tv Hardball With Chris Matthews MSNBC December 28, 2016 11:00pm-12:01am PST
pretending to have the authority to do so around the world is a reasonable limitation on one's first amendment right. >> congressman jared huffman, thank you very much for joining us. we're out of time. sorry. thanks, lawrence. >> thank you. obama versus trump has the transfer of power in a rough patch. good evening. i'm in for chris matthews. with just weeks to go before the transition of power in washington is complete, the outgoing and incoming administrations are signaling two very different policies when it document mideast peace. today accident secretary of state kerry took israel to task over its settlement construction and he warned the two state solution is now in jeopardy. earlier in the morning, president-elect trump gave a pre
buttal of sorts. he said that israel has been treated with disdain and disrespect. and he learned, stay strong, israel. january 20th is fast approaching. the latest flash point between current and incoming presidents. trump took on twitter this morning rebuke president obama's transition efforts. he wrote, doing my best to disregard the many inflammatory president o statements and road blocks. thought it was going to be a smooth transition. not. it was not exactly cheer which inflammatory statements trump was referring to. yesterday in a podcast interview, obama said he thought he could have won a third term in 2016. this afternoon, trump seemed to contradict that earlier tweet. >> many president, when you tweeted this morning transition of power was not going smoothly under president obama, can you elaborate a little bit?
is it going smoothly? >> very good. >> now, critics say crump should not be weighing in so force floy foreign policy weeks before his naugs. andrea mitchell asked secretary kerry about trump's diplomacy. >> confusing allies and adversaries? >> i think it is having an impanel on allies who are questioning what's going on. they have their own policies. they won't be swayed and intimidated by a tweet. they'll pursue their interests. and their own values. >> and late today, trump told reporters, he spoke with obama on the phone and the two had a very nice conversation. for more, in palm beach. host of the hugh hewitt show. >> donald trump this morning didn't seem too happy with president obama.
now he seem to be on the same page. at least as close as they're ever going to come. so fill in the blanks. what was resolved in this phone call? >> i think you're right. that seemed the set donald trump off. not one day, not two days but three days in a row. that he could have won. donald trump clearly took exception to that. i think the remarks at pearl harbor, not mentioning donald trump by name but seeming to take a little subtle dig at him when he was throughout at the memorial with japanese prime minister shinzo abe. i don't think that went
unnoticed by president-elect trump. so the timing is interesting. 9:07 of the morning is when donald trump delivered the third tweet that the issue with the transition, even a week ago. he said that he was being quite graceful. he picked up the phone to call donald trump in what the white house tells us was a very positive call. pointing out that the two will be talking more in the coming weeks. they committed to more conversations between now and the inauguration. i think this speaks to the way it could benefit both men. you have president obama, if he has the ear of the next president corks maybe put some pressure on perhaps not rolling back the executive pores donald trump has promised to roll back. at least to put a bug in his ear about it. donald trump has listened to president obama in the oval office meeting in the past. on the flip side, donald trump
is someone who has never been president before. not that many people have. so they could potentially have a lot to talk about even after january 20. well, a member of the transition committee, he. he agrees. >> i've been getting reports from what we would call the landing teams in the administration. this administration is not working to help the smooth transition of donald trump into office. they're doing everything they can to make this a bumpy road. >> that view though not shared by everybody. shawn spicer told cnn, president obama and his team have been unbelievably gracious to the president-elect and his team.
another member of the skaem, anthony scaramucci, told me that he had nothing but praise. he seemed to contradict the statement that it was not a smooth transition. >> i think when he is going after him in that way, it is two guys. i'm sure they're going to play some golf together. and by the way, president-elect trump if we here, he would tell that you the obama administration has done everything they can to help us in the transition. he came back and discussed it. >> what do you make of this? it almost seems par for the course. different than anything we've ever seen before. the two of them talk and then he's back to saying nice things. doctor does seem to be a pattern here. i think we'll see more of it and that's what happens.
>> my take on it is that at the white house level, it is going very smoothly. i think the president is full of advice to the president-elect and he has the good sense to listen to the advice from someone who has been in that job. those parachuting into federal agencies, i think there might be a different story. remember the trump team began with lists of employees. of the energy department, the epa, the work on chimt change. that sets a pretty wary tone for those bureaucrats and those agencies who i think may have their defenses up. and may not be as helpful as they could be. >> i say it is almost for donald trump.
it is par for the course to be airing all this. in the morning to be saying one thing. i guess it is not the first time we've asked the question. is that presidential the way you see it? >> he is not the only one upset with president obama. speaker ryan tweeted out that secretary kerry lacked the credibility to make his 72-minute attack on israel today. and so in the back ground is not only the president obama, david axelrod very interesting conversation that was part of the delegitimizing. it is the most significant thing that i think has happened in a transition in my lifetime in terms of a major departure from existing policy and throwing our
ally into great fury back and forth. i think when emwe were expecting a calm transition. no one was expecting president obama and secretary kerry and ben rhodes to throw american-israel association into a complete dust pan and set it on fire. and it is right now on fire. and that's not smooth. i agree speaker ryan. that resolution at the u.n. was a very bad idea. i agree that it was a very bad idea and it has turned over quite a lot of controversy. >> back in 2008, three days after he was elected the first time. then president-elect barack obama declined to weigh in. he said the united states only has one president at a time. take look. >> senator, for the first time since the iranian resolution, a president of iran sent a congratulations note a u.s. president. i'm wondering if you responded to ahmadinejad's note of congratulations?
>> i will be reviewing the letter from ahmadinejad and we will respond appropriately. it has only been three days since the election. i have to reiterate once again that we only have one president at a time. i want to be very careful that we are sending the right signals to the world as a whole if that i am not the president and i won't be until january 20. >> a very different public message president-elect barack obama was senting eight years ago than we're hearing from president-elect right now. what do you think about the point he makes, this is a two-way street. you have barack obama, the outgoing president. he knows he's out january 20th. he knows there's a new administration coming in. this is a major shift, what the obama administration did when it comes to that resolution. it almost does ignite pressure from a different party. >> i think he fell it was that important. hardly the first u.s.
administration to be critical of israeli settlement policy. in fact, every u.s. administration since 1967 has been critical of israeli settlement policy. it was opportunity in a way that could not help but get attention of the world. my comment on what secretary kerry said today, and the action itself, it seems to me rather late. not in terms of the transition. just the situation on the ground. it seems to me the day that we could talk about a realistic two-state settlement is probably gone. >> i'm curious, in trump world, how they're interpreting all this. whether it is the u.n. resolution dealing with israel, the pakss president obama is suggesting, promising he will take when it document russia
ordering the investigation. he wants answers on what happened before he leaves office. it does seem like barack obama is very mindful of who his successor is, and trying to get certain things on the record before he leaves office on january 20th. >> an interesting point. you played sound bite talking about his concerns with how this transition is going. other reports on this staff level, the transition isn't proceeding as it typically would. a little bit, maybe not atypical but notable, the steps that the obama administration is trying to put in to put in these policies and procedures in place so they can't be rolled back or put them in now so they can't be unrolled on january 20. that has caught the attention of members of the trump transition team.
i think at this point the idea of one president at a time, while it has been precedent for a long time, it is something that trump has demonstrated through his words and action is less of a priority to him. and i think we saw that today. talking to benjamin netanyahu saying stay strong. january 20th is just around the corner. senting a very strong message to the prime minister and then he wrote back. donald trump's children, don jr. and ivanka, don jr. expect to take over the business and not be involved in the administration. i think when you look at big picture, how the trump team is feeling about this. i think things there are 23 days left. it will move very quickly to try to be an antidote to what president obama is putting into
place. >> you are a critic of what the administration has done here with the united nations when it comes to israel. as someone who does not like that, do you feel that they have put something permanent in place? something permanent on the record by getting that u.n. security council resolution that donald trump will not be able to undo when he becomes president? or do you feel, hey, i'll get someone in there and it is a momentary thing. >> it may lead to the defunding of the u.n. it is a big deal. up until now, the only thing of consequence i can ever remember happening was bill clinton's pardon of mark rich now. we have the criminalization of 600 israelis living on the west bank. and specially criminalization of
the western wall being defined as occupied territory. so resolution 2234 is a radical step i listened to secretary kerry today, trying diminish it. the difference between what he was pointing to is that hamas now controls gaza. that the fatah has gone radical and president abbas is president for life. i'm agreeing with chuck schur and other democrats like steny hoyer. they've gone off the edge and i don't think it can be reversed to blow them off the first week. you can't change this. they've done some real damage. and i think part of it was a did i have frergs the catastrophe of syria, from the red line that was not enforced, from the j.v.s still in mosul. a diverse from leading from behind. i think that's what it was all about. >> thank you all for joining us. >> and coming up, much more on
john kerry's big speech today. staying two-state solution is in big jeopardy. that no administration has done more than president obama. plus, punishing putin. the u.s. getting ready to retaliate for meddling in the election. if the u.s. introduces new sanctions, there will be a response. and harry reid says the potential candidates in 2020 look like an old folks home. we'll take a look at the rising stars that could eemergency to lead to party. and finally, the "hardball" roundtable would be here with three things that you might not know.
with all the back and forth, gallup asked to name most admired man in 2016. 22% naming current president. that is ninth consecutive year for obama taking top honors. when it come to the most admired woman, hillary clinton was the most admired for a record 21st time. first lady michelle obama coming in second place.
friends need to tell each other the hard truths. and friendships require mutual respectful despite our best efforts over the years, the two-state solution is now in serious jeopardy. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was secretary of state john kerry fighting -- with a fiery speech directed at benjamin netanyahu and israel.
the accusations that the united states organize straight u.n. resolution. it objected to israel building settlements in the west bank. it was a remarkably forceful repudiation. >> the united states did not draft or put it forward. it will be up to the israeli people to decide whether the unusually heated attacks that israeli fls have directed toward this administration best serve israel's national interests. those attacks, alongside allegations of the ups led conspiracy and other manufactured claims, distract attention from what this vote was really all about. >> the speech which was largely symbolic was a last-ditch effort toward paving a path to peace. and he openly questioned the policy on the peace process. last week, the israelis enlisted president-elect trump to help stop the vote. he called the egyptian president
and urged them on table the resolution. the speech drawing a strong rebuke from the current israeli prime minister. >> i must express my deep disappointment with the speech of john kerry. it was almost as unbalanced as the anti-israel resolution passed at the u.n. last week. >> for more, the foreign correspondent and betsy woodruff, for the daily beast. the united states, israel, allies for a long time. this is as tense as i can refbl at the same time you have a new administration coming in with a very different perspective. how permanent is what happened today? how permanent is the split we're
seeing now versus, is this something in three weeks that disappears? >> the more important thing, the u.n. security council resolution. that has been enshrined in the international legal order. that is a bibling resolution that establishes some very hard realities on the ground. what secretary of state kerry said today, not necessarily a matter of policy. in 23 days you could have a new administration that says we're done with. this settlementes are go legit. we accept them. we'll move the emstoi west jerusalem. they could say all kinds of things that would completely contradict everything we heard from john kerry. >> does the u.n. resolution that was passed last week. the u.s. declined to veto it. if the u.s. under trump, say did it what you're saying work this u.n. resolution have any power or authority? >> the u.s. would be in violation of those international orders.
the international law that says, the palestinian territory pretty much along the '67 borders, gaza strip, those are occupied territories. the united states, for most people who have studied this, does not intend to move its embassy into east jerusalem. it would make itself, entangle it seventh in legal problems. it would move to the west part of the city which will be part of israel in some capacity. so it is a safe move if they decide to do it. it is just a highly provocative move. something that the arab world, the muslim world, have so far rejected. >> and again, you had john kerry come out. today gave this speech. talked to the press for over an hour. then you have the israeli prime minister minutes later really coming out and responding in very, very strong terms.
what was the rationale from the obama administration's standpoint? why this speech from john kerry? why now? why the language he's using? >> what this speech does, it was an extended repudiation regarding settlements. then kerry laid out his parameters for potentially negotiating a two-state settlement. that isn't unprecedented. at the end of his presidency in 2000, bill clinton did a similar thing. in the final weeks of december, emhere's what my parameters would be. now that kerry's team has been able to put on it record saying this is how far we've come. this is what we think might work. here are our ideas. our parameters. so the fact this is at the tail end of the presidency, it is a cap stone. both from politicians to stay parameters within the speech itself are untenable.
for instance, kerry suggested that palestinian refugees should give up the right to return. that's a nonstarter politically in the west bank. that said though, the fact kerry coupled some of these challenging parameters with a protracted israel means the argument he made, the pitch that he laid out might have more appeal to members of both communities than, for instance, the pitch coming from trump and his team. >> kerry had some harsh words for the political coalition that has kept palestinians in israel. >> the israeli prime minister publicly supports a two-state coalition. but his current coalition is the most right wing in israeli his write the an agenda driven by the most extreme elements. >> this has been just a sort of assumed thing. when people talk about the
middle east that ultimately there will be two states. israel and a palestine. that stal stein will be most of the west bank, gaza. this is where it is ultimately headed. a generation later, after this was codified, not the reality right now. is this still a plausible end game here? >> i guess so. you could say there is a flicker of hope. it is on the ground. what you're seeing on the ground will make it extremely difficult. you hear that it with drew settlements from sinai when it made peace with egypt. none of those were on the scale. that we're talking about in terms of the size of the settlement and the very nature of the settlers on there. there has been concern that trying to remove 600,000
settlers, that it is going to lead to some kind of civil war. >> when you say one state. give us a practical sense. israel claims the west bank for its own and says this is now all israel and then the palestinians living there before citizens? >> a one-state solution would look like that would annex, including the west bank and gaza strip which give them full citizen rights. which means that they're allowed to vote in the parliament, allowed to participate. >> john kerry said, if that happens, israel faces a choice. if you're one state, you can't be both democratic and jewish because you would have a majority muslim population. >> not a majority muslim population but arab population. that's different. that is the concern. you would not be able to
preserve the jewish identity of the sfat israel wants to preserve through democratic means if you have a majority of the population that is nonjewish. at that point you're entering into the second part which is undemocratic. it could enforce the jewish nature but not in a democratic fashion. it would be doing it in any fashion. you have the jewish nature, the democratic nature, and the occupation. you can't have any three of those exist. either israel will be a democratic state and it has to give up the occupation. or it let's go of the democratic nation and remains a jewish stwat the occupying power over the palestinian lives that are there. up next, the united states is getting ready to retaliate.
welcome back to "hardball." two senior white house officials have confirm to nbc news the white house will soon announce how it intends to punish russia for meddling in the 2016 election with a public statement coming as early as tomorrow or friday. the "washington post" first reported, the measures will entail economic sanctions in diplomatic censure. they are expect to include covert action that will invite
cove sanctions. they are calling it a provocation direct by the white house. it is promising to retaliate in turn. this comes after the president-elect has sided with russia over u.s. intelligence agencies. trump's position has put him at odds with laums like lindsey graham who yesterday expressed frustration with the president-elect. >> reince priebus said the president-elect would accept the results if all the intelligence communities on the same sheet of music. now the fbi, the cia and the director of national intelligence are all saying the same thing. >> and graham's colleagues senator john mccain said he expects trump will come around. >> i think he will be, when presented with the overwhelming evidence, change his view. if they are able to undermine an election, they are able to undermine democracy. >> and joined by the former
ambassador to russia. thank you. we have so much reporting in the last few week, the last few months. coming from the intelligence community, painting a picture of unanimity here. at the same time we have donald trump coming in saying he rejects it. he does not accept that conclusion. he has said more than once the intelligence community was wrong with iraq in 2002. if there is formal retaliation in the united states, does there need to be a public airing with real names, real titles, real agencies of what exactly russia did and how exactly that is different than what russia or any other adversaries have done in the past? >> i think there has to be. that's the good news. when you hear reporting that
there will be economic sanctions, that means they have to identify somebody or some organization to sanction. you just don't sanction russia. you sanction individuals, organizations and companies. to make the case, they're going to have to give us some more detail about attribution. tragically in my opinion, there are a lot of americans that don't believe the russians did this. including perhaps even the president-elect. and therefore, establishing the facts to make the case to justify economic sanctions. that will be a big step forward. >> and it seems like already in that set-up, you can see potentially a pattern setting of response and escalations. you have russia and the intelligence community believing russia meddled in our election. already a threat coming back from russia, if you do that, we'll do something else. first, a two-part question. we have the idea of sanctions.
what specifically do you think the u.s. will be doing here in response? what kind of response can we then expect from russia? >> with respect to economic sanctions, i'm assuming there will be a list of individuals or companies or maybe agencies, maybe one of the agencies involved. probably individuals, that's what russia did in the past. sprortd separatists in eastern ukraine. then russian government responded with their own list. in fact i know it well because i was one of the people on that list. they put americans on the list in retaliation. i can't talk about covert operations. if i did know, i couldn't talk about it anyway. that's the problem with those responses.
it doesn't have the same deterrent effect for other actors. let's remember, the russian government is not the only actor capable of doing these things in our elections. there are other countries and maybe even other individuals. so we won't know the detail and certainly we won't know the russian response. >> do we look at this as a three-week blip? whatever the obama administration comes out with? or do you think it lasts past january 20? >> i certainly hope it lasts. it can't just be a set of sanctions and we walk away and say we're good. >> we have only seen the tip of the iceberg in my opinion. we need a real debate. a real investigation. i still think, i applaud the obama administration but i think
we need a bipartisan independent investigation of what happened. in part because we need to know what the russians did. we also need to know how the obama administration handled it. and then we have a lot of other steps to take. not just a counter response with sanctions. then to build up our resilience. in 2020, we have more ability to counter these. >> all right. former ambassador to russia. thank you for your time. up next, democrats facing big questions about how to deal with the reality of president donald trump. and there is a growing feeling they need to worry about being nice. that's ahead. along with a look at the potential democrats who need to take on donald trump. xw
new leadership, the question whether they can show the discipline is needed to counter balance the new administration. harry reid spoke to new york magazine. he offered a candid, even blunt evaluation of the democratic party's prospects under a trump presidency. the key message to fellow democrats, it is better to fight. quote, be careful. this is not all fun and games. stuff he has. has been hateful and disruptive and crude and not helpful to anybody. so be careful what you agree with him about. he gave a bench of contenders to the white house in 2020. he said it appears we have an old folks home. elizabeth warren will be 71. biden will be 78. bernie sanders will be 79. a political report we are the "washington post." the senior national correspondent for mtv news, and
a science professor and pollster. none of which have to give your ages. let's start with the warning. he is saying don't action we he is. fight. chuck schumer is taking harry reid's job and he is saying, there are issues we want to work on. infrastructure is one of them. is he warning the successor, don't do it? >> he's willing to go to the mattresses. i think he recognizes that donald trump is a different republican than most of the democrats on capitol hill have seen. and i think what he wants to do is he wants to try to impart some of his tendencies on to shoomer to try on counter act what they can expect from donald trump. and i think the democratic party is more willing to do that than
they were under george w. bush. the party itself is becoming more partisan. the more partisan you are, the more willing you'll be. >> you look on paper. donald trump has certainly said his share of inflammatory, provocative words. i can't see democrats going along with it. he was not a doctrine or conservative poubl a lot of issues. infrastructure being one of them. medicare. social security. at least on paper. >> there has to be. and let's not forget. chuck schumer wants to take back the senate or at least retain what they have in the senate. so he has to be very careful. they're going to be up in two years. so that's a big problem. i think it is wrong and i disagree with what he is saying. this is not for the democrats who have suffered the losses. this is about you are a party that who is the stand for something and attract voters. it should not just be on opposing trump. it should be on standing up and telling the people what they are going to do for them and what
they stand for. and that's where this makes me laugh. one is you look at wrs and elizabeth warren. this is not about age. this is about standing for something and i think that's what the party should focus on as they go into this next year. what do you think? trump comes to democrats and says, i want to do infrastructure. i want to do the shovel ready jobs. i want to put money into this. i would say two things. show never plans. we've already seen the man. it is a big giveaway to private donors. so it is not really the democrats' man for infrastructure. it is not going to create the same jobs that they would create. what i think they need to do is oppose, oppose, oppose. get in his way and resist. i think the only way is to make it cheer, hey. none of this, we're not going to negotiate. we're not going to acquiesce. >> who else is there? chuck schumer will be leading in the senate. who else is there? >> this is the key question the
democrats have been facing for some time. i keep remembering though that barack obama came out of nowhere to be the presidential nominee in 2008. a lot can change over the course of eight years. i do want to go back to something he just said. there is always, there is always a way that you can fight. these are a good way to emerge. you can find a way to fight over it on the things that you like.
if you fight over them longer and longer, more people rise up. if you're chuck schumer and you're listening to that, looking at the map, look where they are in 28-18. north dakota. you have democrats that have to run in states where trump won by 20, 30 points. i would go back to the fact that democrats have to appeal in these places. probably said it himself. they have to stand for something. and you're right. they can say, we want infrastructure but we want to serve the people when we're doing it. not the special interests. so there is a way to do both. you can't just be speaking to washington.
democrats are so behind on their bench. they don't have leaders to look to right now. harry reid is right about that. they need to build it now and that requires having a message to give to voters that has been wholly absent. >> you think of those who have taken hard stagss. mayors like reid in atlanta and governors in colorado. there are names out there. >> all right. a quick break. when we return, a bit of a rough patch. this is "hardball."
well, donald trump today gave himself a high five on some positive economic news. he wrote on twitter, a u.s. consumer confidence index for december surged nearly four points to 113.7, the highest level in more than 15 years. thanks, donald. it was on donald trump's twitter. but according to gallup, there's a partisan reason for the rise in economic confidence. it comes mostly from republicans who are more positive since trump's victory in the election. gallup's poll shows that democrats took a negative look during president obama's two terms in office. during president obama's two terms in office. democrats took a negative look
phillip bump, ja meal smith of mtv. we're talking about the rocky transition, at least it seemed rocky this morning. then trump talks to obama and everything's fine. i do think that we were talking about this earlier, phillip. we're seeing something about trump's style here. he doesn't like something, he airs it on twitter. today it looks like he got the president's attention and he got what he wanted, at least today. >> donald trump everything is either the absolute worst or the absolute best. this morning it was the worst, speaks to obama and now it's the best. important for all of us to keep in mind there's very little middle ground between the extremes and it can change quickly. >> you have to have four years of donald trump on twitter doing this and how to interpret this
stuff when it happens nlt the state of the transition depends on who you're talking to and most people are not paying attention to the state of the transition. this is not something people care about. this starts to get old fast and he needs to focus on things that people really do care about, because at this point it's pretty much the press that focuses on his every word on twitter. >> by the way, i've not been on twitter in 12 days. >> not you. >> this has been the best 12 days of my life. i might extend this another few. we have to squeeze one more break in. next these three will tell me something i don't know.
we're back with the "hardball" roundtable. jamil, tell me something i don't know. >> the university of wisconsin has a new class called the problem with whiteness. this is a class that's actually designed to get to the roots of white supremacy and understand how whiteness has been defined over the years. but a republican state assemblyman is now threatening the state funding because of the class, it says that white people are racists, which it doesn't. >> i did not know that. >> i want the take donald trump back to his promise to create jobs and i want him to focus on the real job killer which is automation. not china, not immigration, not globalization, 45% of our jobs can be done by automation including all of ours. he should address that. >> it seems very clear that barack obama now sees his primary legacy besides obamacare as being the environment. he said aside acres for national monuments. he's used the antiquities act more than fdr. he has 2-1 the ratio from any other president. this is clear this is something he wants to do. going back to harry reid one of the monuments set aside today is
important to harry reid. >> if automation gets here by tomorrow it won't be the worst thing. thanks for being here. that's "hardball" for tonight. thank you for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. >> tonight on "all in" -- >> friends need to tell each other the hard truths. >> a harsh warning from the u.s. to israel as the president-elect prematurely enters the fray. tonight debating america's role in israel and why donald trump is officially off the fence. >> let me be sort of a neutral guy. >> plus -- >> the stock market has stopped rising until what appears to be the trump rally. >> inside the so-called trump rally and the dangers of a president taking credit for what he inherits. then author rick pearl stein on the nixonian grievances of donald trump as he lashes out at president obama.