does need to be sped up and intensified. i think while isis is a long-term problem for us, we have near-term issues associated with it. all you have to do is look at the downing of the russian airliner and the attacks in paris and the attacks in beirut and so on. so we have a near term problem that needs to be addressed or a near-term challenge from isis that needs to be addressed but when i hear people talk about a completely different strategy, i don't know what that is. putting tens of thousands of u.s. troops in there is not a near-term solution. it would take months and months, even if you decided you wanted to do it, to put the logistics in place, get the troops trained and so on and i'm not sure they don't aggravate the problem. you're not going to have combat formations coming out of raqqah wearing isis uniforms to confront american troops. they're going to melt into a population of several hundred thousand people or more broadly.
so i don't see what a totally different kind of strategy, what kind of totally different strategy would actually work in those circumstances. >> robert gates, former secretary of defense to presidents bush and obama. coming up, it may be the biggest political endorsement of the republican primary season and it's the one that comes from the new hampshire union leader and today it went to chris christie. you may be here's a little healthy advice. eat well, live well, and take of what makes you, you. right down to your skin with aveeno® aveeno® daily moisturizing lotion with the goodness of active naturals® oat and 5 vital nutrients for healthier looking skin in just one day. healthy skin equals beautiful skin. and for shower softness, add the body wash, too! aveeno® naturally beautiful results®
welcome back. in just about each presidential election, the biggest issue for voters is, of course, the economy. but whose economy? it turns out, democrats and republicans are faring very differently and that may explain the deepening political divide in this country. let me show you something here. with the help from our friends at the american communities project, we looked at the employment data in counties that are predominantly democratic -- which is mostly big cities and urban suburbs -- and those that are mostly republican, in rural america. and wait until you see these differences. almost half of the democratic primary electorate, 49%, live in big cities and urban suburbs and in both of these types of communities, since 2000, more people have joined the work force than left it and guess what? this group is relatively optimistic about the economy going forward. now, let's look at the other side of things. about a third, 31%, of the republican electorate lives in rural and faith-driven america and there more people have left
the work force than joined it since 2000 and not surprisingly this group is more likely to be pessimistic about where the economy is headed in the next month. so what does all this mean? these numbers, i think, can help explain why democrats and republicans view this presidential race so differently. if you're a democrat, you're happy with the economy. you're probably not very likely to want to see a change in leadership. if you're a republican in a more depressed part about this country, you're more depressed about the economy and this may be a reason why you want to see a change at the top. in other words, the political divide in this country is being matched and driven by an economic divide and they've fallen into red/blue patterns and that helps explain why republicans and democrats want very different things from their candidates and it explains why we're so polarized and why we can't get things done because we can't agree on what the problems are. it depends on what part of america we represent. coming up next, new indications that the shooting at
indications that the shooting at the colorado planned parenth indications that the shooting at the colorado planned parenth in panama, which is a city of roughly 2 million people, we are having 5,000 new cars being sold every month. this is a very big problem for us with respect to fast and efficient transportation. it's kind of a losing proposition to keep going this way. we are trying to tackle the problem with several different modes. one of them is the brand new metro. we had a modest forecast: 110,000 passengers per day in the first line. we are already over 200,000. our collaboration with citi has been very important from the very beginning. citi was our biggest supporter and our only private bank. we are not only being efficient in the way we are moving people now, we are also more amicable to the environment. people have more time for the family and it's been one of the most rewarding experiences to hear people saying: "the metro has really changed my life."
welcome back. i want you to take a look at the front page of the new hampshire yunion leader. it's big news for new jersey governor chris christie. he has secured perhaps the most important newspaper endorsement in the republican primary season. the question now, will that endorsement give christie, who has been struggling in low single digits in the polls, the momentum to launch a real challenge in the granite state
nationally? joining me is the publisher of the new hampshire "union leader" and the writer of that editorial, joe mcquaid. the panel is also here. so, joe, chris christie. first of all, tell us how you started -- you cut the field to get to the point where you decided to pick chris christie? he was among a group of how many you were seriously considering for the endorsement. >> i think we were really looking just at the governors. i think after the experience of the past eight years, freshman senators without a lot of experience are not good. >> so you punished cruz and rubio for having the same resume as barack obama? >> yes, punishment is kind of a harsh word from the "union leader." >> fair enough. >> disparage, things of that nature. so it was the governors and walker didn't last long enough to really be under consideration. i'm not sure why governor perry didn't get any traction but it was left with kasich, bush, and christie and from that, myself and my editorial writer, some people that i respect in the community, we looked and christie is the guy who can take
the fight to trump, hillary, isis. >> it's interesting. you said -- you seem to say, we were talking earlier, christie's the most trump-like and that was an asset in some ways. >> it really is. because americans seem to be fed up with washington and they're looking for somebody who speaks with a bark off as we say in new hampshire and i think christie does that. but as we said in the editorial, he does that knowing what he's talking about as opposed to some others who don't. >> why christie over jeb bush? jeb bush you could argue had a more successful tenure as governor. chris christie had a lot of downgrades. the economic leadership in that state is at best at a standstill. >> going in, jeb bush had one of the better states, jeb bush has not been a u.s. attorney which i think is also a key in these troubled times and jeb bush doesn't look like he wants it and the public senses that. so i'm looking for somebody who can get the nomination and i
don't think either bush or kasich can do so. >> is it fair to exclude marco rubio and ted cruz, though? i know the analogy to a freshman senator, but ted cruz doing well in iowa now and showing his experience, showing he's got a lot of legal experience, he's highly educated. why not someone like ted cruz or marco rubio? >> well, fairness in politics -- it's not fair to exclude. i take your point but i don't think either one of these fine young guys has the administrative experience and knows how the buttons are pushed in washington in the government. >> he does know how to push buttons on bridges. as a republican primary voter, bridge gate and the second amendment. how did you deal with those two? >> well, second amendment christie waltzed around and came to a position which we could agree with which is the second amendment rules. bridgegate, i was astonished when i asked him what, if anything, he learned from this and he said he learned not to be
so trusting. and i said "you were a u.s. attorney. you trust people?" but i think it shows it's a big state and he's weathered that. there were a couple of people who are under indictment. he hasn't -- nothing has tied governor christie to bridgegate. i asked him when this trial is likely to happen. he said it's supposed to be in the spring. he suspects for some reason it will be in the fall. but i don't think they're going to lay a glove on christie because i don't think he had anything to do with it. >> you know, chris christie has been moving up in new hampshire. he's not leading, however, in new hampshire. >> nope. >> are the voters of new hampshire looking for something different this time? are they looking for a donald trump? are you in tune? starting to realize -- you're a very powerful guy and your endorsement was very power informal new hampshire. but is this what the voters want? >> we will see on february 9 if the secretary of state has the primary on that day and all this business about polls and leading
in the polls and poll driven i think has been damaging to the elections of the united states. it used to be that people in iowa and new hampshire got to pick. now it's fox and the other networks saying "we'll determine who gets on the stage." >> let's talk about the state of the race and broaden the conversation. joe, we won't keep you on the hot seat, you get to play panelist with the rest of them. i want to show quickly -- ted cruz is having a moment. you brought up ted cruz here. i joked with you, joe, that the previous writers of the "union leader," they probably would be cruz people. >> well, patti would be going for buchanan. >> but cruz is moving and jean and molly, he seems to be moving at the expense of carson. >> that's true. i was at a trump rally in south carolina this week and almost literally every single person i spoke to, these are all trump supporters, if they had a second choice, a lot of them are trump or nothing but if they had a
second choice it was ted cruz and a lot of them want a trump/cruz or a cruz/trump ticket. and that was not the case a month or two ago. there was not that buzz so cruz is gaining mind share among republican primary voters. carson is losing it i think partly because of the questions about his foreign policy acumen and the events overseas. people don't see him as tough enough. they like he's a healer. they like he's a uniter but he doesn't have that machismo that trump has. >> tomorrow, bulk data collection of the nsa ends. it totally ends. it's totally changed. ted cruz is on one side of the issue, marco rubio on the other. marco rubio supporters, the super pac, 501(c)(4) have hit cruz on this. is cruz vulnerable? >> yes, he is. and the debate on the 15th in which i'm a panelist, that will come up. if i have any hope to turn that towards a national security focus, that's a major deal. the french were not able to follow up, with the best
homeland security in europe, were not able to follow the terrorists and the collection of metadata will matter. i don't know, joe, if it matters in new hampshire. people don't much like that. >> new hampshire, live free or die state. >> it's all about security now, though, and i think governor christie is on the right side of that issue. >> you think cruz is on the wrong side of it? >> oh, yes, yes. i don't think cruz will do well. >> the one thing about ted cruz that has caused a lot of criticism in washington is that he doesn't play nice. he doesn't get along, he criticizes his leaders. that's what's helping him on the campaign trail. with that he shares those qualities with donald trump. he's a bomb thrower. >> and it's what joe wanted with christie. >> it is, indeed. >> we see a pattern here. >> yeah. christie is -- if there's an insider who's an outsider, it's christie. he's a jersey guy who shoots from the lips but he knows what he's talking about and i think people will buy that. >> joe, stick around. we'll take a quick break. back in 45 seconds with our end
game segment and the aftermath of that shooting in colorado. can our johnson's believes that bath time is more than cleansing. your loving touch stimulates his senses and nurtures his mind. the johnson's scent, lather, and bubbles help enhance the experience. so why just clean your baby, when you can give him so much more?
end game time and the panel is here. i want to talk about colorado here, molly. look, we're getting reports from law enforcement officials it may have been politically motivated. we heard what planned parenthood said. democrats have been on one side of quickly coming out in support of planned parenthood, republicans have been very hesitant about what they've said. >> well, and that seems obvious to me, right?
this is an event that plays right into two major issues for the democrats. and i think what it illustrates is the extonigent to which this election is going to be a culture war on domestic issues. you have the democrats really leaning into these issues that they used to be afraid of, being very strongly pro-abortion right, standing with planned parenthood. that was a talking point long before this happened. but also really leaning into these second amendment issues democrats have been so afraid of forever because they're so alienating to a lot of rural voters. now you have the democrats feeling like the demographics are on their side, the culture is on their side. i don't know if that's true. but that's -- >> it's totally what you said, republicans win on the culture wars, democrats lose. now democrats are the ones that want a culture war. >> exactly. and we don't know, this homicidal man, we don't know his mental state and what prompted him although there are some indicators but the second amendment issue, the gun issue, is where democrats really are coming together. >> well, we know he had a gun.
>> we know he had a gun. >> and you heard donald trump saying after paris, after chattanooga "they should have been armed." well, that is a completely different response than you're getting from democrats. >> joe, i'm curious. in new hampshire, it used to be democrats were a little cautious on gun issues, particularly democratic nominees for president because they wanted to continue to carry places that were rural population -- iowa, new hampshire, where the democrats are more pro-gun rights. have things shifted in new hampshire where it's really now polarized? >> i don't think so and i think it's awful early to be criticizing republicans for not jumping on the issue in colorado until we see the specifics of the issue. but as far as guns in new hampshire, if hillary clinton, who won eight years ago and i expect she would win this time, not bernie sanders, she's going to have to waltz on the gun issue. bernie sanders is a gun guy from next door in vermont so i don't think it will play the way it may play in other districts. >> chuck, you said to mr. trump words matter when you're running for president obama. in 2012 a domestic terrorist attacked family research council
because they were against same-sex marriage. it was a terrorist attack. this was another terrorist attack. words do matter but they can't back people away from difficult issues. >> it's interesting you say that. these are domestic terrorist attacks? >> absolutely. >> and we should be using that language? >> absolutely. we should be and you're right to cite that earlier incident and this incident. they're both domestic terrorism and terrorism incidents and we need to use that word. it's a scary word for people but it's violence to achieve political aim. >> and crazy people out there are impacted by rhetoric so when you -- >> that's what i'm thinking. i'm wondering. we call it this, but you're right. the mentally disturbed are the ones that are looking to create a rationalization for themselves. >> what was the impact in the 1970s when the rate of domestic terrorism in this country was far from what it is now? much, much higher with bombings. these were people with political ends, they weren't terror -- >> well, the rhetoric did have an impact on the weathermen. they went underground and killed
people. that's why rhetoric matters but we can't sanitize an issue. i will talk about the planned parenthood practice, they were selling baby parts. i would be happy to engage people but we have to recognize there are disturbed people on both ends of the spectrum who can be impacted. >> what's fascinating was to see the internal video, the live camera security that planned parenthood now has which is how the police were able to document in realtime where he was, where the hostages were, how to save people. the security that they have now -- >> well, they have officer swase who gave his life this morn. let me move and close it with isis. you heard secretary gates, gene, and it was the subtle advice he was giving the president which is this -- you need to align your interest with the saudis and turks. you have no choice. you need to get rid of assad first. and he kept coming back to it. >> right, he said you have to do that because you need them.
>> ignore the russians. >> you need them all in. ignore the russians, number one. number two, he dismissed this talk of huge numbers of u.s. troops and other troops. he said, you know, the basic plan is the right plan. >> you can't ignore the russians. you can't ignore the iranians. you've got to come up with some sort of timetable because russia is now -- we've permitted russia to become a major player here. it's interesting the arab members of this coalition have not flown any mission because the saudis are so focused on yemen. more than assad. the saudis are completely embroiled in yemen. >> and the turks with the kurds. joe, we know when the "union leader" endorses they don't just do it on one day. chris christie is going to get a run here. >> we'll reinforce it and other guys might get unfair references. >> there you have it. joe mcquaid, good to see you. thank you a great panel. we'll be back next week because if it's sunday it's "meet the press."