tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC June 5, 2017 8:00pm-9:01pm PDT
♪ why then oh, why can't i >> ariana grande gets tonight's last word. "the 11th hour" with brian williams starts now. tonight new details on how russia tried to hack the 2016 election just days before american voters went to the polls. plus, the white house confirming it won't invoke sc t executive privilege. that starts the countdown to comey's testimony on thursday. it was a big day for the president on twitter. attacking the london mayor, attacking his own government, and just today very likely damaging his own case before the supreme court. and he's still at it tonight. "the 11th hour" begins now. >> good evening once again from our headquarters here in new york on this day, 137 for the trump administration.
it's again what the president says on social media by night, and then early in the morning that overwhelms anything the administration attempts to do by day. today, for example, was supposed to be about infrastructure and the need for a new air traffic control system. it is instead tonight about the president popping off on his phone. this morning, a twitter storm which read in part "i am calling it a travel ban. the justice department should have stayed with the original travel ban". we are extreme investigate people. the courts are slow and political". then just a few minutes ago, this again tonight on twitter. that's right, we need a travel ban for certain dangerous countries. not some politically correct term that won't help us protect our people. and this was interesting, kellyanne conway's husband a washington lawyer, actually said on twitter this morning in response to the president's first comments quote, these
tweets may make some people feel better but they certainly won't help office of solicitor general get five votes in the office of the united states which is actually what matters. sad, he ended. there was also disagreement among white house officials today about the importance of what the president says on twitter. here now comments from both kellyanne conway and sarah huckabee sanders. >> thisson obsession of covering everything he says on twitter and little of what he does as president. >> it gives him the ability to speak directly to the people without the bias of the media. >> you are covering tweets. >> i think social media for the president is extraemly important. >> that's his preferred method of communication with the american people. >> that's not true. >> i think it's a very important tool for him to be able to utilize. >> this weekend, meanwhile, it wasn't exactly america first, but it was an american first when the president of the united
states attacked the mayor of a city that had just suffered a terrorist attack. it started with this, "the mayor of london, a man who we point out because it's germane is a muslim to who today spoke out against any act of violence in the name of his religion, this weekend london mayor is a defect khan warned the people of london they are about to see way more police presence ". here's how he put it. >> like terrorists are trying to find new ways to destruct us and attack us and harm us, the police officers are looking for new ways to keep us same listen derers will see increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days. no reason to be alarmed. >> president trump took that last bit out of context plaply and repeatedly attacked the mayor on twitter. at least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and mayor says there is no reason to be
alarmed. the president's first response after the london attack was to retweet the initial bulletin on the bruj report. and finally, it may be generated by an automatic bot but a new tool on social media converts the president's tweets to the format of official white house statements from the president. while neither the president nor his aides want to preent tend that what he says in his late might and early morning twitter rants is by any means official policy, we have no other choice but to take it as such, especially considering they are words from the president and the president has largely stopped talking to the news media. it's been 109 days since his first and only official solo news conference of his presidency. let's bring in our starting panel for tonight. anchor of bbc world news america. we welcome caddy kay to our broadcast for the first time tonight. chief white house correspondent upon the "new york times," peter
baker. white house correspondent for reuters. and to round out our sib subcommittee of white house press corps, white house bureau chief for the "washington post," philip rucker. welcome to you all. peter i'm going to begin with you, you were the last to file of this group. you filed a story tonight that says, among other things, what appears to be the president's simmerin anger lot of it goes back to aorney general ff session. please explain how that is. >> well, if you look at today's twitter storm, there are lots of things you can take out of it. one of the things is the president's seeming dissatisfaction with his own justice department. it acts as if it is another branch of government not under his control, the justice department shouldn't have done this, should do this. what that reflects is this resentment, this unhappiness he has with jeff session, the attorney general, who had been
one of his earliest supporters. that goes back to the decision jeff sessions made to recuse himself from the russia probe. president trump didn't like that decision, wasn't informed before it was made, thought it was unnecessary and blames it according to people close to him for a lot of things that happened since then, including now the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the matter. >> caddy kay, another day, some argue another week lost to russia despite any and all plans the administration may have to the contrary. >> yeah. i think that's the problem the faces right? however he might try to distract -- i don't know why he took on the mayor of london. i don't know why he's repeating his allegations against mayor of london and the travel ban but i think there is a feeling in the white house any day where they are not talking about russia is a good day. and yet here we are at the end of the even and russia has come back to them. it's going to come back in spades by the time we get to thursday. this is going to be the only issue this weeks and the only
issue the next few weeks until we get how many meetings there were, who said what, let's get it out on the i believe at that. until they can level on all the russia issues it's going to carry on being an issue. >> aeesh audio wrasse coyou were briefed by the administration for their plans for their ongoing agenda, which of course rebound as strong as the president's weakest tweet going into the next business day. >> yes, that's -- the white house right now, they are trying to get a focus on their legislative accomplishments. they are complaining that no one is focusing on what they are trying to get done. now, of course they haven't had any really major legislative accomplishments other than passing health care reform through the house. but they haven't had any major bills signed into law. so they are trying to change that. they are saying they are going to do health care over the summer, before the august recess. and that they are going to start on tax reform after labor day. >> philip, your colleague and
our mutual friend, robert costa, is reporting for your newspaper, i'll read the headline "as trump lashes out, republicans grow uneasy". that may be the understatement of the century. is it not? >> yeah. and it's something tha you could have had that headline every wk this president sooechl it is a an ongoing problem for president trump in dealing with this congress on capitol hill. the republicans have the majority there. there is a substantive agenda of legislative items that the republican would like to advance in this majority. it's something that president trump would like to do, too, and nothing is getting done because we have controversy after controversy after controversy. trump wants to move on taxes. he wants to move on health care. now wants to move on infrastructure. this week as we were just talking about is going to be all about russia and comey and getting some of these questions answered and dealing with the president and what happened in that campaign. >> speaking of comey, philip, was there ever a "there" there on the question of executive
privilege? or do you know not think it would have stuck had they tried? >> i'm not a lawyer. i can't answer that exactly. but i just don't politically. >> you are being congrate lated for that, by the way. >> i don't think politically it would have worked if he had decided to exert executive privilege. it seems like he made a good decision here. >> peter, i want to read reporting from the intercept. headline is top secret nsa report details russia hacking effort days before the election. it reads, quote, russian military intelligence executed a cyber attack on at least one u.s. voting software supplier and sent spearfishing e-mails to more than 100 local election election officials days before last year's presidential election, according to a highly classified intelligence report obtained by the intercept. report indicates that russian hacking may have penetrated further into u.s. voting systems than was previously understood. it states unequivocally in its
summary statement that it was russian military intelligence that conducted the cyber a, at that. we are reporting that the leaker behind this story has been arrested tonight. peter, this makes wider the chasm between what we know and suspect about russian involvement and kind of baked in complacent see that a lot of us are feeling and hearing. >> that's right. i think what we've been talking about publicly is the hacking of dnc e-mails, john podesta e-mails. those created political headaches for hillary clinton's kahne campaign. whether it actually changed an election seemed somewhat questionable. this suggests a more ambitious effort on the part of the russians if this is true that goes beyond mischief making and tilting the odds a little bit. this is in fact what the obama white house was really worried about in september and october of last fall. one of the reasons why obama's
aides gave for the fact they did not go harder publicly against russia in this period was there were more concerned about tampering with election machines, taemp tampering with election day processes themselves. that was sort of their first priority up until that point. we haven't seen evidence until now that that succeeded in any way. i haven't done any report, on this report so i can't vouch for it but it obviously raises important questions. >> caddy, a piece of work that philip rucker posted over the weekend came with the headline, trump reacts to london terror by stoking fear and renewing feud. what has the global reaction been that you have sampled to this president's latest war with the mayor of london, of all people. >> the mayor of london is very popular, brian. he is being seen to have done
very well for the people of listen done not just in this attack but in the attack a couple of months ago as well. i think frankly there is a broad feeling in london and in britain that people are kind of fed up with the president and these tweets. the mayor of london said this each on british television said that the president's state visit to britain in the fall should be canceled. we shouldn't be rolling out the red carpet he said for somebody whose position weiss so funny disagree with. i suspect you will hear more of that you also had the acting ambassador to london also coming out and saying the mayor of london has been doing a very good job which puts daylight between the embassy in london and what the white house is saying. we diplomat know what's behind this. we do know during the campaign the mayor of london criticized the travel ban and said it was i go norpt of the president, then the candidate donald trump then to propose that travel ban. donald trump's reaction to that, hearing that the mayor of london
who criticized him was you wait, i won't let him forget this. >> eye eye isha, we are reporting journalism that keeps rolling in while we are on the air. russia white house war room idea. the president has decided any of those questions can go to his counsel based out of new york. the old campaign hands he was going to bring in are going to remain outside surrogates, i guess. and so another change in plans within the west wing. >> well, i'm just hearing that. but it just seems like the white house right now is trying to figure out how to handle this. they are saying that they are going to, you know, put all of their requests in with this outside counsel in new york. but i think it's going to be difficult for them to hold on to that strategy, especially if president trump keeps tweeting about these issues. i mean, you can tell your staff not to talk about something.
but if the president himself is going the keep talking about something, i don't know how much of an impact it has to try to focus on or to try to lean on having outside counsel deal with these matters. >> mr. rucker, other than bringing in a juggler during the testimony how are they going to avoid the president in eeffect leave tweeting of the response of comey. second a serious question, people like me ask people like you this question, what is the pulse inside the white house. >> i don't know they are going to keep the president from watching this. we know he likes to record the hearings on the dvr and watch them in full. i'm sure we will have a reaction of some kind on thursday. he is planning on being in washington on thursday. with regard to the mood, there is frustration from the srs senior officials that they can't
seem to get the president to focus on the agenda, they can't seem to get him to control his impulses and his emotions. he is sometimes getting advice he is just not listening to. it is a frustration for people. he doesn't seem to be growing in job. we are well past the 100-day mark. and the behavior stays the same. and there is only so much that the staff are able to do. >> imagine being the majority leader of the senate or the speaker of the house. everyone is going to remain with us. we'll fit in a first quick break here. when we come back, are we calling ate travel ban or not? seems to be some disagreement. but at the same time the boss seems to have spoken. you doyou'll see whatet but in you're really made of. after five hours of spinning and one unfortunate ride on the gravitron, your grandkids spot a 6 foot banana that you need to win. in that moment, you'll be happy you partnered with a humana care manager and got your health back on track. because that banana isn't coming home with you
until that bell sings. great things are ahead of you when your health is ready for them. at humana, we can help you with a personalized plan for your health for years to come. for 10 years my tempur-pedic has adapted to my weight and shape. so i sleep deeply and wake up ready to perform. now through june 11th, save $600 when you buy select tempur-pedic adjustable mattress sets. find your exclusive retailer at tempurpedic.com.
this is not a travel ban. this is a temporary paws that allows us to better vet. >> i want to go back to the issue of the travel ban. >> it is not a travel ban. when we use words like travel ban that misrepresents what it is. it's not a travel ban. it is a system to keep america safe, that's it plain and simple. >> this was president trump's tweet yesterday, if the ban were announced during a one week notice the -- he says it is a ban. >> he is using the words that the media is using. those are hid words. welcome back to "the 11th hour" a. look at some of the trump administration officials on the notion of whether it is or isn't a travel ban. we have assorted members of the
pros corps with here. those are your words, people, i hope you are hearing that. by the way it's too easy to repeat this. again, the president's tweet from tonight, within what, the last 90 minutes, that's right, we need a travel ban for certain dangerous countries. not some politically correct term that won't help us protect our people. caddy, are you going to go with travel ban? >> the president says it is a travel ban, i guess it is, right. the smartest person i know talking about this is a professor of law at harvard, joke gold smith, who actually worked in the bush administration on terrorism-related issues. he came out with a theory early on that actually maybe the president wants this defeated in the courts so for the rest of his presidency he can explain the courts are against him and anything he doesn't get done he can pin it on obstructionist courts is probably what he would call them. i can't think of another logical reason why the president would at this stage be still calling ate travel ban when he knows
this will be used against him in the supreme court. >> peter baker, i trust you are not a lawyer either, but can you explain to our audience how his tweets hurt his case exactly? >> well, among other things, you know, he uses the phrase politically correct watered down version to describe the revised travel ban to use his phrase that he signed when the first one got blocked in court. and you know, that undercuts him because it tells the judges that in fact this is not any different than what he originally intended and allows people who are challenging it to make the case he just dressed it up. it's just as bad legally and therefore you should treat it like the first one. any lawyer is going the argue will tell you they don't want their clients out there talking freelance because they can create issues like this. while judges may or may not take into account things outside of the actual written document, you know, reality is reality. and you heard even as you pointed out earlier, george
conway, who was slated to be an assistant attorney general in this administration until just last week, husband of kellyanne conway say it doesn't help for the president to do this. >> ayesha, there is that. the conways, husband and wife kind of on display today. he took a certain calculated risk i guess in writing what he did. >> yes. i mean it was very interesting. and when the tweets first went out from george conway's twitter account there were some concerns, was he hacked? was this really him? because it directly contradicted what his wife just said earlier about why is the media obsessing about these tweets? then her husband comes out and says look these tweets are undermining what the president is trying to do. he later clarified and said, you know, i still very much support the president and of course support my wife. and i support the executive order. but he said that any sensible lawyers in the administration would agree with him. and he said that he has spoken
to some who told him just that. it was very interesting to kind of see that dynamic on play today. >> philip, you this weekend, on deadline, and kind of in the moment, wrote about the president in the moment, his -- his first instincts, his reflexes, and how he reacted to and what he said about the london attack. tell our audience the extent of your reporting. >> so i just sort of laid out exactly what he did to respond to the london attack. the very first thing he did was retweet a bulletin from the dredge report. this was unconfirmed news at that point. and it came out before the authorities in london each detailed that this was an act of terror saying it was a terrorist attack. so trump was being indiscrete with his facts. after that it escalated. he attacked the mayor.
he dug in on the u.s. travel ban. he did that before expressing any noted of sympathy or condolences for the british people. it was an unusual way for a president to react. we are used to presidents urging calm and speaking in tmsf coming together and reaching out to allies, itead trump went straight for the jugular and tried to fan this for his base. we see him continuing that today. his campaign actually issued an appeal to his list serve to the e-mail address of many millions of trump voters around the country urging them to help him fight to defend the travel ban with the courts. i think trump and his advisors see this as an issue that can activate his base of supporters out there. >> thank you all of you joining us late on a monday night after yet an eventful weekend. coming up, another break for us. as we have been asking, did president trump sabotage his own travel ban, as it now heads to the supreme court? a former watergate prosecutor
coming here next. along with the former ethics lawyer for pre bush 43 "the 11th hour" continues right now this. . a leaf is a hint that is connected to each person in your family tree. i learned that my ten times great grandmother is george washington's aunt. within a few days i went from knowing almost nothing to holy crow, i'm related to george washington. this is my cousin george. discover your story. start searching for free now at ancestry.com we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. fidelity, where smarter investors will always be. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. abreak through your allergies.? try new flonase sensimist allergy relief instead of allergy pills.
it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist experience you'll barely feel. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. new flonase sensimist changes everything. mom what's for din...ner? water. just water. lots and lots of water. you wouldn't feed your kids just water, so why starve your plants? feed them miracle gro and go from doom to bloom. when this guy got a flat tire so why starve your plants? in the middle of the night. hold on dad... liberty did what? yeah, liberty mutual 24-hour roadside assistance helped him to fix his flat so he could get home safely. my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. don't worry - i know what a lug wrench is, dad. is this a lug wrench? maybe?
he called me up. he said put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally. >> the first time president trump's travel ban went to court, those words you just heard were used in the argued to block that ban from being enacted. lawyers argued they showed trump intended to target muslims. and now, many experts say what we saw from the president on twitter could become exhibit a in the next potential legal battle at the
supreme court for the revamped ban. here they are again. tonight he wrote, that's right, we need a travel ban for certain dangerous countries not some politically correct term that won't help us broke our people. it came after this message this morning. people, the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want. but i am calling it what we need, and what it is a travel ban. then the justice department should have stayed with the original travel ban, not the watered down politically correct version they submitted to the
supreme court. and this, the justice department should ask for an expedited hearing on the watered down travel
ban before the supreme court and seek a much tougher version. we have a pair of prominent attorneys joining us, former federal prosecutor and an assistant watergate prosecutor, nicker ackerman is here with us. and the chief ethics lawyer in the bush 43 white house, richard painter is back with us on the broadcast. gentlemen, welcome to both of you. nick, if you were appointed solicitor general the government's lawyer before the supreme court, and i asked you to make the case for a travel ban, how would these tweets hurt your case? >> they would destroy my case. >> how so? >> this is not only exhibit a against me, but it's exhibit a, b, c, and d. first of all, the government has been making the argument from the beginning that trump was simply talking on the campaign trail that these were discussions that he did in terms the campaign.
and it's different when he's president. what this shows is that it is not different when he's president. he is still doing the same thing. when he talks about political correctness, it is really just a dog whistle for trying to keep muslim out of the united states. he's really going back to the exact same thing that he has said on the campaign trail. and if i were the solicitor general and i had to argue this, i would be absolutely beside myself. he has totally undercut it. and on too much it all they claimed in the beginning it would take 90 to 120 days to really determine what kind of action they could take to really take to have really extreme investigate. that 120 days has passed. presumably they have done everything they should have done in the 120 days to this point. so what was the whole point of the travel ban in the first place if this was the justification? again i would suggest this is
another pretext by this president to cover up who he is really trying the do, discriminate against muslims coming into the united states. >> richard, what's your take on the ethics of what you see coming from the president? >> well, i certainly think the travel ban makes no sense. the united kingdom has had experience with this before, with the irish republican army terrorist attacks. you had protestant groups which were also launching terrorist attacks. but they didn't impose a travel ban on catholics or people of irish decent. nobody considered that. this is an absurd approach. people who are violent tendencies need to be precluded from coming into the united states regardless of their religion. the real problem for the lawyers in the justice department is they have submitted papers to
the supreme court that may very well be describing the travel ban very differently than the president of the united states. and the question is how much those lawyers knew about the president's intentions and his views, because he is the man who set this policy into motion, and whether the papers submitted to the supreme court are accurate factuallyual. if they are not, the justice are going to be very upset, rightfully so w the justice department of it's critically important that the president's lawyers, when they appear before the courts, accurately describe the policies being implemented by the president. some of president obama's lawyers got in trouble a little over a year ago now with a federal judge in texas for misrepresenting some aspects of his immigration policies. and were sanctioned by the judge because of that. we have yet to see how the supreme court is going the respond to this, whether the justice department is going to amend its papers to accurately reflect what the president is truly intending with this travel
ban. because the justice have a right to know what's really going on when they make a critically important decision in a case such as this in a has very, very important implications under the first amendment with respect to freedom of religion, and fifth amendment due process. >> nick, it doesn't seem the president fully understands that justice is part of the administration. and i -- another way of putting that is do you remember a president critical of his own justice department in this way? >> it's never happened before. and not only does he not understand how the justice department works and the fact that the justice department is supposed to be his lawyers, he also doesn't understand how the supreme court works. he also said that he wanted to have the original travel ban put into place. the supreme court is not going to put the original travel ban
into place. that's not how they work. he is the president. he signs an executive order. he has his lawyers take to it court. they take it up to the supreme court. the supreme court doesn't jump in the shoes of the president and suddenly decide it's going to change the travel ban to what it was before. i mean, this is an individual who has no real understanding of how our system of government works. it's absolutely scary. >> richard, i guess we have to take the administration at their word on comey and waiving executive privilege. but do you think they ever could have had a chance? do you think they could change that as the week goes on if something strikes them? >> oh, i don't think so, not with respect to the russia investigation. that was absolute rubbish being pushed by some of the president's advisors. but not with any serious consideration by the lawyers. this is something that the president has discussed on
twitter, with the news media, even with the russian ambassador is dissatisfaction with director comey because of the russia investigation. and you cannot assert executive privilege and tell congress that you are not going to allow james comey, who is a former fbi director -- in the even a government employee anymore -- not allow him to talk to congress about something that the president of the united states is willing to talk about with a russian ambassador. that's absolutely absurd. i don't think that ever would have gone anywhere. that was just being floated by a bunch of the president's advisors who really didn't have anything better to talk about. >> richard painter, out in the twin cities, our thanks. nick ackerman in the new york studios, gentlemen, counsellors thank you both for coming in tonight. we will take a break. when we come back, what a democratic member of congress has to say all about this. he will join us here in the studio. different.
last year, he said he was going to dig a hole to china. at&t is working with farmers to improve irrigation techniques. remote moisture sensors use a reliable network to tell them when and where to water. so that farmers like ray can compete in big ways. china. oh ... he got there. that's the power of and. "america" by simon and garfun [ snoring ]ental) [ deep sleep snoring ]
welcome back to our studios here in new york for "the 11th hour." joining us hoar in new york is congressman dan killedy, democrat of the state of michigan whose district includes flint and saginaw. congressman thank you for coming in. it is a pleasure to have you. let's talk about the president's behavior. you have said a lot about what you have seen. how -- maybe i should ask it this way -- how is it dangerous beyond to his fortunes politically? >> obviously it has an affect. but he's the president of the united states. what he says matters. whether he wants to believe that or not. he is not some casual observer to the process, some sort of disconnected, you know, person. what the president says makes a difference. he has an entire government that is supposed to act on his word. and we have an entire world that makes decisions, every single day, based on the things that come out of his mouth. it's -- it's dangerous to have a
person that doesn't seem to have any breaks at all between the brain and the mouth. whatever comes into his head, comes out. and it's consequential. >> there is this report tonight on the website called the intercept, investigative journalist named glen greenwald started it up. they have a lot of investigative journalists. it says the russians quoting an nsa sort, young woman has been fired for the leak. their attempts to infiltrate were just as great as we thought. how complacent or not are michiganers, your constituents? >> complacent on that subject? >> yeah. >> i think the problem we have, of course and this is where the election results play into this is that people are really focused on their situation, on the troubles they are having every single day. when i go home, you know, as much as we talk about this political storm that changes
every single day most of the folks just want to talk about how we are going to get the economy moving again, and jobs. i think the president takes advantage of that. i don't believe that the people back home are complacent. i think they are just focused on the issues that are more important to them every single day. that's front of mind for them. >> back when the flint water crisis was getting non-stop coverage here and elsewhere my heart sank when i heard how long it was going to take to replace the mains, to replace the pipes to the homes, the plumbing within every home. say nothing of the overall water system in that town, which needs a good break and not a bad break. i was thinking today, infrastructure, which was supposed to be the white house's initiative today. today the president chose air traffic control -- not knowing what future that faces in congress, infrastructure is something that the flint/saginaw area has given our country over the years and now needs from our
country. so it would -- i suppose you would chief a legislative agenda that would bring that kind of a thing back to your district? >> absolutely. offensely, this is something what we have to do, it's inevitable that sooner or later we have to replace the aging infrastructure. i worry that the president's inability to focus on anything more than 24 hours let alone 24 minutes i suppose is going to keep us from the one big bipartisan effort that we could join hands on. that's infrastructure. what happened in flint, as you point out, is sad. but it's not that flint is some sort of an anomaly. it's not just sort of an extreme case and poor flint. flint is not an anomly. it's a warning. if we don't get serious, there are going to be more and more flint michigans all over the country. and the president is squandering an opportunity to bring a
seemingly divided congress together around a subject that we ought to be able to work together on and we could deliver for the american people and have the effect of growing our economy at the same time. but he's so focused on, you know, his own ego massaging his own ego that he can't get enough attention on something as important as this and do something about it. i heard kellyanne conway -- i think it was her -- say we shouldn't focus on the tweets, we should focus on what he does. what has he done? what has he done? show me something. the most significant thing he does is gets up in the morning and he tweets. that's what the world listens to. there is no legislative agenda. there are no legislative victories. there is no real progress he has made. except that he just talks about it all the time. >> we will tov to leave it there. congressman thank you for visiting us here. democratic congressman can killedy, democrat of the great
state of michigan. we will take a break. when we come back looking deeper into what the president said and did not say to our nato allies. and what words were missing. and why. looking sharp len. who's the lucky lady? i'm going to the bank, to discuss a mortgage. ugh, see, you need a loan, you put on a suit,
you go crawling to the bank. this is how i dress to get a mortgage. i just go to lendingtree. i calculate how much home i can afford. i get multiple offers to compare side by side. and the best part is... the banks come crawling to me. everything you need to get a better mortgage. clothing optional. lendingtree, when banks compete, you win. okay! ...awkward. thithis is the new new york.e? think again. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships
we have had a clear message from the u.s. administration that united states is committed to nato and it's not possible to be committed to nato without being committed to article v in our collective defense clause. because nato is about collective defense. >> one for all and all for one. that was nato's secretary general last month after president trump refused to reaffirm america's commitment to defending nato allies. a provision known as article v. trump's national security team, we are now learning was blind side booed i the omission in his speech. this is according to politico. the defense secretary, national security adviser, and secretary of state all lobbied the
president to do so. according to the reporter susan glasser, quote, the president appears to have deleted it himself. according to one version making the rounds inside the government. it suggests trump's impulsive instincts on foreign policy aren't necessarily going to be contained by the team of experienced leaders he has hishd. we are joined for the segment by christopher hill arc four him ambassador under three presidents most recently to iraq. he is also an msnbc contributor. and back with us, peter baker of the "new york times" who was also an msnbc political analyst. gentlemen, thank you for this. and ambassador, i'll start you off with the briefest reexplanation to our viewers, the definition as best you can do it of article five. secondly, what is it about the great transatlantic post world war ii alliance, that someone or people in the trump white house have it in for him?
>> first of all, article five quite simply is that an attack on one is an attack on all. it really binds the alliance. it makes the u.s. prepared to go to war in case a member is atta and, of course, after 9/11, nato took the decision to have to declare article 5 with respect to the the fact # united states was attacked in 9/11. so it is what binds nato, and frankly, nato is what binds the united states to europe two times in the 20th century, we left europe, had to come back in rather difficult circumstances including nor man dibeaches. after that it was decided we're not going to leave. our collective security is important. the security of the united states depends on these alliances with these other countries, and article 5 is the basic heart of it, and for an american president to treat that as some kind of elusive concept or to think somehow this is some
kind of thing where you pay for a game or something is to put it mildly, missing the point. >> peter baker, i should point out you have an ongoing association with the "politico" journalist named susan glaers that would be 17 years of marriage. and with her story in the background of our conversation, how do you handle this if you're the internationalist inside the administration whose names we just used, and you're not part of this destruction of the administrative state nationalist wing that won in this speech with this omission? >> you know it's like the old saying, you declare victory and go home. after that speech, the ones who wanted him to say it semble went around telling everybody he did say it. his very presence there they said at the opening implicitly recommitted the united states to
article 5 even though he didn't say it. home run mcmaster rote wrote an op-ed said the president recommitted to article 5. it's not true. he didn't do that. they said flatly that he did and he did. they're trying to in effect rewrite history by saying he's committed to article 5, the white house press secretary said he's 100% committed to it. why wouldn't he say the words? he questioned the very premise. he said, yeah, i'll come to the support of allies who have paid up. his view is too many of the nato allies have not forked over enough money for their own dwerngs they haven't met the 2% gdp target that nato set, and therefore in effect, they're not living up to their obligations and we're only going to defend
the ones who are. that's why nato to hear him say the words that article 5 applied across the board, and he wouldn't do it. >> ambassador hill, isn't this another cloak for a victory for putin and russia because article 5 means if you're estonia , you should walk with broad shoulders knowing that your friends and partners throughout europe and across the atlantic ocean are going to come to your aid? >> these countries, estonia, latvia, poland, they joined nato because they wanted to see the u.s. remain strong in europe. and so, yes, they're all wondering what is going on, and is this a mistake, are these opening legitimators from this new administration, and increasingly the president did you notice buy into this concept that we should be allied with countries in europe such that if
they're at war, we will be at war. these are trying times, extremely dangerous times for the nato alliance. >> peter, physically we saw the president give the mont negro man a physical manifestation. now we're learning about the enormous omission in the speech. do you think speaking of back channels there are people talking to their friends, career state department, to career diplomats in these countries and their power structures to say what mattis has said in the last 24 hours, be patient with us? >> yeah. i'm certain that's probably the case. i'm sorry the career diplomats are saying don't get too worked up about this. of course the united states subscribes to our treaty obligations. it's been law of the land for
decades, so we are obligated under the treaty. it's a sign of why some of these foreign leaders are trying to figure this out. >> thank you. ambassador chris hill, peter baker of the "new york times," gentlemen, we appreciate this conversation from you both. coming up, one last thing about a very different republican, very different president who had let's just say a different way with words.
we've done well in life, with help from our advisor, we made it through many market swings. sure we could travel, take it easy... but we've never been the type to just sit back... not when we've got so much more to give when you have the right financial advisor, life can be brilliant. ameriprise i know you worry i can't keep up with our weekly tee times. dear son, but i've been taking osteo bi-flex ease. it's 80% smaller but just as effective. which means you're in big trouble, son. improved joint comfort in seven days. osteo bi-flex ease. made to move. ♪ ♪ nothing performs like a tempur-pedic. and now is the best time to buy one. now through june 11th, save $600 when you buy select tempur-pedic mattress sets. find your exclusive retailer at tempurpedic.com.
so we know how to cover almost alanything.ything, even a coupe soup. [woman] so beautiful. [man] beautiful just like you. [woman] oh, why thank you. [burke] and we covered it, november sixth, two-thousand-nine. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ to find smarter solutions. to offer more precise and less invasive treatment options than before. like advanced genomic testing and immunotherapy. see how we're fighting to outsmart cancer at cancercenter.com/outsmart ♪
if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis,... isn't it time to let the real you shine through? maybe it's time for otezla (apremilast). otezla is not an iection a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months,... with reduced redness,... thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you're allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts... or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight... and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea,... nausea, upper respiratory tract infection... and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.
last thing before we go tonight has to do with what was happening right now at this very hour and minute 73 years ago as june 5th, 1944 gave way at midnight to june 6th. the planes were in the air. the troop carriers were in the water and about to land. the bombardment of the french coastline had already started about 30 minutes ing a by now. the first pounding that was delivered by the largest invasion force ever assembled, the final push to win the war in europe, defeated tyranny and save the world. but because words matter, let's spend a moment on the words of a future president of the united states, general dwight david eisenhower, supreme allied commander in a different era before twitter and social media changed the world in their own way. eisenhower made the most consequential decision of the
war. he knew young men would die in great numbers and he knew a slaughter on those beaches was a distinct responsibility. he wrote if the landings failed if any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone. 11 months later, the war in europe was over, less than nine years later, dwight eisenhower was elected president of the united states. and so that is our broadcast on a monday night. thank you for being here with us, and good night from new york. >> rachel is still under the weather, but she did tell us she's itching to get back into this chair and hopes to be back very soon. we've got a big show for you, including a story that broke late this afternoon involving the leak of a top secret document. we'll have more on that in just a bit. but first, let me take you back