Skip to main content

tv   MTP Daily  MSNBC  January 3, 2017 2:00pm-3:01pm PST

2:00 pm
decide he doesn't want that. for the moment, they do make cars in mexico, the chevy cruise hatchbacks, sell them in the united states. only accounts for about 2.5% of the chevy cruise, but they make them. >> the bully pulpit in the business world. got that beat for us. appreciate that. that's going to do for this hour, i'm steve kornacki and mtp daily starts right now. if it's tuesday, it's trump versus house republicans, and round one goes to trump. tonight, drain the swamp, house republicans back down on gutting the ethics office after the president-elect's social media slam. >> withdrawn, yes. >> plus, boeing, carrier, and now general motors, how will corporate america deal with the new normal of trump's 140 character public shaming? and finally, the joe show. live photo ops in the senate may never be the same. >> anybody else want to be sworn
2:01 pm
in? >> this is mtp daily and it starts right now. good evening, i'm chuck todd here in washington, happy new year. i'm back. glad to be back. welcome to another edition of "mpt daily." it's opening day for a lot of us here and for the new republican congress. school's in session. and appears republicans learned their first lesson the hard way. especially when it comes to dealing with donald trump. ethics and a public outcry. but at the end of a wild day we're left with more questions than answers about what all the drama really means and by the looks of things, we're not the only ones. let me explain. on the eve of this new congress, house republicans held a vote behind closed doors to strip what was known as the independent bipartisan congressional ethics watchdog group called the office of congressional ethics of it's power. that vote, after hours, on a federal holiday, no less, and
2:02 pm
without the support of house leadership, was supposed to be ratified today in a larger passage of rules bills. on the opening day of this new congress. well, the effort, of course blew up. but more than that, republican leaders appear to have been cowed by trump in their first act in the new congress. and here's why. this morning, it looked like this effort to gut the ethics office was moving full steam ahead. here's house majority leader kevin mccarthy this very morning before we heard from president-elect trump. >> the reforms do not change the entity, the public still registers a complaint. they still do the work with the ethics review. and it still goes forward to ethic whether they should dismiss it or review it. same thing as before as today. >> and house speaker paul ryan initially put his best spin on things this morning. assuring the public of the following, quote, this house will hold it's members to the highest ethical standards, and the office will continue to operate independly to provide public accountability to congress. now you need to remember, both
2:03 pm
ryan and mccarthy, apparently opposed this move behind closed doors last night. which also makes you skramp your head if that was the case, why didn't they exert influence in power here to stop this in the first place? well, but then around the same time as ryan's statement this morning, came trump's tweets. quote, with all the congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the independent ethics watchdog, as unfair as it may be, their number one act in priority? focus on tax reform, health care, and so many other things of far greater importance. well, within two hours of those tweets, house republicans had withdrawn the effort unanimously by the way. but there's more to this story than just ethics. if you're trying to figure out, what the 2016 election was really about, today's evidence that apparently are not alone. elected officials haven't figured out the message. was it about draining the swamp? was it about disruption of the way things are done in washington? was it simply about selective
2:04 pm
ethics, we're here to clean up the party that we don't belong to ethically. everybody still seems to be grasping for that answer. but if you don't play it right by ethics, it could bite you. we're going to move on and talk more about this. joined now by carl haus, covering washington, politics for 36 years, and as i always like to say, the unofficial mayor of the capitol hill press corps, so, all right, let me start with this -- >> happy new year, chuck. >> happy new year. nothing like getting congress back in a session to give us something to do. >> not audacious, not a great start there. >> let me start with this. kevin mccarthy and speaker ryan we're told were against the move from the get-go. so how the heck did we get as far as we got before it got withdrawn? >> i think that's what a lot of republicans around town are scratching their head about. i ran into them today and talked to them on the hill and elsewhere. how did it get that far if paul ryan and kevin mccarthy didn't
2:05 pm
want this to happen? you know, where's their power? so in some ways i think that the way that this unravelled, reflects badly on them for the start of this. you know, you talk to republicans, they'll say, well, we knew we were going to have to undo this, the trump tweet, you know, wasn't the deciding factor. we were getting tons of phone calls. but, they do say that the decision came after the trump tweet. so the new message to congress from the white house is obviously going to come in the form of twitter rather than documents. and, i mean, i think they're mainly chagrinned. that's the word i would use. here's the big opening day, this is the start of their big united government and they totally stepped in it.fiasco. and i think it was funny hearing some of the republican members talking, i knowhey like trump's tweets when he was taking on the media or people they didn'tli, i think finding out that it can be aimed at them was a new discovery and
2:06 pm
they're like, wow, that guy really has a big bully bull pit. one member said he was scared of it. that's a shape of things to come. >> and brings up the next question, so you're right, so mccarthy and ryan are against this, couldn't stop it, trump does two tweets and he stops it. who's got a bigger constituency in the house republican conference? paul ryan or -- >> or who are they afraid of? right? >> that's right. who are they more fearful of politically, paul ryan or donald trump? >> i had one republican say to me, you know, it was scary to him that ryan and mccarthy would be so strongly against this, and then their membership would go ahead anyway and do this. you know, it's hard to see that happening to tip o'neil or connoren in the senate. so i think that mr. ryan and mr. mccarthy have to probably take some steps to reestablish them. who is running the house republican caucus right now?
2:07 pm
which seems to be the question we've been asking for about six years, by the way. >> that's a fair point. let me ask you quickly on the ethics office itself -- >> sure. >> would you say that ethics that ethics investigations -- the ethics committee, this office, would you say it was functioning very well before this episode? >> no, no. i've been saying that to people all day. you know this isn't -- although the office of congressional ethics has been a little tougher and willing to do things than the committee on ethics that has lawmakers. it's not like the ethics enforcement in the house is this, you know, rabid law enforcement, it just doesn't work that way. i think that they were -- they spent a lot of capital, blew up in their face on trying to tamper something that isn't that huge a threat to begin with, honestly. >> carl, mr. mayor, good to see you. >> thanks chuck. >> your term will never end savrs i'm concerned. >> all rht, a right. >> there you go, thank you, sir.
2:08 pm
joined now the man that ran the office of congressional ethic when it first began and i thought it'd be beneficial to understand the actual office. thank you, sir. >> my pleasure. >> so this is what republicans wanted to do -- this is what got passed last night, and i want you to help walk me through what this would have meant. stripped the office that you ran of the following. ability to investigate anonymous complaints, conduct reviews, free of interference from members of congress, maybe referrals to law enforcement without i guess ethics approval and to publish your finding publicly. if all these four powers were taken away, what's the point of the office? >> well, i think there isn't much left if those are taken away. particularly the published findings. that was the real genius in how this was set up. that the office would gather evidence, interview people, collect documents, find the facts, present those to the lawmakers, and then after a
2:09 pm
certain period of time, those facts became public, whether the committee chose to act or not. and then the public could judge for itself. the conduct of their elected officials, and then how the house dealt with that conduct. so it was really was about transparency -- >> sunshine. >> throwing light on the kind of dark corners -- >> good old fashioned sunshine. if everybody sees it, public approves after that, so be it. >> exactly. >> let me ask this, so the creation of this. it was in '08, and i guess the question is, in response to what? what did -- describe what you feel as if your charge was -- what was broken that you were charged with fixing. >> so i think there were primarily two things, one w the sense that the public had no way to raise concerns about their members and their behavior with the institution. >> so let me pause you, before the creation of this office, an average citizen could not file an ethics complaint? >> they would have to have had a
2:10 pm
member agree to -- >> do it for them. >> which, historically almost never happens. >> of course. >> for all the reasons that anybody would imagine. >> right. >> and then onceage allegation was made or complaint was made and questions were raised, it was a black box. and nobody knew what happened. and prior to the office's creation, there was the raft of scandals about jack and the members that went to prison over there interactions with him. and nobody knew what was going on in the institution that was primarily responsible for policing -- zbletices committee was totally basically non-player during the abe ram mess. >> nobody knew. >> and that was the trigger. is that fair to say. >> i think that's right. i think that's why this was about opening up a window to the process. both on the front soend people could raise concerns and on the back end to see what happened. >> all right. now the chief concern of the average member of congress was the following. no due process and the fact that you get to publish your findings means, guilty until proven
2:11 pm
innocent. what do you say to that? >> on the due process question, in the two years i was there, there were no due process issues. members had the right to address this board that voted on whether the case should move forward. they couldn't be compelled to testified. they couldn't be subpoenaed for documents, all the involvement was voluntarily. they retained council. there really was no due process, there were no due process violations at all. and in terms of the findings being published, i mean, these are the facts. the facts are the facts, right? if someone went on a trip and it was paid for by someone that shouldn't have paid for it or if they sponsored an earmark for a company that benefitted one of their donors, that's what happened. and the objection that anybody should know about that is really a different animal from members are being slammed. >> is there any partthe due process argument that you think is a fair critique? >> i never saw any part of that. this was a very member. friendly process. starting with them being told, what was being investigated, all
2:12 pm
the way through to having the last word in front of our board. >> it's interesting you say member-driven. you've had plenty of experience -- you've prosecuted and run, plenty of experience going after -- in your opinion, you're not there now, is this office too friendly to congress? even as it stands now? >> you know, i think it works, it worked within the confides that were putten to, but it produced very intense, very vigorous fact-based investigations. and then the chips fell where they fell after that was presented to the house, presented to the members, and presented to the public. >> all right. you would like to see the office stay? >> ting delivered a valuable service and if the house -- if the house wants that service, then, that's what they were getting. >> all right. neil wise, the man who ran this office when was tirs created. thanks for coming in. >> appreciate it. before the panel, something that eric cantor said when he was in house leadership. cantor was in congress in 2006 when the republicans lost
2:13 pm
control of the house. they lost control amid of a wave of ethics investigations. this is an interview that cantor did with the national reswine flu 2010 as republicans were campaigning to take back control of congress. >> i think it's a republicans emerge as a new governing majority it is incumbent that we understand there are reasons for our being fired in '06, '08, some of that was for ethics violations. we had several members under public investigation during the time of the '06 elections. i think we've learned that's not a good way to gain the confidence of the people and we ought to institute a zero tolerance policy. it's time for us to live up to the people's expectations and that is we cannot tolerate any ethics violations or behavior in rms of compromising the ethics that the people expect us to have as their representatives. >> so let's bring in the panel.
2:14 pm
democratic pollster, senior editor at said national review, may have been part of that interview way back then and washington bureau chief at usa today. you know i'll start with you since it's your publication that did that interview. and it strikes me today that some of these republicans that are in the house apparently forgot why they lost it before. because that's what made this to me so head scratching in the first place. and it's like, where was eric cantor sentiment yesterday when this was happening? >> well, there's been a lot of turnover among house republicans -- >> including eric cantor. >> including eric cantor, that's right. and it would be interesting to see a breakdown between the older members and the newer members on this vote, but i think there's no question that this was politically a colossal blunder, terrible way to start off the new year. and if trump hadn't intervened -- >> oh. >> one wonders whether they
2:15 pm
would have had the sense to pull back. >> trump didn't say he was for this office, he just said, what are you prioritizing here? but it was -- it was actually a more effective shaming, i think. >> politically, and i'm glad you showed that, i member, i was in the meetings when going into election where we rolled out -- you might remember this, chuck, a culture of corruption. >> yes. it was the '06 campaign. >> it was. and a lot of fighting to have democrats land on that. and what we did over time was under republican's h two big advantages, over security as well as values right and over the culture of corruption, we undermined that big gap they had in middle america around values and doing the right thing. and this sort of spoke to me exactly the same, problem is fundamental overstaff that if republicans aren't seeing as a value sort of center party, and middle america, church-going america, it's a real problem for them. this was a colossal mistake.
2:16 pm
>> and susan, what's interest, andhis is where trump -- i'm going to quote chris matthews, he's got the best ear in politics. he's not stupid. he knew, he knew where this was headed and he basically -- you could argue it probably gets repealed anyway that they were getting a lot of grief. >> at some point. >> and he decided, i know how to make it happen today. >> or at least i know how to appear to make it happen. because of me. because you know -- >> good deal. >> remembers of congress were getting calls from constituents saying what in the world are you doing? it's not a political mistake, why do they think they were sent here? >> that was my question, what was the message for the voters? >> in secret, on an issue that no one ever talked about during this entire campaign, they choose to do that first. >> you knowhe other thing is -- and i'm not one who is quick to praise president-elect trump, but it was also deft because the careful, gentle way in which he did. he didn't say you were being corrupt or crooked, basically
2:17 pm
stop and take a second, is this really the way you want to start off. >> two things -- >> it was a very mature way of handling. >> smart, subtle. not usually the adjective we use with donald trump's tweets. not only willing to listen to him, he was willing to give them a hard time in a public way. he didn't say quietly, please, you've got to get out of this. he did it in public, and that tells you something about how this is like this count is likely to operate for the next two years with this republican. >> this was a new sheriff in town, small moment, but it's a new sheriff in town moment. >> but showed us who -- i'm not being partisan, but 8% of americans think that members of congress are highly ethical. according to gallup poll -- >> there is bipartisan agreement on one thing. >> they're all corrupt. and you feed in when the first thing you do is scratch this office. and let me paint another scenario, donald trump's got his own conflicts of interest issues that democrats certainly believe is going to trip him up at some
2:18 pm
point. the question's always been how are house republicans going handle those issues? congress, we've heard from a lot of congressional republicans who say they're going to hold him accountable. haven't that undermined that effort with their mess today? >> is it ironic? noobl congressional republicans thought they could do this because of donald trump? because donald trump -- >> that's what i'm wondering. >> has not releed his taxes. >> the public doest ca about these things. >> public doesn't care, we might as well as well. >> i guess they got a message today that public still cares. >> i do think that these things, they matter if they're added to other things. if there's a perception that the republicans are more interested in their own personal advancement, then they're doing anything good. >> and that's what today looked like. >> that's what happened in '05 and '06. >> that's what democrats have to take advantage of. their rupt and for special interests and democrats can roll that into the next midterm election. i think they'll be successful. >> well, day one. >> day one, i'm already
2:19 pm
starting. >> all right, stick around. coming up, the big challenges facing both parties in the new year. what will republicans really do about health care in between repealing it and repealing it again? will democrats try to stop president trump the way republicans tried to stop president obama or finds way to work with him? stay tuned.
2:20 pm
discover card. i'm not a customer, but i'm calling about that credit scocard. give it. sure! it's free for everyone. oh! well that's nice! and checking your score won't hurt your credit. oh! i'm so proud of you. well thank you. free at at, even if you're not a customer.
2:21 pm
welcome back. no drama. paul ryan was easily elected to his first full-time as house speaker this afternoon. ryan captured 239 of 240 votes cast by republicans. remember he doesn't vote for himself. lone republican defection, kentucky's tomas massey, he voted for daniel webster. the current congressman from florida's tenth district, not the 19th century senator. massey never voted for the establishment republican pick in any speaker election. so that wasn't exactly news. let's look at the full tally here, a little more dissent on the democratic side believe it or not, tim ryan received two votes. remember he challenged nancy pelosi for the democratic leader spot. congressman john lew and jim
2:22 pm
cooper also received a vote of peace for this second consecutive speaker election. a lot fewer defections on the republican side compared to 2015. and with four descending votes this year, defection is slowly growing in the democratic caucus. we'll be back with more mtp daily in 60 seconds. [vo] quickbooks introduces jeanette
2:23 pm
and her new mobile wedding business. at first, getting paid was tough... until she got quickbooks. now she sends invoices, sees when they've been viewed and ta-da, paid twice as fast! see how at quickbooks-dot-com. welcome back. it's like the first day of school here in washington. so for the first time 2007, reblics control both congressional chambers and the white house. it's the tenth time with republicans running the entire show. with a new congress today and a administration taking office in a couple of weeks, very quickly. here's an overview of the storylines we are watching as we kick off 2017. first, change your experience. what will define the trump administration? next up, health care, are republicans prepared to own the repeal? supreme court. who will be trump's pick and what type of fight will really follow?
2:24 pm
how ideological will it get and what will the democratic strategy be? will they change a little or a lot? opposition tactics. will democrats borrow from the playbook to counter trump or feel they can do it piecemeal? what about the economy? will it keep humming along and how much credit will trump try to take if it does. and finally trump and russia. will the administration's ties and stance on russia become a liability or is trump right that the public doesn't care as much as washington? let's bring back the panel. susan, i'll start with you, of those storylines that we are outlining, what to you is the biggest question you want to get answered to understand this year better? >> i think russia is the surprise there, because all the others we're thinking she could have said on election night, but the fact that russia looms a as big problem for donald trump that he is at odds not just with democrats and the intelligence community, but with congressional republicans like john mccain and others on this issue, it strikes me that this is something he's going to need to address in a way that he hasn't and i guess he feels the
2:25 pm
same way because he's meeting with intelligence agency leaders of some sort, he says this week to get more information about it. >> and it's more than just the intelligence investigation and all the hacking issue, it's also if he's going to have a policy closer to russia, it also means he's making a decision to pick russia over china. and china's going to feel that. i mean, you know, when you play world chess, you're playing you're really playing the game of risk. >> yeah, reverberating all through the world with respect to our middle eastern policies as well. and one of the other questions that we're going to watch unfold is what kind of republican resistance there is there. >> reporter: and who leads it? >> they're the usual suspects. >> well, and -- >> ryan mae. >> what happens with senator rubio on these issues? he did initially say about the tillerson pick he was going to have questions. >> great tweet, friend of vladimir was not among the qualifies he was looking for in the next secretary of state.
2:26 pm
let me ask you -- put you on the spot on the democratic side. >>. >> oh. >> which is this. you got your shots in the last time. it seems as if this fight between keith ellison and tom perez is a proxy fight, could be turning into a proxy fight for the following. democrats thinkt needs to be wholesale change inside the party, keith ellison, and the democrats that think hey, hillary clinton was an awful candidate, but she got three million more votes anyway, we don't need to change much next election and that's the tom perez campaign. too simplistic or does that sound right? >> i think there's a nuance there. and part of the argument going on in democratic party right now is so which direction do they go? do in fact some people say, we've got to go more after some of these blue collar voters. some say barack obama won bk to back majorities, 51% while winning house and senate seats, while losing those same blue collar voters. do you try to expand the lek tort with young voters and
2:27 pm
taking that diversity into account? but what all of them are saying which is interesting, we need to rebuild the party. how realistic is it investing in the party is on both sides. >> but that's structural. and that's something that's going to resinate with either one of them. and i guess i'm going to -- >> i didn't answer the question. >> you didn't answer the question. because, i guess this is a question then schumer has to answer. is it schumer's job to decide, are they full fledged opposition or do they think there's -- what say you? >> schumer is the guy who has the tool to use for the next two years, right? so, and schumer's speech today on the floor was interesting, but not determinative. i think you could read it any way you wanted. >> it's classic schumer. very good about that. >> there were quotes to fulfill any kind of analysis you want. >> bernie sanders, happy. joe manchin, happy. schumer knows a speech to do both. >> future of the democrats, one thing that's interesting is
2:28 pm
barack and michelle have a say. i'm not sure bill and hillary do. first time in a quarter century they haven't been the family with the most to say. >> and people are stepping up and saying, bara's going to do his farewl big farewell address in chicago coming up -- >> by the way. i have to say, i have never seen so much fanfare. >> right. >> right. >> good idea or bad idea? feels like an exercise building. >> clearly someone who you're going to see completely off the stage and you've seen other people step completely off the stage and going to be sort of aggressive. for some time. >> this isn't the oval office farewell address as well. although, you know, and. >> reporter: it's a new political era, chuck. >> no, but i think it does -- but it does set up barack obama
2:29 pm
the face of the democratic opposition? >> you know, that's an interesting question. one thing i don't see among the democrats. i see some democrats who are talking about how the party needs to appeal more to white working class voters, on the basis of economics. what i don't see is them saying what other democrats have done in the past, which is we also need to try to cater a little bit to their cultural sensibilities in a way that bill clinton did in the 1990s. and i wonder if a merely economic message is going to be enough to try to cut those margins -- >> no. no. they're absolutely not. i wrote a whole book about it, no. there is a cultural riff right nogoing on in this country and progressives and my liberal friends, they think everything's transactional. that middle america family that goes to church every sunday. everything isn't about pocketbook and transactions. howard deen talked about it. i don't think enough progressives understand that.
2:30 pm
>> i don't think barack obama will become the face of the democratic opposition. if he did, that would be at odds with a century of precedent for presidents leaving office. that doesn't mean he can't weigh in on issues that he cares a lot about -- >> but a century. teddy roosevelt. >> not since teddy roosevelt. >> arguing not in a tumultuous political period oddly enough in this case since then. you have two parties -- >> why do americans have so much more respect for jimmy carter or for george w. bush or for george h.w bush, they took a different path. >> all right guys. still ahead, as the tweeter in chief picks his latest corporate target, is he helping to keep jobs in the u.s. or are we looking at crony capitalism? stay tuned.
2:31 pm
anyone with type 2 diabetes knows how it feels to see your numbers go up, despite your best efforts. but what if you could turn things around? what if you could love your numbers?
2:32 pm
discover once-daily invokana®. it's the #1 prescribed sglt2 inhibitor that works to lower a1c. a pill taken just once in the morning, invokana® is used along with diet and exercise to significantly lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. in fact, it's been proven to be more effective at lowering a1c than januvia. invokana® works around the clock by reducing the amount of sugar allowed back into the body, and sending some sugar out through the process of urination. and while it's not for lowering systolic blood pressure or weight loss, it may help you with both. invokana® can cause important side effects, including dehydration, which may cause you to feel dizzy, faint,lightheaded,or weak, upon standing. other side effects may include kidney problems, genital yeast infections,changes in urination, high potassium, increases in cholesterol, risk of bone fracture, or urinary tract infections, possibly serious. serious side effects may include ketoacidosis,
2:33 pm
which can be life threatening. stop taking and call your doctor right away if you experience symptoms or if you experience symptoms of allergireaction such as rash, swelling, or difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take invokana® if you have severe liver or kidney problems or are on dialysis. tell your doctor about any medical conditions and medications you take. using invokana® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. it's time to turn things around. lower your blood sugar with invokana®. imagine loving your numbers. there's only one invokana®. ask your doctor about it by name.
2:34 pm
welcome back to more presidents of the president's club have now rsvp'd from the upcoming inauguration. hillary clinton will attend trump's inauguration and we know that president george bush and laura bush will be there as well. president carter said he plans to intend the inauguration. the elder bushes will not be attendin traditionally, all formerpresidents, if they can, physically, attend the inaugural and they're all always invited. all of the living presidents attended president obama's first inauguration in 2009. we remember this famous photo, the left there and the last time
2:35 pm
all five of the current mebs were together was after the the dedication of the george w. bush presidential library in 2013. more mtp daily ahead, including tweeting trump and corporate america, but first, here's the cnbc market wrap. >> that's right, thanks, chuck. well markets started the new year with gains. the dow, the dow excuse me rising 119 points, s&p adding 19 and the nasdaq higher by 46 points. american factory activity hit a two year high in december thanks to a surge of new orders. there could be a sign of a rebound if the effects of strong dollar overseas and lower demand for oil drilling equipment. and more than a quarter of consumers say they plan to try mobile payments for purchases this year according to a study by see is a. that's an increase of 8% over 2016. that's it from cnbc, first in business, worldwide. ate to sevec plaque psoriasis made a simple trip to the grocery store anything but simple. so i had an important conversation with my dermatologist about humira. he explained that humira works inside my body
2:36 pm
to target and help block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to my symptoms. in clinical trials, most adults taking humira were clear or almost clear, and many saw 75% and even 90% clearance in just 4 months. humira can lower you ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask about humira, the #1 prescribed biologic by dermatologists. clearer skin is possible.
2:37 pm
2:38 pm
welcome back to mtp daily, carrier, then boeing and
2:39 pm
lockheed martin, each in the cross hair of tweets from donald trump. general motors sending mexican made model of chevy cruise tax free across border. made in usa or pay big border tax. gm explained later that only a small number are built in mexico, and all of the sedans are actually built in ohio. but the hatchback which accounts for only 2.4% of the models sold in the united states in the last year are indeed made in mexico. before the markets open, gm shares initially fell, but ended up higher for date. on the same day by the way that trump took after gm, he's been heaping praise on gm's chief competitor, ford. ford announced today that it's scrapping plans to build a plant in mexico. remember, trump, hinted at this a few weeks ago. instead, ford said it's investing $700 million in the state of michigan. the company's president and ceo said it was encouraged to do so because of the pro growth policies. and of course, trump immediately
2:40 pm
took credit for that on twitter. let's not forget, a few days after the election. trump tweeted about speaking to his friend and chairman, bill ford, about keeping one of the companies plants in kentucky. folks, keeping jobs in the u.s. is a good thing, but this could begin to some to smell like crony capitalism, seeing day ford makes this big announce, goes after gm. those who are friendly to trump are profiting while others get vilified and risk watching their stock value plummet as a result before things open at 9:00 a.m. so what if it you're one of these companies, what do you do? joining me now is the man many companies turn to to get the answer to that question. eric, he is a crisis management consultant and author of the book, glass jaw, man fes or it for defending reputations in the age of instant scandal. wow. so -- >> what are your options? >> you wake up. you're him this morning and you think, first day at work, holiday, you came back and went,
2:41 pm
oh good grief. president-elect's after us. >> companies, companies under attack by trump on ttter hav three options. number one, you can capitulate, number two, you can minimize, three, you can fight back. let's look at them one at a time. if you you want to capitulate, that's a great example of what essentially happened today. what -- >> carrier. >> well yes, but take a look at what ford did, it's interesting, because what they essentially did by capitulating, not because they were tweeted against, but they preempted. they gave trump a win. and that's what i mean by capitulation. you sir in your brilliance, wisdom, and handsomeness were right, we're going to do what we want you to do, problem solved, you're out of the news. and that's what companies really want. so, that is always your first choice. second, you have the issue of min mization. if you look at what trump did a few weeks ago, went after the pharmaceutical companies for price pg. they can't capitulate. how do hundreds of companies come together inside of three
2:42 pm
minutes and policy on thousand was different drugs. you can't. so what they do? vanilla statement we look forward to constructive dialogue with the administration. the thing about twitter, the bad news is trump tweets. the good news is he tweets about a lot of stuff. and you never know when your issue is going to move out of the news. and the good news for the drug companies is, that issue did move out of the news, temporarily. it will be back, but sometimes the better of your bad options is to be boring. >> be boring or dos you just stick your head in the sand? >> that's what i mean. one area where the crisis management try is 30 years behind they tell their clients, you must respond immediately. no. >> sometimes the bt response is say nothing, right? >> sometimes the problem goes away quickly. i mean, the bad news about twitter is it's out there. the good news is there's millions and billions of tweets. the third issue, the third option is when things get interesting. fighting back. >> uh-huh. >> and this is what companies are terrified of because what
2:43 pm
companies don't do -- >> don't know how to do it. >> what they're good at is behind the scenes work. what they don't do is they don't -- they don't want to get on tv with you and defend their companies. why? because number one, it's not what they do. i'm telling you that there are companies with 20,000 employees that don't have one person who is trained, willing, and able to get on tv, why? and not because they're stupid, but as a general rule whoever goes on tv and defends the company, probably loses their job. and so, what -- the big unknown right now in corporate america and where there is a lot of teeth gnashing right now is what if trump does something that is so permanently ownerous to our business that we must go on tv and twitter and fight. >> you're going lose that fight. more times than not. >> you're probably going to, but what if you have no other choice? and what companies are now trying to figure out, under what
2:44 pm
conditions will we fight back? who goes on. what they're probably going to decide is number two, min mization and take their hit. nobody really wants to fight of the president of the united states. >> the goal is a lot of companies are going to go back to your one, two, three, preempive strike, ford knew they could be in the cross hairs. find a way to give him a win. >> right. that is your best choice, but the second sopgs what's more likely. min mization. >> last question, is this a boom for your business? crisis management knowing that a president-elect is willing, at any moment in time to upend the am cart of corporate america or because trump is so permissible about it? does it make ceos have to do it himself? >> when they're terrified, yes they call and ask, what companies usually decide to do is hide. >> well, there you go. eric, thanks fortune not hiding. always fun. appreciate it. >> you bet. is the country too obsessed with scandals? i'll explain. plus dualing messages
2:45 pm
president obama and president-elect mike pence rally their parties on obamacare. that's ahead on the lid. stay tuned. just want to find a r without getting ripped off. you could start your search at the all-new that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new
2:46 pm
2:47 pm
18 major scandals. they inclu the 2013 government smutdown in obamacare. those are political disagreements. on the left, democrats might point to this piece which lists 19 scandals involving donald trump. trump's bankruptcies and hiring of cory lewandowski. not scandals at all. both legally, legal things they could do. we're not at the point where every eyebrow raising thing gets a investigate tacked on to it as to brand it like a piece of beef certified scandal. with the pressure readings on a football. which raises a bigger problem.
2:48 pm
what is a scandal anymore? especially in this ultra-partisan environment? presidential conflicts of interest, here's the real problem, if everything's a scandal, then nothing's a scandal. not everything has to go to 11. we'll be back. sy your life can mom: oh no... tech: this mn't have time to worry about a cracked windshield. so she scheduled at and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there, so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much! (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.
2:49 pm
my insurance rates are but dad, you've got...
2:50 pm with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. it's good to be in, good hands. time for the lid. republicans have started the ball rolling again. this time they have vote on the president signing the bill. the bill was introduce today the expect to begin tomorrow. what are repealing and when are they going to relevapeal it. democrats are strategyizing way to safe it. republicans trying to figure out how to kill it. as to whether if and when republicans repeal the law
2:51 pm
license to what kellyanne conway said this morning. >> it could take years to complete the process. >> do you have a replacement plan ready to go tomorrow? >> we have pieces of it we don't have it confirmed yet. >> panelist are back. cornell, a new roadblock democrats can put in to save themselves. >> i'm laughing because they don't have piece to replace it. it was republican idea put in place put in place by a governor in massachusetts because a lot of the liberal and progressive wanted a single pair. politically, here is the problem, it is hard to repeal sl where you have 20 million people
2:52 pm
using it it. go to mitch mcconnell's state. do you know where it's been successful? >> where. >> in his state. >> to take away the republicans want to take away the idea of the mandate if you take away the mandate it clap collapses because young people won't do it. it's tough to find a replacement. >> they have no choice but to vote on the repeal. at this point is it in their interest to pretend they are repealing or do they own up to the fact that we're not repealing the whole thing, we're getting rid a lot of it.
2:53 pm
don't they say that. the. >> the fact is the heart of the obama is they don't think they can get to with a simple ma jorpt with the senate. what they are going to do is repeal the parts they can repeal with the majority. they have not figured out how to make that work. stable transition to new system. what they are talking about will not provided that stable transition. >> the problem is they can repeat and delay, the problem is in four years they have to have trump care in operation. i'm surprised that they have not committed to the preexisting conditions pro vision which is
2:54 pm
difficult to manage as you were noting. today kellyanne conway said people will not lose their health care -- >> good luck with that. >> disruption of your health care has been political fact of health care, that's the problem they have. >> how many of you think this will be the following reality of the next decade. it become the new tax fix where everything congress at the end they have to pass the law that we repeal it but we continue -- there's a continueuation of it for another two years. >> i think absolutely. this is why americans don't like politics because it's not real. because that's exactly what's going to happen. >> the headline will be repeal but they have to keep putting and putting and 2022 they punt
2:55 pm
again. >> obamacare needs patching up. obama was calling for legislati legislative fixes. >> maybe he ready to give donald trump -- cornell, susan, ra mesh thank you after the break sfwloo vice president biden from today's photo opt. in a minute. when you've been making delicious natural cheese for over 100 years like kraft has,
2:56 pm
you learn a lot about people's tastes. honey, what do you want for dinner tonight? oh, whatever you're making. cheesy chipotle pork quesadillas? mmmm... ravioli lasagna bake? yeah, i don't know... grilled white chicken... grab something rich, sharp and creamy. triple cheddar stuffed sliders. sold! we aim to cheese! kraft natural cheese: we make cheese for how you love cheese.
2:57 pm
2:58 pm
2:59 pm
in case you missed it this afternoon for the final time the vice president welcomed new senate class. vice president is still vice president is vice president until january 20. here joe biden welcoming them. >> hello, everyone. >> thank you. >> i want to know what you're drinking? >> did you give vice president a kiss. >> look over there. >> man the baby avoided him,
3:00 pm
ooch. come on we're going to miss bipartisan effort. joe biden should be greater all the time regardless whether she vice president. that's all tonight. good morning. i man mormon. first day for trump era. first fight already on the way. is this a sign of things to come. i'm going to talk to lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. we're going to have stories from turkey tonight. this one have bill and hillary will be on


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on