do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®. >> yes. >> know the guy's name. >> i should. >> tell me the guy baseball team. >> who is on first, what is on second. >> go ahead and tell me. >> who is on first, what's on second, i don't know on third. >> baseball game, go ahead. who who's on first. >> who? who? >> the guy at first base. >> who is on fit? why are you asking me? i don't know. >> good morning. welcome to "am joy." we've got a real who's on first scenario coming from the white house this week. it all started wednesday night
when "the washington post" reported, based on anonymous sources, special counsel robert mueller seeking interviews with three senior intelligence officials. director dan coats, nsa director rogers and deputy director leggett suggesting he's underinvestigation. trump responded blasting fbi leaks. rather than letting his lawyer speak for him, trump tweeted. "i am being investigated for firing the fbi director by the man who told me to fire the fbi director! witch hunt." even though he seems to mix-up mueller with the one doing the investigation rod rosenstein, who hired mueller, wrote the memo as a pretext to fire comey, trump basically confirmed he is under investigation, right? no? an anonymous source close to trump's legal team when he said i'm being investigated, he wasn't actually confirming he's
being investigated. and was trump definitely tweeting about rosenstein or perhaps maybe the attorney general or maybe himself. i don't know, who's on first. everyone lawyered up, mike pence, jared kushner, even personal attorney cohen hired his own attorney to help in the investigation. to help me unpack, defense attorney seema, msnbc legal analyst paul butler and former representative from south carolina bob english. thank yoal for being here. nick, i'm going to come to you on this first. >> sure. >> what does it say to you this even the vice president has now lawyered up and the president has now added to his legal team in addition to marc kasowitz a criminal defense attorney. >> i think what it says is there's a serious criminal investigation going on, and it obviously was in their interest
to have counsel. no way they could go into an interview at the special counsel's office and do it without the assistance of counsel or advice of counsel, the absolute lunacy of not having lawyers. >> i feel like, seema, the crux of this case is the question of why donald trump fired jim comey. >> that's right. >> i feel like there's sort of a definitive sound bite in that regard. is donald trump himself telling our own lester holt why he fired, or at least the circumstances rounding jim comey. let's play donald trump talking to our own lester holt back on may 11th. >> he made a recommendation. he's highly respected. very good guy, very smart guy. the democrats like him. the republicans like him. he made a recommendation. but regardless of recommendation, i was going to fire comey. >> now, he's talking there about rosenstein. so he's essentially say he recommends he do it. did you get from that sound bite the answer to the question
whether or not the firing was obstruction. >> i don't think at all. may be one piece in the puzzle that could lead up and add up to obstruction, but i still stay with the fact that he's allowed to fire who he wants to fire. i don't think it rises to the level of corrupt intent. not at this point. i think there's a lot of other falk stories look at. >> what in he also fired mueller. there were headlines this week about donald trump allegedly considering maybe even firing mueller or ordering rosenstein to fire mueller. >> again, one more piece of the puzzle. other things to look at. there's no independent evidence at this point that he has the corrupt intent to actually obstruct justice. >> paul butler, i know you disagree with that. >> joy, if donald trump were one of the roundaway boys who seema used to prosecute in the bronx, he would be on his way to jail for obstruction of justice based on his pattern of conduct. let's look at how he treats
every investigator on this case, whether it's robert mueller james comey and now rod rosenstein. he wants to fire them. he wants to get rid of them. this is a man who doesn't want to be investigated. this is apart from private conversation asking vice president and reince priebus to leave the room to he could talk to the investigators one-on-one. maybe this is how he used to do things back in queens when he was building his real estate empire but this is not how it works in the district of columbia. >> if you were a member of congress from south carolina, you helped draft impeachment articles against bill clinton, one of which was obstruction of justice. you were executive director of something called republican.org. apart from the legal queion whether or not this rises to obstruction of justice, whenou
compe this to what you guys did with bill clinton do you think this meets the political test of obstruction. >> this was much more serious of what we were dealing with with bill clinton. in the case of bill clinton it was lying under oath in the matter of monica lewinsky. this is working with russians to impact the election. that is a much bigger deal. as james comey said during his testimony, if any americans participated in that, that's a really big thing. so the difference here, of course, my party is in control of the house. that's where impeachment must be considered. and so the thing that's holding us back is fire of the 38% of donald trump's solid voters. those people can kill you in a republican primary. so the political challenge here is being able to seek the truth
without enemies to punish and friends to reward and have my party rise above. it's difficult when that 38% is out there waiting to kill you in a republican primary. >> i feel like that is the difference. you obviously were a prosecutor in the watergate situation where republican actually overcame that. democrats controlled congress at the time. >> until they actually had the smoking gun with the tapes. we actually had nixon confirming everything john dean testified to before the senate select committee. it wasn't as though republicans jumped on the bandwagon. they took it seriously as a lot of them are taking it seriously now. the meeting, barry goldwater and party elders with richard nixon in august of '73 only happened because of what was on those tapes. >> let's talk about smoking gun. i'll stay with you for a moment. a lot of people are trying to
get to material differences in these cases. in nixon's case he consented to the idea of trying to get cia to fire the special prosecutor. it was sort of similar situation. >> except here trump has done it himself. he apparently went to the head of the national security agency and asked him it try and put a stop to the investigation. he went to the director of national security, asked him to put a stop to it. really you've got probably four acts of obstruction here. keep in mind the corrupt intent is simply the intent to stop the investigation. that's all that means. >> there haven't been any direct orders to stop the investigation. he's hoping somebody drops something. he wants something to happen. he hasn't put out that direct order yet. >> bringing in the head of the fbi into the white house and saying, i sure hope you can say your way clear to stop it. that's not expressing hope, that is -- it was taken by comey to be a directive it stop the investigation. donald trump is literally
telegraphing he wants it to stop. >> that's comey's objective opinion. >> that's trump saying it. he said it over and over. >> he said hope. he didn't directly order him. then comey's subjective opinion of trump's intent. isn't that different? >> no. because the icing on the cake is trump admitted it. he admitted to lester holt the reason he got rid of comey was because of the russian thing. he admitted to russian ambassador next day after he did it calling comey by namend saying now i've got this russian investigation off my back. that is corrupt intent. this is a fantastic obstruction case. >> paul, i want to let you in on this, too. prosecuting corruption cases as opposed to straight up criminal cases of obstruction, the idea is that the politics is wrapped up in it. donald trump said on twitter feed to russian ambassador, apparently to aides on tv that he wants this investigation to end. when does the president's desire
to not be investigated any more cross over, in your mind, into a corrupt intent to stop himself from being investigated? >> when he orders his underlings to impede the investigation. when he asks for loyalty from the fbi director. so you know, when a politician is under criminal investigation, he has a lawyer who is an advocate for him trying to keep him out of prison. at the same time the politician, especially if it's the president of the united states, has to uphold the law. he has to enforce the law. now we hear that donald trump's personal lawyer is running around the oval office ordering people to do this and do that. there's a real conflict between, again, the president's responsibility to the people versus his own desire to keep himself out of criminal trouble. >> so, i'm doing to let you have a word on it. you have marc kasowitz facing
ethics complaints filed by citizens for accountability in office, essentially because he's telling white house officials not to get lawyers. meanwhile "the washington post" is reporting not only obviously pence the lawyer at the center, kasowitz saying they don't need to have their own lawyers. he doesn't practice, not in the bar here. at what point who would donald trump have to fire for you to agree he's trying to stop himself from being investigated. >> first of all, let me say it's smart to get a lawyer, even when you're a witness. i have been called as a witness to testify, and i have sought legal counsel. so it's just smart. just because you have a lawyer doesn't mean you're the subject, when that refers to pence and everybody se including cohen. >> in your mind, what would trump have to do in your mind to stop the investigation? >> i think there would have to be more corroborating evidence of intent. like the clinton situation there
was the blue dress. other situations -- >> dna? we're running out of time. for you as a political matter, a lot of this gets into the matter, most of us are lay people, not attorneys, for you bob english, when does it meet the test of impeachable corrupt intent for you. if you were in congress now, would you support articles of impeachment floating around house of representatives? >> it's not time to draft articles of impeachment but it's time to pursue with real vigor. that's what i'm concerned about with my party. we should not be holding back here. we should be driving forward with an aggressive investigation to get to the bottom of this so we can restore the confidence of the american people. we'll check into it if there's an allegation russians, foreign hostile power interfered with our investigation, we'll check into everything about it.
that will give everyone confidence in my party. as it is, my party is basically saying, we should drop all these investigations about trump and russia. that's a real problem. it's responding to that 38%. it's kowtowing to them. those folks are ultimately going to kill the republican party anyway. so it's time to face them and say, you know what, less go forward in this investigation. let's find out. let's also overcome this politics and grievance we've developed. it's not time to draft articles of impeachment but surely is time to get with this investigation and get behind it strongly. >> thank you very much. i'm doing to leave it right there. seema, nick, paul, and a lot of people wishing not former congressman bob english. thank you for being here. i appreciate it. coming up, robert mueller goes to jared. that's next. my business was built with passion... but i keep it growing by making every dollar count.
that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing. and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet? and you're about in to hit 'send all' on some embarrassing gas. hey, you bought gas-x®! unlike antacids, gas-x ® relieves pressure and bloating fast. huh, crisis averted.
yogig-speed internet.me? you know what's not awesome? when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids. and these guys. him. ah. oh hello- that lady. these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh. sure. still yes! you can get it too. welcome to the party. introducing gig-speed internet from xfinity. finally, gig for your neighborhood too.
the russia-gate saga showing no signs of slowing down. that could be bad news for son-in-law and uber adviser jared kushner. mueller is investigating kushner's finances and business dealings as part of the probe into russia's interference with the 2016 election. mueller looking into possible money laundering by other trump associates as reported by "new york times." the suspicion is that any cooperation with russian officials would most likely have been in exchange for some kind of financial payoff and there would have been an effort to hide the payments probably by routing them through offshore banking centers. joining me former white house ethics lawyer under george w.
bush, scott gore kin. scott, i'll start with you, i should this statement, we do not know what this report refers to. it would standard practice for counsel to examine financial records, anything related to russia. mr. kushner previously shared what he knows and will do the same if he's contacted about any others. spent time looking at business connections and russia. do you think there's anything here? >> i think kushner is lucky he's not in jail at thmome. as we dig in here, we're going to start to see not just jared but his dad be pulled in the mix as well. it's not magic where a kid at 25 becomes a billionaire. a lot of his connections are
through his father. if there's anything to worry about, it's going to be the complete family. remember, jared travels with ivanka to do business a lot of times. as of now, if i were a staffer and in his position, i would resign, not only for the distraction but for the fact he shouldn't be there at all. he lied on his forms, background check. for me, if i had done that working for obama, i would have been fired, locked up. there would have been no doubt about it. nobody would have asked any questions about it further. he's guilty of a crime and definitely should not be in the white house at the moment. >> richard painter, there was an interesting justice department memori memoriala, saying can accept
payments. if that is the reason out of the justice department, what are the chances they would feel jared kushner who does have a very expensive building, 66 park avenue he's looking to refinance, put him in a deep debt, that he couldn't try to make a deal with a foreign bank, for instance, to try to finance it. >> i do think it's premature to say jared kushner is guilty of a crime and belongs in jail. but it's absolutely critical to find out the facts as to what's going on with respect to foreign government money and other foreign money that's going into the trump business empire and into the kushner business empire. the department of justice is just flat-out wrong in the argument emoluments does not permit from receiving payments of foreign governments. i'm on the other side of that case with some good lawyers, a great team. we feel very strongly that
emoluments clause specifically prohibits any person holding a position of trust with the united states from receiving profits or benefits and dlings with foreign government bob mueller needs to get to the facts here in his investigation. i continue to be worried that the white house is trying to orchestrate the firing of bob mueller. congress needs to investigate. yes, in our case in the southern district of new york, we have asked a federal judge to find out the facts. once we find out the facts, we can figure out what payments the president can keep, for the keep. the same should be done with respect to jared kushner. if there is any criminal activity, of course, those who are doing it should be held accountable. >> sarah, the issue is we just had a financial disclosure that comes out that showed donald trump has made quite a bit of money since being elected president. he's doing very well for himself. he's still signing deals, getting patents put through by chinese government, doing hotel
and golf deals. he hasn't slowed that down at all. if the justice september said he cannot violate emolument clause and is clear to take foreign governments, who would enforce, even if found out he was in violation who would enforce it? >> i'm not sure anybody would enforce it. the entire pattern of his presidency is him brazenly breaking laws and nobody enforcing it. so many laws rest on good faith, that the president is out for the public, not to make money off the executive power of the presidency. unfortunately that's what he's doing. we're in a new situation. i think we need more documentation. the documentation you referred to shows the money he made, doesn't show his debt, doesn't show his transactions. cose, we still don't have his tax returns. it's going to take a while for people to be able to access this information, if they are at all, especially since so much locked
up in offshore accounts. that's what we need to do. >> that's where we are. i want to hold you guys. don't anybody move for a minute, i do have to inform the audience we have breaking news, the judge in the sexual assault trial of bill cosby has declared as mistrial. we'll go to norris town, pennsylvania. give us the latest, ron. >> reporter: the jurors arrived this morning and told the judge they are still deadlocked. they have been deliberating for some 50 hours during the course of the past week or so. a marathon session. and now there's a mistrial in this case that had bill cosby facing three counts of indecent aggravated assault. the question going forward is will the prosecutors decide to try this all over again. the cosby team had been pushing for a mistrial as deliberations dragged on and on. jurors came into the courtroom and asked at least a dozen
questions or readbacks of jury testimony. the defense said to the judge this is not fair. you should call a mistrial. came back the second time, the jurors did, and said they were deadlocked. they had been deliberating two days deadlocked, a very unusual situation, a deliberation that went on longer than the trial. in the end what the defense tried to do was essentially highlight inconsistencies in andrea constand's story. she told different stories to the police at different times during the course of the investigation of this crime, this alleged crime, that took place back in 2004, some 13 years ago. cosby has also testified about this in civil depositions and made statements to police. it was constand's statements that had jurors not able to get to beyond a reasonable doubt. earlier she told investigators she had not been alone with bill cosby. it turned out, in fact, she had been. she also maintained contact with
him after this incident happened. there's testimony there was some 70 phone calls between the two. constand had told the investigators early on that she had rare contact with him. all of this called into question her credibility. the defense went after this hard. they also reminded the jury back in 2005, another d.a. in montgomery county looked at the case and decided not to prosecute it, because he said back then at that time it was a weak case. the jurors were aware of that as well. it's been a very dramatic and intense time outside the courtroom. the deliberations dragged on so long. the expectation of a mistrial was very strong. the analyst we were talking to, legal analysts thought what was doing on in the courtroom was there was a majority of jurors trying to sway a minority of jurors toward conviction. they kept asking questions of the judge that were at times very damning of bill cosby.
they, for example, asked about his testimony that -- his statements to police that actually described what happened. again, the bottom line, mistrial. we go back to the beginning. cosby will be free. prosecutors will decide whether they want to try this all over again. >> real quick, ron. are we expecting statements or press conference from cosby and his attorneys or from any representatives of the jurors or any individual jurors? >> i'm sure the cosby team will be out here and talk. they have been very vocal through the deliberations, the trial. they have been saying all along it's unfair. this case should never have baseball brought to court. so we really expect they are out here and prosecutors as well. joy. >> thank you very much from pennsylvania. appreciate it. joining me on the phone civil rights attorney lisa bloom. your thoughts on this mistrial that's been declared in the cosby case. >> well, i think it's very sad. by my count 1 women's have come forward to accuse bill cosby of
sexual assault, only one able to get into a criminal court, this woman andrea constand. it's sad. i've also been sickened by something that was really underreported this week, that is bill cosby's representative on the courthouse step during deliberations reading out a witness statement to the press that was recorded but not allowed during the trial. jury deliberation is a sensitive time. no lawyer would be able to do it. it was a pr person that did it. you have to wonder if the lawyers were part of that decision. hard to believe it would be done without permission of the lawyers. i think that was a dirty trick done during jury deliberations, they have been a contributing factor. i know from doing sexual assault and rape cases for 30 years. it's difficult. it's always hard to get juries to believe women in the case and it's more difficult when you have a celebrity for a defendant. i think that went into it. >> what role do you think
sequestration played into it. i know sometimesexhaustion, the time ent, just frustration, wanting to get out of there, unfortunately it's human nature those things wind up playing a part in how these things shake out. >> sequestration is difficult. i wrote a book about the jury in george zimmerman case and frustrations and anxieties they went through. sequestered juries do have access one way or another, from a family member telling them about something, they do often know what's doing on. listen, no one can accuse this jury of not working hard. they spent more time deliberating than in the trial. they seemed to have reviewed everything over and over again. unfortunately they were not able to reach a verdict. i'm going to be interested if we can find out what the count was. was it 11-1 for conviction, 10-2 for acquittal. i think that will weigh into the prosecution's decision about whether to retry mr. cosby. >> even though there are so
many -- like you said, 60 accusers, does it surprise you, jurors had to know that going in, that didn't sway them with the case? >> well, they were only allowed to hear from one other, other than andrea constand. i think that was a pad decision by this judge. i think more women who had substantially similar stories to andrea constand, similar in time, similar in method, should have been allowed to testify. in other cases more accusers have been allowed to testify. perhaps that's the decision that will go up on appeal before the retrial and the prosecution will be able to bring in more women. i say give the jury all of the information and let them make a decision based on all of the facts that are available. >> i want to jus remind our viewers we're in a breaking news situation, bill cosby, tre been a mistrial in the lone case involving allegations of drugging and unwanted sexual
contact. the judge asked each juror individually, do you agree there is a hopeless deadlock that cannot be resolved by further deliberations. each juror answered yes. the report we're getting cosby stared quietly ahead. made no motion, said nothing. the defense attorney moved for a mistrial. the ultimate jurors they brought into the courtroom. this is 52 hours of deliberation. the judge said it was probably one of the most courageous, self-less acts in the justice system. cosby charged with three felonies, aggravated in decent assault, derived from one incident. lisa, would it surprise you if this prosecutor or another tried again to prosecute bill cosby given the result here? >> no, i would expect that. listen, many cases that are not high-profile cases end in hung jury. it's not uncommon. typically the prosecutor does retry the case. again, they usually want to find
out what the count was and find out if just one holdout for acquittal. that usually weighs into their decision. i want people to know there are a lot of civil cases against bill cosby going forward. i have one of them, representing a defamation case against bill cosby and a number of them going on across the country. i think it is a dad day for sexual assault survivors, many of whom say to me on a regular basis, i can't trust the justice system to do right by me. we have a very hard timeith these cases. it's very hard to getple to believe women. you have to understand how sexual assault victims typically behave. it's not uncommon, in this case, andrea constand had a number of phone calls with bill cosby after the incident. that's used against her at trial to show she was lying. how could she continue to have a relationship with him. she said, we were friends. she still wanted to have the mentoring relationship. she was in denial. she wasn't able to deal with
what happened for a long time afterwards. so she did continue to have communications with him. that's difficult for people to understand. i understand it because i work with sexual assault survivors every day and that's not uncommon behavior. that's a part of the problem, people do behave differently after sexual assault. >> lisa, i do have an update. hearing prosecutors saying they will retry the case, bill cosby released on bond in the meantime. the case will be retried. lisa bloom, thank you very much. >> thank you, joy. bring in msnbc analyst paul butler on the phone. paul, your thoughts. it looks like prosecutors are going to try again. >> this counts as a win for bill cosby. whenever there's a mistrial or hung jury, defendants usually take it as a victory. i think it's way too soon for the prosecutor to affirmative assert they will be bringing charges. they need to talk to the jury and find out what the problem
was with the case, why they weren't able to persuade beyond a reasonable doubt, and then make the decision. you know, lisa is right. there are often inconsistencies in victims' statements. it doesn't mean the assault didn'thappen. but the standard in a criminal trial is very high." the jury asked for beyond a reasonable doubt. not grounds for criminal conviction. that's may be the issue here. >> finding out jurors escorted home. they were a sequestered jury. prosecutors saying they will retry the case. how difficult is it to put a celebrity on trial? it obviously complicates matters? >> it does, but it cuts both ways. since it's bill cosby, america's dad, i think these charges took
on an extra notoriety. probably everybody on that jury knew there were 60 women out there who accused mr. cosby of assault. in that sense celebrity doesn't go to his benefit. on the other hand, he is america's dad. for a long time, he had the image of being one of the most trustworthy people in the united states. so i think at the end of the day, with that it's a wash. i do think this jury did an admirable job. they deliberated for five days. they worked as hard as they could to come to a consensus. the way our legal system works, if 12 people can't agree at the end of the day the person is guilty, he gets to go free. >> paul butler, thank you so much. appreciate you sticking around for this breaking news. >> of course. >> follow msnbc all day. more "am joy" to come after the break. ♪
hey, bud. you need some help? no, i'm good. come on, moe. i have to go. (vo) we always trusted our subaru impreza would be there for him someday. ok. that's it. (vo) we just didn't think someday would come so fast. see ya later, moe. (vo) introducing the subaru impreza. the longest-lasting vehicle in its class. more than a car, it's a subaru. and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget...
that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you the opioid my doctor prescribed for my chronic back pain backed me up-big time. before movantik, i tried to treat it myself. spent time, money. no go. but i didn't back down. i talked to my doctor. she said: one, movantik was specifically designed for opioid-induced constipation-oic- and can help you go more often. number two? with my savings card, i can get movantik for about the same price as the other things i tried. don't take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. movantik may cause serious side effects including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and/or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. movantik may interact with them causing side effects. don't back down from oic. talk to your doctor about movantik. remember mo-van-tik.
if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. "how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly and win at business.
sonders. generous, kind, with heart. that's what i'm saying. that may be any additional money into it, come out with a real bill, not obamacare. the results are going to be fantastic and hopefully it will be announced at the appropriate time and everyone is going to be happy. >> okay. so my job is to help you stay informed by giving you fact ral information about political decisions and policies that might affect your life. i can't do my job on this story. i can't tell you definitively if the nate health care will be, as donald trump said, generous and kind or it will be, quote, mean, as trump described the house bill at that same meeting. i cannot tell you because i don't know what's in the bill. in fact, very few day. senate republicans writing it in absolute secrecy, hoping to pass it before senators have to face constituents over fourth of july recess and before public has a chance to learn what it will do to 1/ 6 of the economy.
joining me wendell potter, former health insurance executive and founder of tar belt.org. we don't know what's in the bill, not allowed. just based on the house bill how hopeful are you the ahca out of the senate will be compassionate and kind as donald trump claims. >> no hope imaginable. i can't imagine they will come up with anything approaching what the president said. here is why. i think the republicans, and one of the reasons why they are doing this in secret, they know they cannot deliver anything approaching that with what they have been saying and principles guiding discussions or comments on how to fashion a health care system in this country. they clearly want to cut benefits. that will undoubtedly lead to a lot of people losing access to
care and consequently, joy, their lives. >> doctor, one of the things we do know from the house bill that doesn't seem to be changing in senate, they want to roll bk medicaid expansion. whether they want to do it more slowly or quickly, that seems to be the core of what they want to do, they want that $800 billion to put towards tax cuts for the wealthy. what we know so far 3 million more uninsured, based on the house version of the bill and what we're hearing about the senate. we have study from commonwealth 940,000 jobs lost by 2026. a lot of people don't realize the obamacare bill created a lot of jobs in the health care industry. your thoughts on the core of the bill, which is cutting medicaid? >> sure. either the republicans are sinking in the quicksand of opinion, not fact, or they just plain don't care about the health care of the average american citizen. you quoted the numbers
appropriately. the cbo numbers do not lie. we know they are going to have 24 to 25 million people lose health care. that is without a doubt, okay? but let's talk about some of the other things including rollback of the medicaid expansion. i have patients that come to my clinic now that have never seen a doctor as adults because they have never had health care but they work every day because they couldn't afford health care. now with the medicaid expansion they can get preventive services. let's not forget about the other things. let's talk about the rolling back of the essential benefits that obamacare required. okay. i'm doing going to rattle these it's important, elderly people five-fold increase, no dental, oip opioid abusers no service. states will get this latitude to be able to do what they want when it comes to the lifetime cap on the services and money patients will get.
let's say you have aaby born with a heart condition, and then they have to have open-heart surgery and it costs hundreds of thousands at birth. state will say that's the cap and that patient will defacto have a pre-existing illness and not be covered, which by definition is what republicans are saying they want to protect, the pre-existing illness. if you have a cap on the amount of money you could receive over a lifetime, that means you have no more pre-existing illness coverage. this is totally ridiculous. it's cofefe. >> what we know of the bill, at least what came out of the house, senate working with is what they don't like. quinnipiac has a poll coming out with a 20% approval rating, even republicans underwater at 40%. when people asked by kaiser foundation how should senate
handle house bill, 20% want major changes, 29% say don't pass it at all. we also know democrats are going to respond what they know already, even if they don't find another thing about senate bill, play you an ad from the campaign committee because they are already advertising against the bill. take a look. . >> are they prepared to make 2018 a referendum on that, health care? >> joy, i really hope so.
what i have to say is i think 2018 is secondary. this is the closest that republicans have come to really passing this thing and repealing obamacare. we have to remember this is not replacing, this is just repealing obamacare. what they are doing is they are doing to gut medicaid to give a tax cut to the wealthy as you said earlier. if that happens, and we know hearing from republican leadership they say that this bill, this senate bill is about 80% close to the house bill. if this happens, it will be cruel, it will be inhumane. it's just people will be suffering. we're talking about our most vulnerable, the youth. we're talking about sick people. we're talking about elderly people. this is why i'm saying it's like beyond 2018 because we need to stop this right now before it even gets passed. democrats are going to have to do a lot of work. they have to use every
procedural tool in that tool belt to really try and slow this down, stop this. as we know, republicans are doing this behind closed doors. thirteen men deciding on this bill with mitch mcconnell leading the way. >> wendell potter, if the insurance industry could write their own bill, would it be something like this? >> they are not even this cruel, to tell you the truth. there is something that's happened to this party. my father and my grandfather. it's as if they are under some evil force that would led them to take away access to health care for millions of people who are their constituents. it just is beyond anything i can even comprehend. my colleagues in the insurance industry would never be this cruel. >> all right. that will have to be the last word. thank you very much. thank you guys for being here. appreciate it. thank you. we're going to now go back to breaking news. bill cosby and his attorneys --
actually, we're bog ttagoing to break. when we come back, we're going to let you hear from bill cosby and his attorneys. stay with us. ♪ so i looked at the scenery. ♪ she read her magazine... the all-new volkswagen atlas. covered from coast to coast with america's best bumper-to-bumper limited warranty. adult 7+ promotes alertness and mental sharpness in dogs 7 and older. (ray) the difference has been incredible. she is much more aware. she wants to learn things. (vo) purina pro plan bright mind. nutrition that performs. ...studying to be a dentist and she gave me advice. she said... my daughter is... ...dadgo pro with crest pro-health. 4 out of 5 dentists confirm... ...these crest pro-health... ...products help maintain a... ...professional clean. go pro with crest pro health crest pro-health... ...really brought my mouth... ...to the next level.
the energy conscious whopeople among usle? say small actions can add up to something... humongous. a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing.
jurors in the bill cosby trial have been discharged after the judge declared a mistrial earlier this hour. bill cosby released on bail and the case will be retried. nbc's ron allen is outside the courthouse in norristown, pennsylvania. give us the latest, ron. >> joy, it's just been an incredible turn of events here. the jury came back after some 52 hours. the judge said this the longest proceeding in the history of montgomery county. he thanked them profusely because they had deliberated so hard and taken this so seriously. in the end they were not able to get to conviction or acquittal for that matter in the fate of bill cosby. cosby and his attorney and his team just left the courthouse thanking his supporters in this area and around the world, and also thanking the jurors for their hard work during the past week. the district attorney here has said he will retry this case.
when he said that in the courtroom, a gasp went up. remember, this case is 13 years old. it dates back to 2004, an incident at bill coffin's home where 31-year-old employee at temple university, said she was at his home for dinner and she sexually assaulted her. so, again, there's been pressure from a lot of women's groups, a lot of victims of assault groups to keep this going, to push this through -- i hear some cheering in the background. some noise. i'm just trying to see what that is. there have been some supporters of bill cosby small groups who have been here in the past couple of days, but there have been many more of bill cosby's other accusers. women who have made allegations against him dating back to the 1960s. and you have to remember, joy, that this case was about one woman's allegation. andrea constand. the other case is perhaps more than 50 of them. none of them have come to a criminal court. they're too old to come now. this was the case that so manyw
cosby convicted had their hopes pinned on. >> and you just saw glori allred. i believe she is holding a press conference now, talking about the ca from the point of view of andrea constand. let's listen to that just for a second. >> -- will come. i hope that the prosecution will try this case again and that the next time the court will permit more priority bad act witnesses to testify as the prosecution had requested for the this trial. for the trial that just ended, the court only allowed one such prior bad act witness to testify. and that was my client, kelly johnson. rather than the 13 such witnesses which the prosecution
wanted to call. if the court allows more accusers to testify next time, it might make a difference. in other words, it's too early to celebrate, mr. cosby. round two may be just around the corner. and this time, justice may prevail. i also want to commend the courage of andrea constand, as well as kelly johnson and their mothers in testifying and all of the accusers whom i represent, who have spoken out. they've taken risks, they've refused to be silenced. and i want them to keep their spirits up. and i also want other persons who believe that they are assault victims of anyone to
report it to law enforcement and to stay strong and to consult private attorneys and to know that there can be justice and there may be justice in the future. i'm returning to court in santa monica on june 27th on our case that judy hough versus bill cosby. and we'll look forward to the court's setting a trial date and to working for justice in our civil lawsuit against mr. cosby. and now this is linda kirkpatri kirkpatrick. do you want to take a -- >> sure. >> so that was gloria allred. she represents kelly johnson, who is, as she said, the only witness to testify to prior bad acts. kelly johnson is another accuser
of bill cosby and there have been many such accusers, up to almost 60, according to gloria allred's daughter, friend of the show, lisa bloom, but the only one who was allowed to testify to prior bad acts was kelly johnson, who's represented by gloria allred. and she represents some of the other women who have also made accusations against bill cosby. of course, bill cosby denying those accusations. i want to let viewers know, we showed some split screen tape. and you saw a woman who was speaking with bill cosby in the background. there you go. that tape. that's actually on tape, that's not live. and that was bill cosby's attorney, and she was speaking on his behalf. she's one of the attorneys for him. you can see the attorneys are quite jubilant with the result here. so we're going to bring you more inrmation and if bilcosb himself has anything to say, we'll certainly bring that to you as well. joining me now on the phone is civil rights attorney, lisa bolam. lisa represents some of the women who have accused cosby of sexual misconduct. and lisa, your mother, gloria allred, who represents kelly johnson, was making the point that kelly johnson was the only fact witness, the only prior bad
acts witness who was allowed to testify. do you expect that if this case is retried, that the prosecution will try to get more of the other accusers' testimony in? >> yes, i expect the prosecution to renew their motion to allow the 13 women who they requested to come and testify as to the prior bad acts. there is law that supports the position that if somebody has engaged in substantially similar behavior with other people, that that is relevant evidence that the jury should hear. you know, i'm in favor of letting the jury have all of the relevant evidence and let them make a decision. don't keep factual information from the jury. let them hear it. let them make a decision. if two women, if five women, if ten women, if thirteen women say, bill cosby drugged me and sexually assaulted me during the same time period that andrea constand makes that allegation, i think that's something a jury should hear. i think common sense dictates,
most people would consider that relevant evidence that they would want to have in the balance before they make an important decision about whether someone's innocent or guilty. >> and lisa, what do you make what we're hearing, ron allen reported to us earlier, that one of the issues for the jurors seems to have been, as you've mentioned before, that andrea constand had continued contact with bill cosby. they seemed to be on the hung up on the question of her truthfulness about whether or not she continued the relationship. do you think, ultimately, that's going to have turned out to ve been the definitive fact pattern in this . >> i think that is something, i'm sure, was very important to the jury. the defense pound that issue throughout the trial. and this is very common behavior, especially when we're talking about a very high-profile man. you know, my client, jill hearth who had sexual assault allegations against donald trump, had contacts with him afterwards, and donald trumped tried to use that against her when we were all talking about that last summer. there were many, many cases. virtually all of my cases when a woman is accusing a high-profile person of sexual misconduct or
sexual assault, there are still contacts afterwards. because the human mind works in very strange ways in sexual assault cases. usually, women are in denial for a long time, they blame themselves. in andrea constand's cases, some of the contacts were trying to get him to admit to what he did on phone calls that were recorded. so that makes sense. so it's not the same as a robbery or a burglary. sexual assault is a complicated thing. and the prosecution, to their credit, brought an expert into the trial to explain this kind of behavior, that it does go on, it's fairly typical. but people expect in a sexual assault case, that after an incident like this, a woman is going to run away and never talk to the guy again and this is the kind of thing that gets used against her, unfortunately. >> lisa bloom, thank you very much. lisa does represent some of cosby's accusers, as well. we always appreciate your assistance in trying to understand these matters, lisa. thank you very much. thank you. up next, no justice for philando castile. stay with us. ♪
whoa that's amazing... hey, i'm the internet! i know a bunch of people who would love that. the internet loves what you're doing... ...so build a better website in under an hour with... ..ocentral from godaddy. type in your idea. select from designs tailored just for you and publh your sitwith just a few clicks-even from your... ...mobile phone. the internet is waiting start for free today at godaddy. finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the hotel you want. lock it in. tripadvisor. there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you.
you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans,
they loupply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today.
the judge if the bill cosby trial has declared a mistrial. we're standing by, waiting for the district attorney to deliver a press conference. but we're returning to friday's news. this is philando castile's mom. >> i am so disappointed in the state of minnesota. my son loved this state. he had one tattoo on his body and it was of the twin cities. the state of minnesota with tc on it. my son loved this city and this city killed my son! and the murderer gets away! >> on friday, a minnesota jury acquitted police officer geronimo yanez of all charges after he shot a killed philando castile during a traffic stop. the decision came nearly a year after the world watched his disturbing final moments. the last moments of his life which was shared through a video
streamed life to facebook through castile's girlfriend, diamond reynold. yanez testifies that he stopped castile after he saw his car drive by and they made eye contact, which gave him strong suspicions that castile was a stop in a recent robber. during the stop, castile told yanez that he was in the possession of a firearm, which he was legally licensed to carry. diamond reynolds said he would only be reaching for his identification. reynold's 4-year-old daughter was also in the car. after five days of deliberations, the jury cleared yanez on all charges, on charges of second-degree manslaughter and reckless discharge of a firearm. castile's mom outrage after the verdict was amplified yesterday in minnesota, where thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in protest. police made 18 arrests following those protests, which shut down the i-94 freeway in st. paul.
and as much as the verdict came as a shot and a disappointment many. if history is any guide, it was not much of a surprise at all. because the only thing more rare than an officer being charged with a deadly shooting is an officer being convicted. and joining me now is castile family attorney, judge glenda hatchett. and judge hatchett, it is rare. the prosecution, i guess, in a sense, has to be commended that they charged officer yanez at all. were you surprised by the verdict? >> i was surprised and very disappointed that heas acquitted. and joy, you're absolutely right. this is the first time this tin history of minnesota that a police officer has ever been charged for shooting a civilian, for killing a civilian. so talk about it being rare in this country. even more rare in minnesota. and so john troy, the prosecutor in that county and his team are to be commended. in fact, i said yesterday, what we saw was a combination of both talent and tenacity. but i will tell you, joy, if we cannot get this one right, i
don't know what that means for us as a nation. because there were so many of us watching this trial carefully. i've been in minnesota for the last 15 days, that it has to be justified. even his partner, his police partner on the other window, closest to the passenger side, was standing there very casually with his thumbs in his vest. and he testified that he did not see a gun and that the gun, the emt said they had to reach deep into his pocket to retrieve this gun after he was shot. he was -- he fired seven shots. five actually hit him, two in his heart, either of them would have been fatal. and so this is a -- this is a very difficult case to understand how he was acquitted. >> yeah. and we -- and now the "new york daily news" is reporting on friday that philando castile's
uncle has called on donald trump and the trump administration to bring federal charges against jeronimo yanez. you don't expect that to happen, do you? >> i don't expect that to happen, because all along, i have understood and watched, th from the state part as well as the federal level. and the federal procution will require that race was a motive in this situation and that that is a very, very steep hill. i do not expect it and i particularly do not expect it under this administration's leadership. >> yeah. well, and i'll just very quickly ask you, you know, we saw that the mom, that philando castile's mom was angry and i think rightfully so. how is the family faring this morning? >> they are -- you know, this has been 11 months. valerie castile is one of the most remarkable women i have ever encountered, but this is painful. this is deeply, deeply painful,
because they feel, frankly, that the system has not supported them in this matter. and i will tell you, as a mother as two young adult african-american men, to see him with my pathologist, dr. mitchell and i, i went into the examination room, and to see this young man's body ripped apart with bullets, when he was complying. he did everything right, and yet, he is dead, is very difficult. it is very difficult, joy. >> well, please -- >> but it's not over. so i'm disappointed, but i am not discouraged. and let me be very clear about that. >> thank you for adding that. i really appreciate it. judge glenda hatchett, thank you very much. we really appreciate you being here. >> thank you. thank you, joy. thank you for having me. >> joining me now, phillip ateeva golf and criminal defense attorney, jack rice. phil, i want to come to you first. i think that is a point we want to make. it is surprising, really, when a lice officer is actually brought to trial at all.
you just go through the statistics. mapping police violence, 1155 people killed by police in 2016. 13 cases where the officer was charged. zero people convicted, because all police officers have to say is, thought he had a gun, was in fear for my life, case closed. >> the reasonableness standard here, many people are saying, that's the enemy, right? the reasonableness standard. because if you think it's reasonable to be afraid of black people, then you can just kill them, right? that's a self-defense standard and it's even more so for the reasonable officer. i think, though, if we focus too much on the facts of any individual case, we end up doing a disservice to philando castile and the people who loved him. we do a disservice to other folks. i remember a year ago in july when the shooting took place. it was the same week as alton sterling, the same week as the dallas shootings. i was in doj with the then attorney general, loretta lynch. we were all grieving that entire
week. but i also remember two years ago today, the mother emanuel church and that shooting. and i also remember a longer history here. so if we talk about what's responsible for the acquittal in this particular case, we're going to talk about the reasonableness standard and we're also going to be talking about the ways in which there are not appropriate laws to deal with discrimination that isn't intentional, that isn't about the individual character. and we'll be right to do that. but if we're not also talking about the way in which america is lying about race and has been for quite some time. if we're not talking about the mendacious history of leader or lack thereof. if we're not talking about a crisis of vision when it comes to actual justice in america, we're doing everybody a disservice. because as much as this case hinged on those particular factors of reasonableness and the officer and whatever was going on in the minds of the jury, the next case will hinge on the last one. one of the things i'm hearing from the community is where the center for police and equity works, a great deal is, it's not
even angry. it's not even shock. it's resignation and, well, i guess it's on us. there is no way for me to overstate the corrosiveness of this to the american dream and the participation in that dream communities that feel as if thetate has said it's okay to kill you if i'm scared of you. >> yeah. and jack, i think that's the point. you have here a case where there's a little kid in the car. there's a 4-year-old in the car. there's a woman driving. the officer must have heard her narrating. this is taking place live on facebook live. so that the whole world can watch it unfold. so nothing really deters officers, even the presence of a child. so, i mean, i think, isn't it reasonable at this point for african-americans to conclude that, you know, that the black lives matter slogan is sort of a necessary plea, because it appears that police officers don't have to mind the black lives in front of them. >> you're right.
black lives don't matter. i've tried cases in this county, in this courthouse, muse. and what i can tell you is this is something everybody knows, racism exists. racism exists in the world, it exists in this country, but it also exists in our criminal justice system. i've stood in front of jurors and i've had to tell them again and again and talk to them about what is it is to be afraid of young black men. and what that means. when automatically you will see them, and you say, i'm afraid immediately. and understand that lowers the standard immediately, because then all of a sudden, if i'm afraid, that means can s i can myself. so that's what we see regularly when, automatically, you are afraid. and this is something i've been fighting and something i've been saying on a daily basis. and again, i've watched this happen in courtrooms across this state and across this country. >> and phillip, do you want to jump in? >> yeah, so i really appreciate that perspective. and i want to echo something
that i feel like is an important part of the conversation here. cpe works with two different nstuencies. we work inside police departments and in the communities that are most affected by it. i talked to you a little bit about how folks are feel like, what else can we do? we've got to take justice in our own hands, which is a dangerous thing, right? but what i also want to make sure is part of the conversation on this day after is the phone calls i've been getting from chiefs in law enforcement, the people who train other officers. and to a person an of this case, not after all of them, but after this case, i'm hearing exasperation, folks being tired of having to defend these tapes. i'm getting folks -- chiefs and sergeants coming and talking about, you know, this is really hard to defend, because he was clearly and literally, calmly following instruction. how do i then go out and police and with a straight face say, you know what, we're here reppirep i resenting the best of the values of this country. >> if i could jump in there, that's the one point i've been
talking with a lot of people i know, in the criminal justice system, on the federal and state levels, as well. what what we've seen, and this has been the problem, what the police have done is defend their own, consistently, always. and this includes the bad ones. the problem that we've seen is they have defended bad cops that do bad things. there are good cops in the country. there are. but when they defend everybody, including the bad ones, and then now claim that all of a sudden, now we're seeing a bunch of bad cops, as if we weren't seeing them before, but you simply can't deny it, because we're watching them on tape. that's the problem we're seeing in the community. what we need to see from the police, from law enforcement, is their willingness to stand up and point out their own that are the bad apples, because they need to create and develop and establish credibility, not just for the african-american community. they need establish it for the entire country. this is not a black problem, and it is a black problem, but it's also an american problem. and i think we collectively have to stand up, collectively, and
address it. if we don't, this is going to continue. again, the african-american community is resigned. they're saying, well, yeah, of course this is happening. of course we're dealing with this. we've always dealt with this. at some point, we have to sit down and say, enough, collectively. we must! >> and i think that as you said, after a while, it's exhausting. you say sandra bland, no charges there. so she's left to die in her cell. you see marley graham establishing the police can bust into your house and kill your chd i front of his grandma and his little baby other. we see eric garner, also choked to death on tape. we see it on tape. you just see it over and over and over again. the alton sterling case again, you see it on tape unfolding in front of you. no charges, no charges, no charges, no convictions. after a while, you think, what's the point? >> somebody in charge has to stand up and say, look, it's not an accident that we had codes
that did this for slaves and we see something that looks very similar in certain communities right now. so if we're going to do better, we're going to need to be a whole heck of a lot more honest about what the history is here. >> i can tell you what the federal government is doing. our attorney general is about to restart the war on drugs and put more people in prison, so that should help. >> i sense irony. >> phillip, jack, thank you guys. really appreciate it. we are standing by still from a press conference from the district attorney in the bill cosby case. but coming up next, we will have a moral moment, which i think we desperately need with the dr. william bash brber. stay with us. oscar mayer is making changes so big... hot dogs will never be the same again. we went back to the drawing board. and the cutting board. we never stopped tasting... and tinkering. until we had... a line of the world's best hot dogs. we removed the added nitrates and nitrites waved goodbye to by-products. and got rid of the artificial preservatives in all of our meat. every. single. one. for every. single. one of you.
what else would you expect from oscar mayer. we eat, sleep and even drive hot dogs. 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 to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov your strips are slippy... whiter than mine? ...mine are grippy. crest whitestrips stay in place. crest whitestrips professional effects...
we are united in our anguish. an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. >> congressman scalise is a friend and a very good friend. he's a patriot. and he's a fighter. >> tonight, we're taall team scalise. >> this week's shooting in a gop congressional baseball practice left democrats and republicans calling for unity, rallying around congressman steve scalise, who still remains in the hospital, in critical condition. but despite the current couple ba ba couple bayaya, the political divisions are still very real and have moral implications. who better to discuss than dr. william barber. if ever i needed a pastor, reverend, today is the day. so let's start, you know, you and i had a conversation about this and i wanted to try to give everyone else the benefit of your wisdom on this. this idea that republicans now have, they're saying that we all have to come together.
we have to rally together. when you heard them saying that, what did you hear? >> well, first of all, we should be in prayer. we should be unified in our concern for the congressman and the two officers that were wounded. but first, we should also be deeply concerned about the three people who were killed on the same day. ryan, representative ryan said, when you attack one of us, you attack all of us. well, this can't just be a moral ethic that you apply to members of congress. that's why the real question is, will one or two days of changes in personality mean a fundamental change in public policy? that's the moral question. i've been thinking about this, joy. all of those that were injured needed health care. so now will they go back to work and say, every american deserves health care, deserve what we received, and we will preserve the affordable care act and make sure pre-existing conditions are protected? since they could have died, will they repent of efforts to take money from mauedicaid that will
help poor people and disabled, many of whom have died without that. a black man from my alma mater saved their lives. will they go back to work and restore the voting right s act and stop systemic racism against black people. aesan black woman saved them. ll they go back to work and no longer promote laws that attack the human rights of lbgt communities? they were shot by guns allowed to be carried openly. will they go back and challenge laws that allow people to get easily so they can vote? they were shot by a white middle-aged man for political reasons. will they change the practice of profiling terrorism as a fear of muslims and violence that's mainly rooted in the urban black area. tone is fine, but if the policies are terrible, we don't have civility. they were saved by good police, so will they therefore challenge bad police like the guy in the castile case. these are the serious moral
questions that have to be answered more than just one or two days of shaking hands and playing a game. because this is really not a game. >> and i think it's so important to keep that in mind. because it is one thing to sort of want civility and to be -- and to take umbrage when it's one of your friends, when it's one of your own colleagues, but like you said, there's a whole country out there. and a lot of people, at least in my twitter timeline, and it's a delicate thing, because everybody is wishing the congressman well and hoping that he recovers, but steve scalise has a history that we've all been forced to sort of ignore on race. he did come to leadership after some controversy over attending a white nationalist event, which he says he didn't know what it was. he also cosponsored a bill to amend the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. he co-sponsored the american health care bill, and cosponsored a bill to repeal the ban on semiautomatic weapons. because he is in jeopardy and everybody is pulling for him, are we required in a moral sense to put that aside in the moment?
>> whatwear requi we're requires we hope he recovers and when he recovers, he's a new mind-set. if a lesbian person saved your life, you should not go forward being homophobic. you shouldn't be, anyway. if you almost died, but your life was saved because you got health care, you should apply that ethic and want everybody else to have the same health care you have. the bible, one of the guys that pr prayed, walker from north carolina, he was saying how he prayed for everybody. the bible says in isaiah 10, war on to those that legislatevil and rob the poor of their rights and make women and children their prey. the bible calls, wherever you just put on a face in a time of crisis, but continue to do the same thing, it's called making graves look good that are still full of dead men's bones. in other words, it's hypocrisy. if congresspeople pray for one another, and they should,
p-r-a-y, but then if they pass policies that prey, p-r-e-y, on the poor and the minorities and the sick, then we have a serious moral problem. and even our constitution, joy, says the only way you can get to domestic tranquility, the only way you can get to civility, is you must start with the establishment of justice. you must provide for the common good and you must provide the general welfare. changing the tone of words is not stuff. you have to have a change in the trajectory of policy. prayer is not enough. faith must have words. so i'm praying that the brother gives up and lives and then comes back and says, this experience has changed my thinking fundamentally, not just about myself, but about the policies i support. and lastly, joy, they talked about raising $1 million for charity. that is good. but if you turn around and take $600 billion from the poor and the least of these, and you don't pay a vote to give people
a living wage, personal privatized charity is not going to solve our social problems when it comes to the poor and the uplift of the least of these. >> i think we can get a lot of amens on that. i have to ask you while we have you here. we've been talking a lot about philando castile. i know his family is on the minds of a lot of people. what would you say in response to the sort of feeling of few tilt and hopelessness that i think a lot of us feel, a lot of people feel, when you have an instance of police-involved violence, that there's really actually no hope of justice for the family. what do you say to people that feel that way? >> well, you know, we all have our moments of despair, but in those moments, what i do is i go back and read and study people who face similar moments. you know, frederick douglas could have quit when the dread scott decision was signed and passed, but ty didn't. many of our slave foremothers and fathers saw great violence and hurt, but they didn't quit. they didn't give up.
and when the naacp was founded in the early 1900s, one of the reasons was black men were being hung on an average of one per day. and we did not have an anti-lynching law. you know, it's interesting that the man that helped push the anti-lynching law in the 1920s actually came out of ferguson. he was a white republican. he later on got put out of office for that stance. but he took that stance at that time. you know, it took us over 50 years to overturn plessey versus ferguson. now, i wish that the moral universe argument bent quicker and i wish we didn't have to have the suffering. but what we can't do is ever give up. on our own humanity. on our own standing for what's right, even if right does not come fast, quick, and in a hurry. and there is a legacy of doing that. you know, i remember, joy, when i was reading the other day, i went to the store the other day,
and cheney's nephew worked on my cell phone. and we were talking about that. when they were killed, the young people didn't come out of mississippi, they went to mississippi. and so i believe we're going to need continued season of non-violent resistance. don't quit, don't give up, continue to stand, because we must heroonor the lives of thos that have been slain violently by bad police for standing up by what's right until change comes. >> reverend dr. william barber, it's so good to talk to you. we are going to do this on a regular basis. we'll have you come in on a regular basis to give us some of this inspiration and some of these positive affirmations of wh we cano to change things. we really appreciate always your time, sir. thank you so much. >> thank you so much, joy. >> thank you. up next, the eyes of the political world will be on georgia's sixth district on tuesday night. the democrat who could take back the seat for the first time in decades joins me next.
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 orwo because we've seen a thi or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ before fibromyalgia, i was a doer. i was active. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. she also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. woman: for some, lyrica can significantly relieve fibromyalgia pain and improve function, so i feel better. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these,
new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can be more active. ask your doctor about lyrica.
all right. we're going to try to get a little politics in before this bill cosby presser. so joining me now to discuss the democratic race in georgia's sixth district is the man who could bring it back to the democrats for the first time in a very long time, john ossoff. why do you think you could win newt gingrich's old seat? >> hey, joy, thank you for having me. there's a coalition growing here of independents and republicans who want to see fresh leadership. with all of this disarray who want accountability and for delivering for our local economy here, improving daily life for georgians, rather than getting drawn into the partisan circus. and that's why early voting has been so intense. and with election day on tuesday, now's the time for folks in georgia to make their time to vote and make sure they make their voices heard on election day. >> there's some polling that comes out of the district that
shows that the top issue in the sixth district is health care. 44% say health care is number one. tax reform is 25%, the number two. and transportation, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. when you see a poll like that, is that because people in the district within the obamacare repealed or are you hearing people say they want it preserved? >> across the political spectrum, folks are concerned about this bill that has just passed the house, particularly women, and particularly those with pre-existing conditions. more than 300,000 georgians with pre-existing conditions in the sixth district alone. and you know, folks are concerned about losing access to health care. what they want to see a bipartisan effort to improve the laws on the books, to make health care and health insurance nor affordable, to improve access, to improve the quality of care. but what they're getting out of congress right now iseeply concerning. >> yeah, and it's a republican district, we do know that. so when you're talking to people door to door, are they concerned that you're going to be sort of a nancy pelosi rubber stamp? what are the concerns you're
hearing back to you from the republican doors you're knocking on? >> folks want representation that's focused on improving their daily quality of life. i think that they're tired of the negativity and partisanship in politics. they want someone who's going to be focused on delivering results for our local economy, working to make more affordable health care choices available, working to protect women and those with pre-existing conditions. it's about improving quality of life before it's about the partisan circus in d.c. >> yeah, well, all right, we wish you luck. i wish we had more time, but maybe we'll talk to you again if you win. thank you very much. we hope you'll come back. >> thanks for having me. >> jon ossoff, appreciate your time. -- in court and got to tell what happened to them. too often, these types of crimes, sexual assaults, do not get reported. especially cases where a drug
has been used in a drug-facilitated sexual assault, an intoxicant, so a victim does not have a clear memory of what went on. so, we hope that doing this and moving forward in this case sends a strong message that victims of these types of crimes can come forward and can be heard on what has happened to them and they will have the prosecutors and vestigators that are looking at those cass s take a hard look at them and treat them with the respect that they deserve. the other part of this that i think is so important is, i think, standing up for sexual assault victims. this is a case that we know has been important for sexual
assault victims everywhere, but when we look at the case we have, we have one victim. we have andrea constand. she has shown such courage through this. and i think share our thoughts on her, were just in awe of what she has done and moved forward in this case. and when we made the determination that we had talked about today, of moving forward, it lies in the fact that she's entitled to a verdict in this case. and the citizens of montgomery county, where this crime occurred, are entitled to a verdict in this case. and we will push forward to try to get that done and get justice done.
you know, our job in this, and as prosecutors, we should take on the tough cases. and we do. and we do it because it's the right thing to do. and in this case, there is no doubt in my mind and all of our minds that this was the right thing to do. and so we will push forward. i'll also tell you that i feel very blessed to be in this position, because i am surrounded by an incredible group of people, a dedicated group of public servants, who certainly aren't in this for the money. they are committed to doing what's right. and i want t start with the two folks that are flanking me. so, i don't know how much you
know about their background, but they started at the same time in our office, coming up in august will be their fifth year as prosecutors. so, you all, as long as you're in the courtroom, got to see what i got to see and i am just incredibly proud of the two of them and how they stepped up. i heard one question asked, was this their only case. uh, they're consistently carrying cases of about 200. stu is the captain of our sex crimes unit and kristen is the captain of our domestic violence unit and elder abuse. they run their teams, they work very hard in each and every one of the cases they have and they, i hope, make all the citizens of
montgomery proud of what they do. our appellate unit, bob fallon, who's the deputy district attorney and adrian jappe. they aren't here, because they're usually in the background on a lot of things, but the two of them and their team over across the hall from y'all sit now have kept up with everything the defense threw at us, every attempt to stop this up. the motions that were filed. they have just worked and worked and worked to make sure tha we could get to the point wre we could go into a courtroom and try a case. the other thing i would be remiss if i did not speak about is our law enforcement community and a number of the folks up here with us, chief gallon and i
and chief fry from cheltenham cannot be more proud of our law enforcement community and everything they have done through this. so sergeant schaffer here, who has been with us since day one and everything that he did -- where's he -- this guy retired. and he's still here. and harry and all the folks from cheltenham, who worked there, work their tails off in this. and, you know, know nothing but great things to say about them and mike shade and jim reap, who are montgomery county detectives and we're all just so proud of them. deputy chief burnsteel behind jim reap, who had to manage a lot of the work that the team
did. and again, our chief gallon and i can't be more proud of all of them. al also, i would be remiss if i didn't thank the attorney general's office for the help that they provided us in pittsburgh, when we were out there selecting the jury and the allegheny county district attorney's office, who helpeds in every way they could and opened up thei doors to us and worked with us and are just show ow law enforcement works together and the team approach that we attack all these issues with. so, at this point, i'll take a few questions, but i'll preface before i take these questions, we're re-trying a case here. so, there's things that i will to the be able to get into and hopefully i can answer a few of your questions. laura? >> what will you do differently next time, if anything?
will you seek to get even more prior bad acts witnesses in? >> well, we have to re-evaluate the case. and that's going to be part of the process now. and we do that in most cases. when we've finished with a case, we take a hard look at things, see if there's things that we can improve upon. we felt really good about this case. we felt good about it on friday when we closed our evidence and we felt good about it on monday when we closed. so you know, there's always tweaks and we can always do things better, so that will be a self-assessment that we'll go through. jim? >> can you explain what goes into the timeline of setting a new rile datrial date. >> so the judge made some indications in court that he was looking to put this on within the next 120 days. what i expect is in the near future, we'll set a pre-trial conference where we'll meet with
the judge and get a timeline of what we're going to do. legally, i think we ha 365 days to try the case, but we're going to push it along. >> i want to bring in msnbc legal analyst, paul butler, who's on the phone. you're listening to the prosecutor right now talking about retrying the case. paul, the prosecutor there said that he has 365 days to retry this case. what do you think that they might try to do differently thefection time? >> well, they need to talk to the jurors to find out what went wrong with this case. this is a prosecutor who ran on a platform of putting bill cosby in jail. this is the only criminal prosecution and it has not been successful. so he needs to talk to the jurors to figure out whether the vote was close, was it 7-5 or 10-2. and if it was 10-2, was that in favor of conviction or acquittal. and i think it's very premature to make the decision to bring charges. very unusual in a case like this, where the jury honestly worked hard, the prosecutor just
says, summarily, he's going to go forward. >> so it sounds to me like you're sort of criticizing the prosecutor a little bit for using this case for politics. do you think this maybe wasn't the strongest of the, what is it, like 60 allegations at this moment? >> you know, it wasn't so much the strongest, as the only one in which the statute of limitations does not run. >> got it. >> and of course, that's an unfortunate situation in which you have 60 people who are accusing mr. cosby of assault, but only one has a criminal case. so it's unfortunate. you know, another thing to remember, though, is that a criminal conviction is not the only measure of justice. bill cosby had to pay money. that's not as satisfying as a qu conviction, as the stigma of having to go to jail, but convictions aren't the only
measure of justice. >> and can i ask you in a case like this, would that settlement have come in as evidence? >> no, because mr. cosby didn't admit guilt. so the jurors wouldn't be permitted to know about it. >> got it, and in this case, if the prosecutor goes again, gloria allred represented the only witness to be brought in what's called prior bad acts. can you talk about, how difficult or how easy is it to get in evidence, even if you can't try one of the other 60 cases, to get one of the other women who have made accusations? how difficult is it to get them in, get their testimony in? >> the judge in this case only admitted one prior bad act, following the rules of evidence. it will concern is that if a jury knows that someone has been accused of doing this same thing many times before, they'll give that too much weight. it's what lawyers call overly
prejudicial. and that's so why the rules of evidence really strong ly limit that. mr. cosby isn't accused -- he's not on trial for the other 59 times he's accused. he's on trial for what he did to miss constand, according to her, and that's really the most probative evidence. >> and we didn't get a chance to play this, but do we have time to play camille cosby's -- let's really quickly play what camille cosby puch cosby. you haven't heard from her at all. this is her representative. a lawyer for bill cosby reading a statement from camille cosby. let's take a listen. >> how do i describe the district attorney? heinously and exploitively ambitious. how do i describe the judge? overtly arrogant and collaborating with the district attorney. how do i describe the counsels for the accusers? totally unethical. how do i describe many but not
all general media? blatantly vicious entities that continually disseminated intentional omissions of truths. . i am grateful to any of the jurors who tenaciously fought to review the evidence, which is the rightful way to make a sound decision. >> wow. and paul butler, she ends the statement by saying, ultimately, this is a medicianifestation of justice based on facts, not lies. as a friend once stated, truth can be subdued, but not destroyed. would that kind of an attack on the judge and a prosecutor wind up having any role in the next prosecution. could that come in, in some way? what do you think about that? >> it shouldn't. although, she's accusing the prosecutor of discrimination, then, of course the prosecutor may want to bring another case to get a jury to try to consent to prove that it's not his bias that's determining that's driving this case. it's the fact that he believes that mr. cosby is guilty of indecent assault.
>> all right. well, paul butler, thank you very much. don't too far from your phone. i suspect that msnbc will want to have you around a little bit more today. thank you very much. appreciate it. all right. coming up, donald trump rolls out his cubaccent and a foreign policy built for the 1950s. be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin. be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses.
stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®.
live-streat the airport.e sport, binge dvr'd shows, while painting your toes. on demand laughs, during long bubble baths. tv on every screen is awesome. the all-new xfinity stream app. all your tv at home. the most on demand, your entire dvr, top networks, and live sports on the go. included with xfinity tv. xfinity the future of awesome.
we will have the latest on the bill cosby assault case that ended in a mistrial this morning. but first, the big news out of miami this week. donald trump traveled to florida on friday to announce yet another attempt to undercut president barack obama's legacy. effective immediately, i am canceling the last administration's completely one-sided deal with cuba. >> the white house says that the new policy blocks u.s. businesses from dealing with companies owned by the cuban military and sharply limits individual travel to the island. trump also seemed to take credit for cuban leader fidel castro's
decision to retire next year, something that castro actually announced back in 2013. >> raul castro, who, by the way, is leaving now. i >> that's totally not why. joining me now are congresswoman barbara lee of california, f fernand amandi sr. let me ask the congresswoman first, what do you make of donald trump's switcharoo on cuba? >> first, i think that he's shown just how disingenuous he's been by these rollbacks. this has been a 50-year policy in terms of ensuring that americans cannot travel freely to cuba like we can to vietnam or china or anywhere else in the world. also, he knows good and well that ending the embargo would
create more jobs in america and rolling this back would destroy at least 13,000 jobs, 6.2 billion in revenue. and so it's a policy that president obama attempted to move forward on because we in congress still haven't been able to legislatively lift the embargo and lift the travel ban. so he's trying to roll back the gains that we made in terms of normal relations with cuba and trying to set us back 55ea it doesn't make sense and i hope the american people resist this move. >> fernand sr., why shouldn't americans be free to travel to cuba if americans can travel to north korea? americans get on a plane and go to iran if they want to. why shouldn't americans be free to travel to cuba? >> americans should be free to travel anywhere in the world and will continue to be able to travel to cuba. let me try to put this in
context, in nonpartisan context. this is what's in the interest of the american people and what is in the interest of the cuban people. to give credit where credit is due. president obama reached out to the cuban regime in an effort to open up a basically paralyzed relationship over 55 years with noble intentions. and he tried. president trump comes in, looks at it and decides that this is not, as we expected it to be. the fact is that the cuban government did not react to the unilateral concessions that the u.s. government granted. they continue to meddle extensively in venezuela, creating a debacle in that poor country. they increased the repression in cuba. and so you wonder why not reset the policy. the fact is that the president did not eliminate president obama's good elements of the
policy. many of them, in fact most of them remain in place. what is the main point of the policy is that the direct relationship, the direct fundg, the direct business with the cuban regime, the oppressive regime over 58 years is no longer allowed. the policy in turn turns to the cuban people. let's engage the cuban people directly. pretty much what president obama tried to do but couldn't. let's give president trump credit and a chance to engage the cuban people and stop funding this repressive oppressive regime for 58 years. that's the right thing to do for our country. it is the right thing to do for the cuban people. we applaud president trump's decision. >> let me go to fernand jr. there are a lot of complications here, right? so you have the estimates from
engaged cuba saying that this policy switch would cost $6.6 billion over trump's first term. that it will cost 12,295 jobs. more sort of directly, i mean i've been to cuba. the thing you hear most when people will talk to you off the record, and by the way, it is clearly an authoritarian country because people can't talk to you openly and freely, it's pretty clear. but when you can get them alone one on one, they say we really want to make money. the only way to make money is through the tourism industry, by being a waiter or in that industry where you can make tip income. why is it a better idea to withdraw that by making it harder for americans to travel to cuba? >> well, i'm not sure it is, joy. i think that's where i part a little bit of company with my dad in ascribing the good faith intentions to president trump. at the end of themaer, number one, like congresswoman lee says, he in no way cancelled the
obama policy. this was a slight alteration, so i think there's some disingenuousness there. what it ends up doing more than anything else, this is the tragedy about the new alteration is once again it gives that castro regime, that authoritarian regime that all of us agree exists an excuse on which to blame the lack of progress. what the obama policy did was eliminate all of the excuses. joy, we know that a successful con man like the castros utilize the hustle of blaming someone, the blame game. by now doing this action, they can blame the united states again for an aggressive posture, when before they were accountable for their totalitarian actions. that's why i think at the end of the day as tragic as it is, this policy change, this policy alteration will not change the fundamental dynamics of the 58-year repression of the cuban people. i think we were on a closer path to that happening with the previous approach. now these con men in cuba have another excuse with which to
blame. >> very quickly, congresswoman lee, your colleague, marco rubio, on the senate side, seems to have gotten something and also congressman diaz-balart. they went in and had a meeting with donald trump. is this what they got for exchange for a friendlier relationship with the white house? >> probably so, joy. let me say a couple of things. we have bipartisan support in congress to lift the embargo and to lift the travel ban. there are only a few members of congress holding this policy hostage. we have 12 republicans and 12 democrats on a working group, trying to work together to make sure we do not go back 55 years, but rather move forward. 65% of the public want to travel to cuba freely. and in fact 63% of cuban americans in miami-dade county believe that this policy is a failed policy and we should move forward. so it doesn't make any sense. >> we're almost out of timeut i want to give fernand sr. a
chance to respond. what about lifting the 'em paem? >> the embargo is an american law and we are a country of laws. the president stated it very clearly. here's what we expect the cuban regime to do. liberate political prisoners, allow free expression, allow multi-party politics in the country and have supervised elections instead of continuing to be a tyrant for 55 years. is that not an american principle? >> well, i want to have this debate again. i can see the next host is standing in the room. i have to get off the air so i'm going to let you go. thank you very much to congressman barbara lee and fernando amandi sr. and jr. friday was my son, jamar's 20th birthday! happy birthday, jamar. if we would have done who won the week, that's him as baby
jamar. he's still adorable even though he's not a baby anymore. thank you, guys. he's not a baby like that anymore. he's way, way bigger than that, he's 20. join us tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern and the very latest with bill cosby is coming up. alex witt, is coming in. >> photo bomb, do it, do it, do it. hi! >> go, go, go. ♪ to err is human. to anticipate is lexus. experience the lexus rx with advanced safety standard.
experience amazing. a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home... ...with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection, which could lead to hospitalizations. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day, so you can stay home. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home,
ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. when i feel controlled by frequent, unpredictable abdominal pain or discomfort and diarrhea. i tried lifestyle changes and over-the-counter treatments, but my symptoms keep coming back. it turns out i have irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, or ibs-d. a condition that's really frustrating. that's why i talked to my doctor about viberzi... ...a different way to treat ibs-d. viberzi is a prescription medication you take every day that helps proactively manage both abdominal pain and diarrhea at the same time. so i can stay ahead of my symptoms. viberzi can cause new or worsening abdominal pain. do not take viberzi if you have no gallbladder, have pancreas or severe liver problems, problems with alcohol abuse, long-lasting or severe constipation,