tv MSNBC Live With Hallie Jackson MSNBC October 31, 2016 10:00am-11:01am PDT
and virtually no referrals needed. see why millions of people have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. don't wait. call now. so dad slayed the problemt with puffs plus lotion, instead. with lotion to soothe and softness to please. a nose in need deserves puffs, indeed. and that does it for "andrea mitchell reports." live from kent state. follow the show @mitchell reports. hallie jackson is next. hi, everybody. thanks, andrea. we are also on the road here in warren, michigan at macomb county community college. if you couldn't tell, donald trump will be here this afternoon. the second of two stops for him
in michigan later today. moments from now he's due in grand rapids on the other side of the state. we'll show you that life when it happens. trump has new material to hammer clinton with in the last eight days of campaigning. there is an fbi probe of e-mails and now new allegations based on wikileaks hacks that her team received a question in advance at the primary debate. one of the top spokes people hammering the defense on the fbi investigation. >> my husband that was involved in a sexting scandal with under age people had access to a computer that may or may not have had classified information. that's quite a defense. >> we were watching the daily briefing over at pennsylvania avenue to see if the white house will weigh in for the first time on this. we'll give you developments on this controversy regarding the e-mails if they happen. for now we have nbc reporters covering every aspect of this from michigan to ohio to florida
and over to the justice department in washington, d.c. that's where we begin with pete williams. 72 hours ago we were sitting here on the show as the story was breaking. >> the newest reporting is they want to use everything including the fbi and watching the little bitle ka campaign and what is the fbi. the answer is no answer yet. this will take time. they have been at it since last night when they got a search warrant approval from a judge to elect the team that did the e-mail investigation, look at the e-mails on the laptop computer from huma ab incidened. she doesn't remember using the laptop. it is possible she used it once and didn't recall. it is possible she sent e-mails to anthony weiner which started a cloud backup on the computer.
not clear. the incontrovertible fact seems to be they are on the laptop and the task is to analyze them and see if any are relevant in the clinton e-mail investigation. the optimism is that could take a day or so. a lot of this is automated. forensic programs that narrow down the time frame and narrow down whether any of the e-mails and the assumption is a lot are duplicates. eliminate those and see what's left. that's the process going on now and the simple answer is it's not done yet. >> as far as what could be done what's your sense before the election and after. will the fbi talk about it? >> i can only tell you what they tell me which is last week the thought was there is no way it could be done before the election. now there is thinking that if
there is something the fbi can say there is. failing that i don't think we'll hear anything further. there is no plan from director com comey without new information. >> you heard pete say if the fbi can say something potentially the agency will. i imagine that would be welcome news to the clinton campaign which has really been calling on director comey to release more. right? >> right. they think the murkiness of this, the unknown is more politically damaging than if director comey were to come out and say a little bit of what may be in these e-mails. secretary clinton maintains that if all of the information is provided it won't change the bottom line equation which is that director comey called her careless but decided not to bring charges against her. they are using this as a political tactic, going after
him, calling this unprecedented. they see it as a way to energize the base. tim kaine earlier today in florida used the tactic. listen to what he had to say. >> when this letter came out friday raising questions but not really answering any and the fbi director had to backtrack he said, yeah, you're right. this could be seriously misconstrued. he had to backtrack on it with the second letter 24 hours later. what hillary and the supporters decided is there may be distractions but we won't be distracted. >> in terms of what we expect to hear from secretary clinton and kent state we were told she's going to try to put the focus back on donald trump, paint him as dangerous, someone who shouldn't be trusted with the nuclear codes. this is an attack line we have heard before from her. she's going to try to put it in sharper review with eight days before election day and ohio is
one of the big key battleground states. hallie. >> thanks, kristen. kasie, you were the first to report the story on friday. this is not going to end on election day regardless. >> we talked about how they are wrapping their head around it and to voters as well. there is not a fundamental alarm about whether hillary clinton can pull off a win whether democrats have been confident she was in a strong position for a variety of reasons. i don't think the people believe what's happened over the past is a fundamental threat to that. whether it could sway voters to stick with the candidates over the democratic ones. we'll see if it bears out.
>> the most important thing is the long-term implication. you can see it developing over the past couple of weeks. we are heading potentially for a cult of investigation over the next several years if it is elected president. digging down into the respective bunkers there are democrats who were frustrated with the fact of dealing with having hillary clinton in the white house. here we go again. they have to go out and defend her. from that perspective it has the potential to be a long-term thing we are dealing with more than a short-term fundamental change. we talk about the culture of investigation. we got an e-mail from a
campaign. there are a lot of new materials. the speech in grand rapids. he'll be talking jobs and the economy. he'll talk about economy. we do expect to see trump talk about the economy. we want to go to josh earnest at the white house briefing room. >> i have made clear that the white house will be skroop louse about avoiding even the appearance about these decisions. that's a posture that i won't change and it is a posture that speaks to the institutional responsibilities here in the white house which is preserving the independence and integrity.
conducted by the department of justice. you raised a question about some of the decisions that were made to communicate information about the investigations to the ub lick. what's true is i don't have independent knowledge of how the decisions were made. i don't know what factors were considered. dating all the way back to july. when director comey announced the results of the investigation and spoke at length to the public about his decision not to prosecute secretary clinton. included in the news conference were rather harsh condemnations of the way secretary clinton handled the situation. director comey testified before congress at some length on camera under oath about the investigation. some of the testimony provided fodder to secretary clinton's
critics. over the course of the fall we have seen the fbi move forward. in providing other investigative information. 302 forms and other documents to congress. the fact is my lack of independent knowledge about the decision-making prevents me from weighing in. i anticipate this. i will neither defend nor criticize what director comey has decided to communicate to the public about the investigation. what i will say is the department of justice in our democracy given the expansive authority to conduct investigations. the department of justice is given subpoena power. they are allowed to compel witnesses to testify.
they are able to collect evidence that's not readily available. they are allowed to empanel a grand jury. those are substantial authorities. it is important in the mind of the president that those authorities are tempered by adherence to longstanding tradition and practice and norms that limit public discussion of facts that are collected in the context of those investigations. there are a variety of good reasons for that. and the president believes it is important for those norms and traditions and guidelines to be followed. >> were they in this case? >> again, think you have to -- i know there's been discussion about this. by discussion i mean a multitude
of reporting based on anonymous sources at the department of justice. there are responsibilities the department of justice and the fbi must fulfill. the good news is the president believes director comey is a man of principle and good character. that's the reason president bush chose him for a senior administration at the bush administration's department of justice. these same character traits led senators to confirm him to the job. the traits that led the president to select him to be the director of the fbi. these are tough questions. it is a good thing he's a man of integrity and character to take them on. >> in the absence of any information about this voters are left to essentially speculate about what might be involved in this. what the fbi might be looking at or not just before the election.
in the interest of people being able to not rely on anonymous sources and the like, see the fbi release more information than comey did in the brief letter prior to election day about what's going on. >> in the same way i will neither criticize nor defend director comey's decisions i don't have independent knowledge of the decisions made to release this information. there are other people with the luxury of being able to opine, writing op-eds or serving as anonymous sources for reporters to weigh in with their view. when i'm here representing the institution of the presidency i don't have that luxury. in the same way i will neither defend nor criticize director comey's decisions with regard to what to make public i don't have
any recommendations to make either with regard to what information should be communicated to the public. >> in the past after the fbi announced it was not proceeding with recommendations to bring charges in this case, the white house did defend comey and defended hymn a number of times. is that a substantive shift and the language is you won't defend or criticize him? the fact that you are not defending him, is that a signal to us that there is a reason for the white house to maintain distance here? >> josh, what i have observed in the past is director comey is a man of integrity, principle, a man who is well regarded by senior officials in both parties, somebody who served in a senior position in the bush administration. he's somebody who has bipartisan support when the nominations to be director of the fbi from the
senate. those things are true. they speak to his good character. the president's assessment of his integrity and character has not changed. for example, the president doesn't believe director comey is trying to influence the outcome of the election. the president doesn't believe he's secretly strategizing to benefit one candidate or one political party. he's in a tough spot. he's the one who will be in a position to defend his actions in the face of significant criticism from a variety of legal experts including individuals who served in senior department of justice positions and administrations of both
parties. i'm not going to be in a position to frankly either defend or criticize. the decision whard to what to communicate in public. that's separate, josh, from the kind of investigative and prosecutorial decisions made. that's their institutional responsibility to make the decisions about investigations and prosecutions independent of any political interference. i will defend their right to do it. in fact, it is their responsibility. >> this decision aside, is it concerning at all to the white house that you have the justice department and the fbi basically griping at each other in some form of public or semi public fashion? they have to work closely together to keep the country safe. is there an issue that needs to be resolved so the justice department isn't accusing the fbi of not following proper
procedures? >> you have heard me discuss the president's view of director comey's integrity and character. the president's got a lot of confidence in the attorney general of the united states loretta lynch to run the department. she's somebody who spent decades as a career prosecutor. she's not new to this. a lot of work was done when she was attorney for new york. that's a position where these decisions are closely skroot nieszed. the president has complete with the institutional responsibilities with the department of justice. >> one other question on a topic that's difficult to talk about
for another reason. the president's half brother published an op-ed, i suppose, in a new york newspaper essentially air ago list of grievances against the president saying he hasn't sufficiently supported his family in kenya, didn't send condolences after his half brother's children passed away. he ends by saying, you know, i will not be humiliated anymore. does the president have thoughts about that op-ed or the fact that this family issue is playing out publically? >> i have to admit i have not seen the op-ed you are referring to. if we have an official reaction to it, i can follow up with you. i spoke to the president about the series of questions you started the briefing with but i have not read the op-ed, so i didn't ask him about that one. we'll follow up with you. >> thanks. >> going back to the fbi, you
said you don't have -- or the white house doesn't have enough independent information to either criticize or come out with a position on comey's letter. what do you say to the american people if the white house doesn't have enough information to decide whether the letter was appropriate or not. seemingly they are left with what to believe. there are lots of criticisms now. lots of calls from both sides of the aisle asking director comey to release more information. do you feel the american people wouldn't have a right to more information about this probe? they are going to the voting booths right now. >> are you sure this is a legitimate question to ask. these are the kind of questions being considered at the department of justice now.
given the institution gnat responsibilities vested here at the white house, i don't have a recommendation to make. it is important for them to make these decisions consistent with their -- let me be precise. it is important for officials at the department of justice and fbi to make these decisions consistent with their responsibilities. as i made reference to earlier, those officials are given expansive authority, expansive powers to intuesday on the privacy of private citizens. that authority is tempered. by longstanding traditions, norms and guidelines. that largely avoid extensive public investigation. let me give you an example that will resonate with you based on
your day to day responsibilities at the white house. it is not uncommon for you when you call the department of justice asking them to even confirm there is an investigation ongoing for them to decline to do that. typically when you report about an ongoing investigation that's not based on official confirmation received from an official at the department of justice based on confirmation received from an anonymous official not willing to speak publically about the case because it would be improper for him to do so. in a way we all -- that reflects the reality of the world we work in it underscores the sensitivity of the investigation. the other thing to consider is a tendency to say with regard to the letter written on friday to
say, well, congress is independent. they have their own independent oversight to exercise over the department of justice. the first is the kind of norms and traditions that limit the public exposure of investigations don't supercede the oversight responsibilities or requests that are submitted by members of congress. the reason is simple. congress is indeed independent of the executive branch. they are far from impartial. congress is made up of 535 politicians. democrats and republicans. we have already seen just in the last 72 hours the kind of risk associated with communicating to them sensitive information. there is one senior republican
official who is already indicated -- who previously endorsed the republican nominee for president. who let it slip his party is considering impeaching president clinton before he's been elected if elected. i think that's a clear indication that congress is not at all impartial. that's why many of the norms, longstanding norms that apply when we are not talking about an election being a week and a half away that should apply and the president believes the norms are important and worth upholding. >> it seems these letters or that's what people are saying. we are talking about an ongoing investigation. a letter was sent. i guess i'm trying to parse out.
where does the white house stand on that as a general issue having an ongoing investigation that's now being discussed. >> this goes to the fact that because we have worked to shield this investigation given the politically sensitive nature of it, even if they weren't politically sensitive we would go to great lengths, we would be scrupulous about insulating that independent investigation from the appearance of political interference. i don't have knowledge about the investigation or the kind of decision decisions that led director comey to take the steps to communicate some of the material that went into the gaegs to the congress and the public. again, i am not in a position to defend or criticize that
decision. that's something the officials in the department of justice and the fbi have to do. senator reed is accusing the fbi of having a double standard. he and others. are you concerned that now you have more accusations going around the fbi probe? >> as mentioned before the white house has not been briefed on the investigation that the department of justice and fbi were conducting into secretary clinton's e-mail system. the white house has not been briefed on even the existence of
any investigation into the activities or habits of the republican nominee. these questions should be directed to the department of justice and the fbi. >> to senator reed's letter. basically accused the fbi director. you said you believe that director comey is a man of integrity in the letter that senator read sent he said he wasn't believed director comey was principled and he no longer believes that. what's your reaction and do you agree? >> questions about application of the hatch act should be directed to the office of special counsel. this is an independent agency filled with attorneys and investigators who among their
responsibilities are investigating potential violations of the hatch act. you have to talk to them to confirm the existence of an investigation let alone what they have concluded. the president believes the director is a man of integrity, character and principle with a difficult job. those traits i described will be against the difficult challenge over the course of the job. >> you spoke to the president earlier today. obviously there is a political side to this. we saw secretary clinton and her campaign reacting strongly to this. additional reaction to this election. >> with regard to the election there is a lot of speculation in terms of what potential impact this could have.
based on the public evidence i have seen from polls and other analysis. their hasn't been a significant change in the race. those of you following for a while. the president is somebody who was even keeled. doesn't get too high, too low. he has a tendency to focus on the responsibilities he has in front of him. the president pairs strongly as you have heard him say. supporting secretary clinton's campaign and over the course of the next week. the president put together an aggressive travel schedule. to make the case to the american
public in support of the candidate he endorsed. a change to the public pitch president obama will make in support of secretary clinton's campaign. >> you have been listening to white house praes secretary josh earnest at the white house briefing happening live. as you saw the majority were dominated by questions about secretary comey's information related to hillary clinton's server. i want to bring in kristen welker who is covering the clinton campaign who spent a length of time covering the us who. quickly as we run through the highlights from josh here, the white house choosing to neither defend nor criticize comey, acknowledging he's in a tough spot saying there is no recommendation from the white house on whether comey should release more information as democrats including members of the clinton campaign call on and
praise the integrity and character of comy. i want your take. did you get the sense the white house is trying to keep a distance? >> no doubt. josh was choosing his words carefully. a couple of take aways. he said a number of times that president obama believes director comey is a man of integrity. wouldn't weigh in on the big debate now. should the director release more information? what was significant is he said he doesn't believe, the president doesn't believe he's trying to influence the election. that's important. it will be important politically and also as people try to analyze this decision that director comey made. there is a lot of pressure on him to release more information. you heard josh talk about the importance of following the
norms. what has been done traditionally in this case. a lot of people will read different things into those remarks. some suggest he's indicated by tradition. wouldn't insert this information 11 days out before an election. you would have republicans who would hear he's saying therefore no more information is necessary until this investigation is complete. i think you saw there a white house trying to walk a fine line in what's a very sensitive matter right now. obviously politically explosive. what's so difficult for the president is he's been actively campaigning for secretary clinton and will continue to do so. the president will undoubtedly get questions about this. josh setting the table for him to walk a fine line as well. i anticipate the president will sound a lot like josh just
sounded. under score the point he doesn't think director comey is trying to influence the election. >> on the political side he said he doesn't see a significant change. i want to bring in a clinton campaign supporter. congressman, thanks for joining us here. >> thank you. >> let's talk about what you just heard from josh earnest. you heard him praise the integrity and character of fbi director comey. some of your colleagues on the democratic side called for his resignation. i'm thinking of congressman comey. where do you stand on this? should the fbi director step down or do you believe in his integrity? >> what he did was unprecedented and out of line so close to the election. it raised suspicion. at this stage director comey should provide more information to both show he wasn't trying to
influence but shouldn't make clear. he was oblique and left the questions out there. certainly he didn't want to create a misleading impression. she should have known that's what would happen, that republicans in congress to whom he sent the letter would leak it. he should have known politics would have started the moment he sent republicans and congress the letter. >> do you believe he was trying to influence the outcome of the election? >> he was believing they would not disclose this information. or he was irresponsible in doing this ten days before the election. director comey would give them an answer. that won't stop hillary clinton. she's been facing this kind of
attack broad side for a long time. she says steady. she'll keep going forward. those of us who believe in her will redouble our efforts. we have seen these tricks close to an election. we want to make sure the dirty trips don't influence the vote and hillary clinton is our next president. >> in your words you said the director was either naive or irresponsible. it doesn't sound like you have confidence in him in his duties as the director. >> he should talk to the american people. this letter -- >> should he step down though? what do you think? where do you stand on that? >> he needs to talk more to the american people. what republicans did in leaking the letter and no one is pointing to the fact that republicans who disclose what director comey provided to him. let's acknowledge this. he didn't go out there and leak for the story that the fbi may want to look at e-mails.
republicans did so. they created a firestorm. they knew politically it would be a fire storm though there is no information of wrong doing. director comey understanding he's the one to provide the letter and should have known republicans will go out there and intentionally leak this. he should give the american people more clarification. he said it is a mislead iing on. >> senator read says he believes director comey may have violated the hatch act. >> they are prohibited from engaging in electioneering. the fact we are talking about this shows they have created a sense of electioneering on the part of director comey. >> is that a yes?
>> we have information about e-mails. he doesn't say one thing or the other. sends an e-mail to his employees and says i don't want to create a misleading impression. the disclosure. he should have known he was either naive or responsible. so close to the election. i have to let you go. quickly you have to work with director comey for the term. are you comfortable in being able to do that? >> if director comey could be more forthcoming understanding the impact his words can have
that's important. it is the institution not just director comey but the institution of the fbi that runs a risk of looking like it is not impartial. not trying to get the facts. >> we have more coming up live on msnbc. you see donald trump speaking in grand rapids, michigan. he was introduced, by the way, by bobby knight with some colorful language we'll talk about after the break. remember here at ally, nothing stops us from doing right by our customers. who's with me? i'm in. i'm in. i'm in. i'm in. ♪ ♪
one, two, - wait, wait. wait - where's tina? doing the hand thing? yep! we are all in for our customers. ally. do it right. why don't you let me... and me... help you out? ♪ you're gonna hear what i say... ♪ i love taking stuff apart and building new things out of it. anne: pal's my most advanced annedroid. [gasps] this is awesome. ♪ oh anne: you haven't seen anything yet. announcer: give your cardboard box another life.
the fbi. they know. they know. they know. hillary is the one who made 13 phones disappear. some with a hammer. hillary is the one who destroyed 33,000 e-mails. after she got the subpoena. after. before is no good. but after? no. that's why something should have happened. hillary broke the law over and over and over again. we can be sure that what's in the e-mails is absolutely devastating and i think we'll find out. that was donald trump going after the latest fbi news as we heard him do over the weekend. he was introduced by bobby knight who called him a tough son of a -- and filled in the
rest of the blank. we are monitoring news from that. we want to bring in a republican operative and liz smith, democratic strategist. i know you had a chance to listen to the white house secretary briefing where josh earnest acknowledged he believed, the white house believed director james comey wasn't trying to influence the outcome of the election. they are not trying to defend decision-making, acknowledge that comey is in a tough spot. in your view should the white house have defended comey's decision-making process more? >> well, josh earned his paycheck today. he really has a tough needle to thread there. i think the tone was appropriate. he did defend comey's integrity and push back on insinuations
from people like harry reid that comey is trying to affect the election outcome. there are questions about how the process was carried out. it is not the white house's job to go out and defend what the fbi does, especially if it goes against protocol. it was a gentle push under the bus there. that was measured. >> over the summer democrats were defending the fbi director. how do you square that with what's happening now? >> i'm not going to jump on the partisan bandwagon and join the bashing of director comey. we know there are a series of bad decisions that put him in this situation. i think it is incumbent upon him now after putting out the vaguely worded letter last week to follow what the clinton campaign is saying and be as transparent as possible and get the e-mails out as quickly as
possible. we have seen a lot of partisan contortions in the race. republicans went from saying he should be impeached to now holding him up as unimpeachable. it's partisan politics at its worst. i think there are questions about how he handled the latest letter to congress. steve, let me pick up on the point. i will pose a similar question to you. the trump campaign in july called comey part of the rigged system. now your candidate is praising him. how do you square the flip? >> of course it's halloween. my 12-year-old daughter is going as an fbi agent tonight which has nothing to do with politics. she's wearing an fbi tactical suit. there is a reason children and americans revere fbi agents because of the long history of bravery and integrity. the director has been endorsed. i leave it at that. in terms of rank and file.
unfortunately there is something serious to investigate here. the clinton camp for far too long viewed one set of rules for them and another set for everybody else. the fbi will make that certain in the coming weeks and months. the american people will make it certain next week that we cannot tolerate corruption and incompetence in the oval office. what they did and comey has an obligation to be transparent, the obligation was on hillary clinton to not hide a secret server in your basement, not to operate in the shadows when you are secretary of state of the united states. >> steve, you said there is something serious to investigate here. we don't know that there is any new information here. this innuendo from the republicans is indicative of
what's coming from the trump campaign. >> let me stop you. i see the point your making, liz. i have a question for you. i want to bring an op-ed from eric holder. he says speaking to exactly this point that it is incumbent upon director comey or the leadership of the department to dispel the uncertainty he has created before election day because, as liz points out, nobody knows what's in the e-mails at least publically at this point. should comey dispel this before election day? >> if they can do a good thorough investigation they should. they are under no time pressure here. the clintons created this mess. i won't take holder's recommendations or attorney general lynch's after she met in private and i think they hoped secretly with bill clinton and made herself the unreliable as any ash tor of justice.
her department of justice quarterbacked an investigation by four different field offices of the fbi into the clinton foundation. where there is smoke there is fire. unfortunately the clinton foundation was a global slush fund run by her husband and unfortunately by her and aides within the department of state. they will learn a criminal enterprise. she's unfit to be president of the united states. >> i'm sorry. that's just crazy calling this a criminal enterprise. this is like the other day when donald trump said this is worse than watergate. during that scandal nixon used espionage to sabotage political opponents. only one candidate has advocated the use of espionage to sabotage his political opponent and that's donald trump, the candidate you are defending now.
>> i have to leave it there. steve, i'm sorry. i have to let you go. >> no problem. >> i will have you both back. right now my producer is screaming at me to get to commercial break. i appreciate you joining us. it is always interesting television. to the microsoft pulse question. do you think the fbi director's surprise letter will cost hillary clinton the election? head over to pulse. msnbc.com. you can find me on twitter, facebook, et cetera. weigh in there. it's been 40 years since texas voted for a democrat. hillary clinton hopes she can turn the lone star state blue again. up next to the lbj library in texas where the former president's daughter lucy will say what it will take for clinton to win her home state. we'll have more from michigan. stick around. if your sneezes are a force to be reckoned with... you may be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®.
[music] jess: hey look, it's those guys. shawn: look at those pearly whites, man. [music] bud: whoa, cute! shawn: shut-up. jess: are you good to drive? shawn: i'm fine. [music] [police siren] jess: how many did you have? shawn: i should be fine. jess: you should be? officer: sir, go ahead and step out of the vehicle for me. shawn: yes, sir. bud: see ya, buddy. today, shawn's got a hearing, we'll see how it goes. good luck! so, it turns out buzzed driving and drunk driving, they're the same thing and it costs around $10,000.
we are back in warren, michigan, where donald trump will be holding a rally. hillary clinton is leading in the polls here by a average of 6%. in texas, shows that clinton is just five points behind trump. it is a very red state. the last time texas went blue was 1976 with jimmy carter. chris jansing is joining us now from austin, texas. chris is at the johnson's library. records are being set for early turn out in the loan star state. >> reporter: it is extraordinary, who would have thought now 40 years after the last democrat won here as a presidential candidate that hillary clinton will be challenging. we are at the johnson library. this was lyndon's base johnson's desk.
>> it is my joy to welcome you to the lbj library. i know you will be spending a little bit of time, welcome home. >> reporter: thank you, it is good to be here. are you shocked that once again this is a battleground state. >> well, i am obviously, delighted because i feel that texas is becoming a majori majority/minority state and it is important for all of our voices to be heard. >> reporter: can hillary clinton really win here though? >> the answer i learned many years ago, and i have been in public service business for 58 years. my first political campaign was when my father was elected to the senate when i was 1-year-old. the lesson that came from all of that was predicting business was not a good business for me to be in. >> reporter: you went to the first convention this year since
your dad left for a long time away. everything that's been going on between hillary clinton and donald trump, the latest of e-mails and the fbi director who megan announced over the weekend set this into a tail spin. you know texas voters and politics, will that kind of revelation make a difference to voters? >> that answer, i don't know. those of you who are committed to one candidate or another are going to stay where with are. it is -- >> reporter: early voting has been remarkable here in a state where frankly turn out is not very good. >> well, i hope it won't. all of us have a stake in the future. i have 14 grandchildren. >> reporter: wow. >> the next president and the quality of that person matters deeply. i feel that every president comes into this office with a new agenda plan of what
they want to do. my father came into this oval office hoping to extend some of the noble and important work of his mentor, franklin roosevelt, daddy aimed to do with a great society. president obama has worked very hard and areas of healthcare to continue to do the greatest good for the greatest number and from my perspective why i am so excited to be supporter of secretary clinton is i believe she has shown over a lifetime of public service. that being her commitment to social justice is one that we both shared and she wants very much to continue. >> reporter: thank you very much. halie, back to you. >> chris januasing in austin,
texas. joining us now is the author of that story. our political reporter for the washington post. you have been drilling down for trump's charitable giving. this piece that you just had out wrapping up all of your reporting. if there is one thing we should know coming ouing out, what is it? >> what's the most important thing that you found? >> he wants to be seen as generous, he knows that's part of playing a rich person in american life. he's giving as little as he can out of his own pocket. >> um, it is interesting. one of the things you have been trying to do going after trump's campaign for some response for this. they did respond to your article about five minutes after it is posted saying that trump donated tens of millions of dollars to charitable causes.
any evidence to back it up? >> none, i asked that information along with a lot of information before the story came out, more than 70 questions and they refused to answer any of them. he's given tens of millions of dollars to charity, i found no proof of that. i would have love to found it and i have not found it. when i ask to provide details, anything to back it up. i got literally nothing. >> proof would be tax returns, would that answer a lot of questions you have? >> certainly, if he releases his tax returns, we would see the charitable reduction claims on his return. >> what are the reactions of confirming these charitable givings, what are their attitudes or demeanor like to you? >> some of them don't want to comment. in a few kaycases who e
been telling a story this year and no asked. this charity in new york, for new nursing school for children with aids, trump was not a donor at all but he showed up and stole a seat on the stage that was reserved for another donor and he sat there through the whole thing and pretended he was a donor and the fphotographer stopped taking pictures and me left and did not give any money. >> what striking to me is how much of your reporting has been done online, seems like twitter had been a real tool for you, could you have done this without the help with that kind of help of tools? >> i could have taken me a hundred years. trump gave a $7 to boy scout, that's what it
costs to register for a new boy scout in the 1999, the year that donald trump's son turned 11, age of entering into the boy scout. i would never have found that out or it would taken weeks of research. >> before i let you go, your handwritten ledger is infamous of dc circle, do you not have spread sheets? >> yes, i do have it. i keep it online. i was afraid that if i spill coffee, i would ruined three months of work. nothing looks as good as writing it out on my hand. >> thank you very much for being with us as we wrap up our hour here on nbc live from warren, michigan. a quick look from today's microsoft pulse question. lets take a quick look at your results after weighing in at pulse. msnbc.com. >> it is opened for another hour
so keep on getting on the pulse. for this hour, i am going to turn it over to thomas roberts, who's in new york. we are off the road and getting back to the mother ship. halie, good to have you back. happy halloween. hillary clinton is grappling of an october nightmare with donald trump. trump is usually reliable blew michigan and hillary clinton is in ohio where trump has had the advantage. you see brown there he's about to introduce hillary clinton. today, of anthony and huma abedin, at issues of 60,000 e-mails and some of it has gone through hillary clinto