Skip to main content

tv   MSNBC Live With Stephanie Ruhle  MSNBC  July 5, 2017 6:00am-7:01am PDT

6:00 am
about article five in poland. >> he's also isn't he thumbing his nose at putin, whether he knows it or not? >> because poland and russia, exactly, are always at loggerheads. >> that should be fascinating. >> we really want to talk about illinois. can you come back tomorrow? >> yes. >> that does it for us this morning. thank you, brian, so much. >> i'll see you tomorrow, america. >> connecticut as well because that's illinois in the making. >> that does it for us for now. the great chris jansing picks up the coverage right now. i love her. >> thank you. the fabulous joe and mika. and, you know, maybe your guests can come on the show as well, why not. let's just book everybody today for tomorrow. hello there, i'm chris jansing in for stephanie ruhle, and this morning we have that dangerous escalation, north korea launching its first missile that could potentially reach our shores. the u.s. and south korea respond with their own missile test, and now an emergency u.n. security council meeting is set for this
6:01 am
afternoon. >> and we do have challenges, but we will handle those challenges, believe me. >> face to face, moments ago president trump left for warsaw and the g20 summit, including a high-profile meeting with vladimir putin. but has the russian investigation tied trump's hands even before they meet? and will not comply. more than 40 states now refusing to provide voter information to the trump administration, including several republican states. critics say it's all just a cover, looking for information to validate the president's unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud. >> and so when people say there's no evidence, i say obviously those people haven't been reading the newspapers. >> we begin this morning, though, with the president headed to europe for the g20. that threat from north korea suddenly at the top of the international agenda. the summit, along with an emergency u.n. meeting this afternoon, now part of a global push to find some way to rein in
6:02 am
the communist regime. i've got a fantastic team with me to help break it all down. i want to start with nbc's kristen welker who is live at the white house for us. kristen, already this was going to be a very high-stakes trip for the president. now you put north korea's missile launch into the mix. give us an idea of the expectations for the g20. >> reporter: chris, this is arguably the president's biggest foreign policy test yet. he is traveling first to poland, then he heads to germany for the g20 summit where he will have the chance to feet face-to-face with the leaders of china, south korea and japan. that's where he's expected to really press them to try to turn up the heat on north korea. but it comes as this administration is losing faith that china can intervene, can actually get something done. remember, the president has really made that a focus of his north korea policy. he's been leaning on china. he invited president xi jinping to mar-a-lago, for example, back in april. they have had a series of phone
6:03 am
calls. white house officials have consistently said that they're fostering a close relationship of the and yet in their eyes china has fallen short. last week we heard the administration slap a round of sanctions on a chinese bank. that infuriated china. and now this tweet today. the president tweeting trade between china and north korea grew almost 40% in the first quarter. so much for china working with us, but we had to give it a try. now that tweet comes on the heels of a tweet yesterday in which president trump was saying that china should effectively take a strong stance toward north korea. so i think that's what the messaging is going to be. but this really underscores that the president is losing faith in that part of his strategy. so what are his options when it comes to north korea? sanctions are a possibility, possibly moving military assets into the region. there seems to be a sense, though, that actual military action is a last resort because in the words of the defense
6:04 am
secretary, the results could be catastrophic. now, in addition to this, chris, of course all eyes will be on that all-important meeting at the end of the week with russia's president, vladimir putin. north korea will be at the forefront there. but also the question, will president trump raise the issue of russia's meddling in the u.s. election. he's getting leaned on by democrats and republicans to do just that. right now white house officials say there is no agenda for that meeting. >> unbelievable. so much at stake here. thank you, kristen. now, so far the only statement we've gotten from the administration outside the president's tweets has been from secretary of state rex tillerson. ha hans nichols has that story from the pentagon for us. what can you tell us? >> the early assessment is that this missile that north korea fired did successfully re-enter the atmosphere. they saw it splash down. that doesn't mean that whatever sort of vehicle they had in there could have carried a nuclear device, but it does give you an indication that this was a successful re-entry and that is a significant step forward on
6:05 am
what could be what the pentagon is saying as well as the state department an icbm. now, the response so far, mostly as you mentioned, chris, coming from the state department. they really want to give diplomacy one last try. when you look at some of the statements coming out, it's not a china focused policy. they want to broaden it. they want to get other countries involved. here's a statement from tillerson last night confirming the icbm talking about diplomacy. the united states strongly condemns north korea's launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile. we intend to bring north korea's provocative action before the u.n. security council and enact stronger measures to hold the dprk accountable. you know, chris, just to give you a sense of what will be happening at the pentagon today, there will be conversations with south korean counterparts. the idea that this was a joint exercise, those missiles that they fired yesterday, that is not lost on anyone here. it was done with the new president there who has been somewhat dovish on north korea. and then they'll be doing more analysis on just what this missile did, how high it went
6:06 am
and whether or not it could have gone even further and teasing it out and trying to figure out the theoretical range. the fact that this did re-enter the atmosphere and didn't burn up is significant. >> the theoretical range obviously is the key point here, hans. what are you hearing from the folks at the pentagon, could this be a missile that could hit alaska? could it hit hawaii? how close are they to being able to hit mainland u.s.? >> alaska for certain. that seems to be the assessment. but probably not hawaii. you know, the key thing here is time aloft. and what the defense department is saying is 37 minutes. what the north koreans are saying is 39 minutes. but those two extra minutes, if the north korean side is accurate, i tend to believe the u.s. side on this, they're watching this on satellite, see a lot of imagery and suspect their clocks are pretty well synced but those two extra minutes gives you a lot of distance. what the u.s. doesn't know is whether or not it flew to its
6:07 am
highest altitude so it might have had more gas left in its tanks. >> i want to bring in matt welch, editor at large for "reason," matt pesca with slate, caitlin huey burns for real clear politics. i'll start with you. i was struck by a quote from william perry, the former defense secretary, who says the ability to strike the u.s. changes everything. help us put into context what this means and what this means for the g20. >> certainly this is, as kristen alluded to in that package, this is a really big test for this president. remember during the transition before he took office he talked about the way in which he would be able to take a tough stance on north korea forming a relationship with china. we're six months into this presidency and he is seeing that his policy is not working. you're going to be hearing from republican lawmakers who have advocated for a tougher stance on this. you're hearing from democratic lawmakers who are advocating for a policy here.
6:08 am
as he goes to the g20, this will certainly be top of mind, particularly as the chinese president will be there. also this meeting with russia, which is also involved. >> you also have to go back, matt, to what the president said back in january. he put out a tweet and he said the idea that north korea could launch a missile that would reach the united states won't happen. those are his words, won't happen. where does this leave him now? >> that was five months ago, who's paying attention to tweets from five months ago. the real question to me is what happens when the era of strategic impatience is over. that was the big change that trump inaugurated with his presidency. so he made moves like sending 59 cruise missiles to syria, dropping the mother of all bombs in afghanistan. those were pointed toward north korea. >> he said the aur marmatta is coming. >> he wanted to say those things to make china motivated to do something. if china falls short of that, what then comes next.
6:09 am
i think you're seeing him talk more about japan than he did before, talk more with south koreans than he did before but that was always the gamble here. you can act unstable but then what happens when that doesn't produce the desired results and produces more results with the north koreans like we've got to speed this up. >> trade between china and north korea grew 40% in the first quarter. so much for china working with us but we had to give it a try, so where does that leave the u.s. >> the use of the past tense had is very troubling in there. here's a clarifying analogy people tell me. can china really tell north korea what to do? people throughout the world always say about the u.s. and israel, well, the u.s., just tell israel what to do. it doesn't work like that. it's pretty analogous to how china and korea interact. what you just said about the end of strategic patience, which is the phrase, does that mean stern resolve? because it would also be
6:10 am
haphazard knee-jerk reactions. him constantly talking about how unpredictable he wants to be, there maybe is a value to that, but not if you're a world superpower and especially not with north korea. for 50 years they have relied on us to be reliable. they are the crazy ones. if they think the united states will react to them in a crazy, unpredictable way, i think that increases the chances that they pull off a strike. one quick last thing, it needs to be said. they have an intercontinental ballistic missile, probably will be able to reach alaska. doesn't mean they could put an actual warhead on that missile effectively yet. >> and yet there does seem to be an overall belief that it could happen in the next 18 months to two years. i talked to one u.s. senator this morning who i suggested 18 months and he said, no, but maybe two years. former nato commander james devrities was on "morning joe." here's his analysis. >> it will be on president trump's watch to make this decision and it becomes a
6:11 am
preemptive strike that is legitimate under international law. you want to build an asian coalition. you want japan, stralaustralia, zealand, singapore, and you have to use cyber special forces and you'll have to use long-range air from guam as well as bring three or four carrier battle groups around the peninsula. we're going to lose hundreds of thousands of people in that scenario. many of them will be americans. there are 200,000 american citizens there. it's a very dark scenario. but if you've got to lance the boil militarily, can you do it? yes. do you have the legitimacy to do it? when the nuke and the intercontinental missile streams cross, yes, that's probably 18 months away. >> many of those americans, caitlin, are obviously members of the u.s. military. what do you make of what you just heard. >> it's certainly startling to think that we could be at this kind of point even though the
6:12 am
previous administration warned the president about this during the transition. i think everybody is looking to see what the president is actually going to do now that this is actually on his watch. and of course the alliances that the u.s. has traditionally will come into play here. we know that the president has kind of tested those alliances, particularly as it comes to nato. >> i also think, and we haven't talked a whole lot about this, but he's going to be going into a meeting where it has always been the u.s. president comes in, they are the leader of the free world, they are the person that is looked to, to say what are we going to do about that. where do you stand on this. does donald trump go in with that kind of leverage? are people going to be looking to angela merkel. >> one thing he's been doing consistently is talking about how great powers now should be talking about their own regions, regional influence. he said that in his speech in little havana talking about the u.s. policy towards cuba and also mentioned venezuela. in saudi arabia, he said that the powers there need to take care of it. it's going to be really interesting to see what he says
6:13 am
in poland tomorrow. it's an underreported part of this whole speech. he's going to give a major address that's probably going to touch on what are the east europeans supposed to be doing about russia right there in article five. donald trump has been outsourcing american leadership out there. i think what he's been trying to do in acting unstable is trying to get the regional powers in asia to deal with north korea. the question is, is south korea actually ready to deal with north korea? i don't know the answer to that question. >> my panel will stay with us, we have a lot more to talk about today. but up next we'll go to hamburg, germany, ahead of president trump's first face-to-face meeting with vladimir putin. is president trump already boxed in, though, before they even shake hands?
6:14 am
work up a not at night.the day. only tempur-breeze® mattresses use an integrated system of technologies to keep you cool while you sleep. so you wake up feeling powerful. save up to $500 on select tempur-breeze® mattress sets. find the breeze that's right for you at tempurpedic.com. wearing powerful sunscreen?
6:15 am
yes! neutrogena® ultra sheer. unbeatable protection helps prevent early skin aging and skin cancer with a clean feel. the best for your skin. ultra sheer®. neutrogena®.
6:16 am
president trump is aboard air force one right now on his way to europe for the g20 summit amid a flurry of serious and escalating issues facing the u.s. and the world, including, of course, north korea.
6:17 am
the president's first stop, poland, before heading to germany for that gathering of world leaders. one of the most anticipated moments will be when president trump holds that high-stakes, face-to-face meeting with president putin of russia for the first time ever. nbc's keir simmons is live in hamburg, germany, ahead of the g20. i know you've been talking to folks at the kremlin. what are you learning about this upcoming meeting between trump and putin? >> reporter: well, not very much honestly. kremlin official echoing the white house saying not much has been decided yet. we don't know. we know it will be on friday. we don't know when on friday, how it will take place, how formal it will be, how long it will be. that kremlin official telling me the two presidents will talk for as long as they need to. now, when you think about that statement, it is pitch perfect in terms of what the russians would like this meeting to be about because one of their key objectives is quite simply to have their president be seen on
6:18 am
an equal footing to the american president. president putin will have met with president xi of china before they come here, so just, for example, if you take the north korean situation that you have been talking about, president putin will go in, if that is an item for discussion when the two presidents meet, he will say, well, i can help. let me mitigate and be involved in this because that's how he wants to be seen around the world, as a big player, the same way that he is trying to -- has been trying to be seen in the middle east by intervening in syria. what the russians, we think, will do in terms of north korea, what their position we think that they would take there is that they would argue that there should be some kind of a deal where the u.s. and south korea stop military exercises and the north koreans halt their nuclear and missile tests. that, of course, is very difficult for the americans to
6:19 am
buy into because it's simply leaves the whole chess board as it is and the u.s. would like to see the removal of any threat from north korea in terms of missiles that could reach the u.s. mainland and the nuclear tests. >> keir, thanks for that. i want to bring in msnbc contributor and editor at large for the atlantic, steve clemons. so big picture from your perspective, steve, you've been following this stuff literally for decades. what's at stake here? >> i think right now what's at stake is how our allies perceive us in this very important meeting between trump and vladimir putin. is donald trump pretending to be winging it? is it something when h.r. mcmaster and others are saying they don't know what he's going to talk about, he'll lead the discussion, but behind the scenes maybe there is a finely tuned thought-out plan for america's strategic interests with russia? we don't know the answer to that. >> we don't know the answer to that? we're in a situation, again, you mention what h.r. mcmaster said. he's really the only one that's
6:20 am
given a clear indication. he says basically they have no specific agenda. this is one of the most consequential meetings we have seen between world leaders arguably in a very long time. >> that's right. >> and we don't -- and you just heard what keir simmons has to say. the kremlin isn't saying how long it's going to be, exactly sort of what the optics of it are going to be. we're not hearing anything from the united states. we don't believe for a second that vladimir putin is going in here without an agenda, do we? >> no, we don't. he is coming in, he's got very special interests. one of them is to stroke donald trump's ego, make him feel good, let him know there's a pathway forward between russia and the united states. but that's going to be at a cost in a sense of the transatlantic relationship, the western alliance between the united states and european powers. angela merkel is hosting this. and look who is in berlin today. xi jinping. he brought two pandas from china with him. he's there saying i'll be your
6:21 am
partner and pal in protecting the world on climate change and protecting the global liberal market order, the global trading system. that is not what donald trump is doing. xi jinping is trying to slip in to the partnership post that america has had with germany and broader europe, and vladimir putin is trying to split that. and i think that -- those are the stakes involved right now in the g20 in this meeting of t. and we don't know how it's going to go. maybe they'll pull a rabbit out of the hat, i want to give them the benefit of the doubt to a certain degree. but our not knowing is creating so much doubt in our allies in the solvency of their trust in us, it's potentially very, very damaging. you're possibly seeing the world tilt, a lot of the global relationships that have made america great in the past are perhaps tilting in a different and more reckless, destructive direction. >> i was asking this question of the panel earlier, and i remember very vividly talking to a lot of people in the german government when i was there for the very last trip that
6:22 am
president obama made and their big question at that time was are we going to see angela merkel emerging essentially as the leader of the free world. from the perspective of our allies, does president trump go into this meeting with the respect, with the gravitas, with the full force of the united states, and people looking at him and saying he is the leader of the free world. >> look, we already know the answer to that. in the pew research polls that show so little trust in him and con calm ittantly little trust in the united states. on your last segment on china, it was fascinating. he walked away from the transpacific partnership, tpp. it's not an economic deal, it's a strategic deal with neighbors in the asian neighborhood. those could be our allies in dealing with north korea. when the world sees the united states walk away from its own party, from its own relationships, walk away from its own interests, it has doubts
6:23 am
about the guy running the show. and i think that is the problem we're in right now. and i think the white house has an opportunity here to say, hey, we've been fooling all of you. here is our plan and we knocked vladimir putin back on his heels. i don't expect that, but that would be interesting. that would shore up congress. congress has doubts in vladimir putin, which is why they have been passing this legislation trying to get a bill to trump that will force him to veto it, i guess, but it will be veto proof on not allowing him to roll back sanctions on russia without congressional support. >> there's an article in "the washington post" this morning and i'm going to quote it. months of russia controversy leaves trump boxed in ahead of putin meeting, arguing if trump intends to loosen sanctions, congress could defy him. they want to pursue stronger sanctions. do you agree that he goes into this meeting in a way boxed in? >> no, i don't, because he doesn't believe he's boxed in. he ignores the constraints that congress is trying to put on him and he's forcing a showdown with congress over these issues.
6:24 am
at least in temperament. we don't know what is going to happen in this meeting. we don't know if he's going to offer putin concessions on sanctions that congress does not want to let the president do. we don't know. but my sense is donald trump sees a constraint and tries to blow past it, so i think the notion that he's boxed in on what he can do is sort of ridiculous because the president doesn't acknowledge those constraints. >> steve clemons, always good to talk to you. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> appreciate it. up next, a little over an hour ago president trump took off to europe for the crucial g20 summit. but after his rocky reception at the nato summit, what kinds of welcome will he get? but first, a louisiana congressman facing scrutiny this morning for filming a selfie video inside a gas chamber at a former nazi concentration camp. the auschwitz memorial and museum condemned clay higgins for that video, calling it disrespectful. his office, not responding to the controversy yet.
6:25 am
we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. ♪
6:26 am
6:27 am
lobster and shrimp are teaming up in so many new dishes.fest, like coastal lobster and shrimp, with shrimp crusted with kettle chips. or new, over-the-top lobster and shrimp overboard. but it can't last, so hurry in.
6:28 am
welcome back. i'm chris jansing in for stephanie ruhle this morning. time now for your morning primer, everything you need to know to start your day. a new york city police officer was shot and killed in the bronx overnight in what police are calling an unprovoked attack and an assassination. police say the 48-year-old was shot in the head through the window of her marked police car. the gunman was pursued, then shot and killed by police.
6:29 am
u.s.-backed forces in syria have breached the wall around the old city of raqqah, a major milestone in the battle to drive isis from it's self-declared capital. lawyers and mental health advocates are urging the governor of virginia to stop thursday's scheduled execution of 32-year-old william morva. attorneys say he was suffering from severe mental illness when he killed a security guard and deputy in 2006. check this out, a new video that shows the incredible moment an 18-wheeler overturned on a pennsylvania highway monday. several people rushed to the driver's aid, smashing through the windshield and freeing him from that wreck. some brave, good samaritans. and, yes, joey chestnut once again the undisputed hot dog eating champion after downing a nauseating 72 hot dogs in ten minutes. i guess that's about, what, one every eight seconds at the annual nathan's hot dog eating contest.
6:30 am
i see it every year, i still can't get over it. let's talk serious stuff, shall we? president trump will touch down in poland a few hours from now where leaders have promised him a big reception before he heads to germany for the g20. matt bradley is in warsaw for us. tell us about this reception, what the president will see what he gets there. >> reporter: thanks, chris. well, if everything goes as planned, and that's a really big if for this white house, but if everything goes as planned, it's expected to be something of a love-in here in warsaw when president trump arrives at about 10:00 p.m. tonight. any u.s. president who would visit poland would get a very, very warm reception, but especially donald trump. that's because the political leadership here and indeed many ordinary pols really consider themselves to be ideological kinsmen of the president. that's because they tend to be, especially this ruling political party, they tend to be anti-immigrant, skeptical of climate regulations and environmental regulations and
6:31 am
very skeptical of international organizations like the european union. but for this reception, they're going to be demanding some things from trump. they want to see him doubling down on article five of nato. that's the bit of the nato agreement that enjoins different groups like the united states or different countries to come to each other's aid if they're attacked. they're also going to want to see donald trump prevent -- present a deal for gas supplies. now, a lot of these eastern european countries who are going to be meeting here all week this week, they're relying on russia for their gas supplies and that gives this huge juggernaut to the east of here a lot of political leverage as well as economic leverage over these eastern european countries. they're hoping that donald trump and this visit is going to break that. and for that, they're pulling out all the stops. some of the political leaders here have even said that other european countries are jealous that they're going to be hosting trump before he heads off to hamburg for the g20. some of the major political parties here are bussing in supporters from outside of the
6:32 am
capital to be present when donald trump makes his famous -- his address here in warsaw in the polish capital. he's going to be making an address at the site of a 1944 uprising against the nazis. so that's going to be a very, very good look for the president before he moves on to hamburg in germany. and that's where he's going to be confronted with some very, very difficult questions and probably some very awkward run-ins with some world leaders like angela merkel and emmanuel macron. they'll be asking about his environmental policy, about trade issues, and of course they're going to be pressing him on what you've been talking about all morning, the latest flare-up in north korea. so here in warsaw, we can expect the president is going to be able to have a little bit of dessert before he starts his more complicated meal. back to you, chris. >> but they're bussing them in. thank you so much, matt bradley. more than 40 states now say they will not comply with a white house commission's request for voter data from last year's
6:33 am
election. maine's secretary of state joining me next, but first, the markets have just opened. let's take a check of what's going on. not a whole lot of action there, as you say. the dow up just a few points. in the meantime, we'll keep our eye on it throughout the day. we'll be right back. we're not professional athletes. but that doesn't mean we're giving up. i'm in this for me. for me. along with diet and exercise, farxiga helps lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. lowering a1c by up to 1.2 points.
6:34 am
do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar, and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis, which is serious and may lead to death. i'm in this for my family. i'm in this for me. ask your doctor about farxiga and learn how you can get it for free. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
6:35 am
6:36 am
testinhuh?sting! is this thing on? come on! your turn! where do pencils go on vacation? pennsylvania! (laughter) crunchy wheat frosted sweet! kellogg's frosted mini-wheats. feed your inner kid we have a brand new nbc news count for you, and as many as 41 states say they cannot or will not comply with the white house request for voter data. state officials are either flat-out refusing to hand the data over, saying it breaks their own state law, or they're limiting the information they share to only what is publicly available. all of this in response to a letter that was sent last wednesday by the presidential advisor recommission on election integrity. it requested voter information including names, addresses, birth dates, political parties and partial social security numbers for all registered voters. maine secretary of state matthew dunlap is among those saying his state will not provide voter
6:37 am
data. he's a democrat who was on the commission himself. also with us is myrna perez, deputy director of the democracy program at the brennan center for justice. thanks to both of you. mr. secretary, i'm going to start with you because you cited state law saying it bars you from giving this information to the commission. if that law wasn't on the books, would you have problems providing this information to the commission? >> well, the information that would be available to the commission would be the same information that would be available to any outside entity, including a governmental entity that wanted to do research around elections. and that information would be pretty limited. it would be basically the name, address, party affiliation and year of birth. so it would not be very deep information. under the help america vote act, which was passed in 2002, the act provided for states to come up with their own statutes about what would be publicly available and who could access it. so we were looking at this as an outside request.
6:38 am
typically requests come from state parties, candidates, issue campaigns to get a copy of the voter file. beyond that we limit who can get access and for what purpose. no matter who gets the voter file, it has to be maintained as confidential information. this is where we ran up against a problem with the request because in the letter it stated that any information that was provided to the commission had to be -- was going to be made public by the commission under the federal open records law. that was a conflict with state statute which said that the voter file had to be main taped as confidential information and because of that we could not transmit the voter file to the commission. >> a lot of people are raising invasion of privacy. it's already taking up a lot of information to get information that is already publicly out there. and it could be costly for some of these states to try to put this information together, transmit this information. so why do it? what do you think is behind this? >> well, i think the concern has come from some members of the commission about people who are
6:39 am
registered to vote in more than one state, which by the way is not against the law. you can't vote in more than one state in a given election, but there's been this recurring suspicion that people move from state to state, voting in multiple jurisdictions, and when you reflect on the help america vote act, it may have been a gap that they didn't have any provision for across state voter registration check to make sure administrators do clean up their voter registration rolls. there never has been demonstrated a problem. i think the advantage to speak on the devil's advocate side of doing this is that you dispel the rumor that people are moving from state to state to vote. my experience is that if you can get somebody to vote once, you're doing a great job as an elections official. >> well, yeah, given our numbers i think that's true. i mean it's -- compared to a lot of, for example, european countries, our voter turnout is pretty sad. i have to tell you both that when all of this started to come up, i have a lot of friends who
6:40 am
have moved and i'm one of them who moved from california to washington, d.c. to new york state over the course of the last five or six years and none of us knew that we had to like unregister in one place before we registered. certainly never occurred to any of us that we were going to vote in two states. what do you think the point is behind all of this? >> the concern is they're going to take this data, use some dubious methodology and junk science to come up with policies that are going to justify federal laws and actions that make it harder for people to register to vote. the commission was ill conceived and ill designed. this rollout of this request was ill conceived and ill designed. this is done on the heels of the president making some outlandish claims that 3 million to 6 million people voted illegally in the election. >> for which there is absolutely no substantiation. >> no, there's no substantiation for this. and i think the problem that we are having right now is that this ill conceived, ill designed
6:41 am
commission is taking an issue that should be nonpartisan. people should be able to study elections, figure out how to improve it, figure out ways to tinker the system so that it better serves voters and we have elections that are full of integrity and secure and turning it into this political issue that is making everyone very skeptical that it's going to produce anything worthwhile and is actually going to hurt voters. >> well, there's a different view of how this is political. the governor of new hampshire was asked about the states that are saying no to this. here's what he said. >> for those governors who are saying no, i mean they're just playing politics. >> so he is essentially saying the people who are playing politics here are democrats and others who basically don't want to be able to prove what the president is saying. >> i respectfully disagree. as secretary dunlap said, states have created their own balancing act between making the voter rolls available for public inspection so that political parties, researchers and the like can examine them and
6:42 am
protecting people's privacy. and if the information is sent over to this federal agency and a national database is created of supposedly everyone registered, states are unable to enforce their laws. one of the things that i found so shocking is that secretary kobach is a secretary and he has dumped in the laps of secretaries all across the country both a legal problem, because it's going to be difficult for them to enforce their own state laws if they comply in many instances and a political problem because voters do not like the idea of some politician in kansas requesting information like their social security number or how recently they voted. >> would you agree with that, mr. secretary? does this create problems for people who are in your position across the country that really isn't necessary to have? >> well, speaking only for myself, it's pretty simple if all you have to do is follow the law. that's what we did in this case. as you mentioned, i am on the commission. we talked about this data request. and when we talked about it, i
6:43 am
emphasized that it should be a request and not a demand and should also only include that information which is publicly available under individual state laws and that was the nature of the request. it's generated an awful lot of interest. i've gotten hundreds and hundreds of e-mails. we've had to keep a phone log of people calling in because of the nature of the information relating to elections. it makes people very, very sensitive to think other people are looking to see whether or not they're active in the electoral process. you contrast that with the other thing that we dealt with earlier this year, which was compliance with the real i.d. act, which is far more invasive and includes much more proprietary information, including images of your original certified birth certificate to be accessible by law enforcement, including federal law enforcement, and yet people didn't feel so badly about that because it was going to help them travel. so there is a lot of information about us out there, but i think the point is here that people are very sensitive about their participation in a democratic election process and the secrecy of the ballot is paramount.
6:44 am
and for those of us who are elections officials, as was stated here just a few moments ago, i want anything that we do to make it easier for people to participate in the process and feel confident about their participation in the process. so there is a very -- there is a very sensitive balancing act here, and i think every secretary of state or chief elections officer, if it's not the secretary of state, has to examine this very carefully and proceed along their own individual state laws in order to determine what they are going to do with this request. >> let's hope that we can all agree whatever your party that we want more people to vote who legitimately can vote. i want to thank both of you for being with us, much appreciated. up next, u.n. secretary nikki haley facing backlash for this tweet. she blames north korea for forcing her to work on the fourth of july. from nikki haley to chris christie, members of congress, do they have a legitimate beef or are taxpayers just not getting their money's worth? we'll take a look at this issue when we come back.
6:45 am
no, please, please, oh! ♪ (shrieks in terror) (heavy breathing and snorting) no, no. the running of the bulldogs? surprising. what's not surprising? how much money aleia saved by switching to geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.
6:46 am
6:47 am
(vo) living with ammonia odor? not a pretty picture. (vo) luckily, tidy cats lightweight with new ammonia blocker tackles tough odor, even ammonia. so long stankface! (vo) ammonia like that? there's a tidy cats for that.
6:48 am
some republican leaders are in the hot seat this morning for some questionable decisions making for pretty bad optics. first you have u.n. ambassador nikki haley complaining about working on the fourth of july with this tweet. spending my 4th in meetings all day. #thanksnorthkorea. and then there was new jersey governor chris christie defending his decision to hang out at the beach while state government was shut down and the rest of the public was turned away from that beach.
6:49 am
>> i think i've proven over the last eight years that i don't really care about political optics. i care about right and wrong. >> some jersey shore beachgoers made their feelings known by creating a not so flattering sand figure of the governor. we're not even showing you the most offensive part. and then there's this. demonstrators showing up at a fourth of july event in texas that was attended by senator ted cruz. they ended up shout him down but cruz's supporters give him credit for showing up because most republican senators have not and they won't hold events while on break, depriving constituents of the opportunity to voice their frustrations with the health care bill or say whatever else is on their minds. i want to get back to my panel. matt welch, mike pesca, caitlin huey-burns. i've said this a lot over the course of this and these protests that we've seen. i do give credit to any member of congress, any member of the senate who actually shows up. but if you look at the numbers
6:50 am
for the number of senators who are in the middle of this health care fight showing up, the majority of them are not available to their constituents. so what do you make of this? >> right. or they have weird systems where it's and people are excluded or they do virtual town halls. i think these town halls actually help the senators. even the ones who take flack. i don't know that tom cotton of arkansas, i watched all four hours of his, i don't know if he did poorly. i think he got an earful of what his constituents were saying. oh, yes, this is what democracy is all about. >> i mean, look, for me. it's also about when you're a politician, you can define your job largely in a lot of ways. i guess if you consider actually being responsive to your constituents on a one-to-one basis. part of your job, you do it. otherwise, i guess you say i'm in my office or it's the fourth of july and i'm taking a break where does that leave us as people who are paying their salaries? >> exactly.
6:51 am
you look at approval rating of congress right now. it's about 16%. faith in institutions right now is about 18% or 20%, according to polls. so, certainly, this is a time to be able to hold your people and power accountable. i have been to republican town halls where the republican member of congress stood there for five hours and took questions. they kind of face this mentality as you saw with ted cruz facing constituents. getting shouted down. others who evade them get flack for it, as well. >> in the meantime, you have ambassador nikki haly, matt. poor thing, had to work the fourth of july because north korea launched a missile that could threaten the united states. >> i think i've been desenatized by donald trump tweeting so much that is a harmless joke compared to chris christie sitting on his own private beach.
6:52 am
congress hasn't passed a budget in 20 years. hasn't passed a budget in 20 years. they just sort of punt at the end of the year revolving series of fiscal clips and all these kinds of things. if you can't keep a beach in new jersey open on july fourth, what point is there to have new jersey? >> now, now, now. >> maybe i'm going a little bit too far. but what happens when we can't do the very basics of government here is that people abandon trust for these institutions and they go for a series of people who make every more kind of authoritarian promises here. there's a back track record in the world what happens when you get low-trust societies. we're becoming. we have always become a high-trust city and a low-trust society because of the people we elect. >> i mean, when you have a governor who is saying and i think, you know, he believes that he's right and everybody else is wrong. clearly, he's made the right
6:53 am
decision. and he made what i think is a conflicting argument. one is i have a right to be with my family and he said i was only with my family for 40 minutes and i wasn't sun bathing because i had a hat on and talking to my wife. does he think that anybody is looking at this who has any kind of common sense and thinking, oh, yeah, i get that. >> well, maybe nikki haley can argue, i had a hat on. i agree with you. i think at 15%. his approval rating is lower than congress'. >> this was before that happened. >> he is not literally saying that. he is saying what he always said. i will do my own thing. you are wrong and sometimes it helps him like when he gets into fights with teachers in the unions and sometimes it doesn't. he can dismiss optics. optics is a really important part of politics. really important part of communication. doesn't always get the optics right. matt's point, springsteen, i'll
6:54 am
come up with a third reason. >> bon jovy. i think we can go on and on. i guess the larger point here is that i wanted to get to was really about sort of faith in institutions and how we feel as americans about the people that we elect to represent us. and what can our expectations be? are we at a point where we expect so little. so little of our politicians and not just in terms of what they do, but in terms of what they say. what they tweet. what they do in a press conference that none of it m matters any more. >> that's a really interesting point. these are people who are elected to serve the people and also paid by taxpayers. when you look at what congress has to do and just taking congress, for example. because they're on recess this week. what they have to do in the next 30 days before they go on another congressional recess for a month, basic tasks of governing. passing a budget. the debt ceiling.
6:55 am
working on health care. something that they promised to do for the past seven years. when the people, american people look at this and say if you can't work on the basic functions of government, not even introducing new kinds of policies, i think that's where we get this number. >> and i just also want to say that there are a lot of politicians out there who work really hard, do a really great job. i always get criticized for this when i say it to people. i know people who work on both sides of the aisle in congress. they're not getting rich these young staffers. they're doing it because they truly believe they want to do something to make america better. you can agree or disagree with their politics. but, boy, others who really give the profession a bad name. thank you, all. happy fifth of july and we'll be right back. wondering, what if? i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary
6:56 am
treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni.
6:57 am
6:58 am
text "blades" to gillette on demand noo text to reorder blades... ...and get $3 off your first order with gillette on demand. that's why at comcast we're continuing to make4/7. our services more reliable than ever. like technology that can update itself. an advanced fiber-network infrustructure. new, more reliable equipment for your home.
6:59 am
and a new culture built around customer service. it all adds up to our most reliable network ever. one that keeps you connected to what matters most. and that wraps up this hour. i'm chris jansing in for stephanie ruhle. coming up right now more news with craig melvin. right now we follow some major developments overseas. the united states and south korea responding to north korea overnight with a show of force. both countries testing missiles of their own off the korean peninsula. kim jong-un continuing to talk to the united states. one of the high-stakes showdowns and he is en route to poland. his first stop ahead of the g-20 in germany. a key chance to unite the world against pyongyang. the other high-stakes meeting the other much-anticipated
7:00 am
face-to-face with vladimir putin. the first face-to-face since president trump has been in the white house. the white house saying the president won't go easy on the russian leaders. what will they talk about? our team set up in this country and around the world. let's start with hans nichols at the pentagon. hans, after the united states confirmed this was, in fact, a successful test firing of an intercontinental ballistic missile by north korea, what did we do? >> they did show force. a symbolic show of force and the u.s. and their counterparts working jointly and basically into the water still in south korean territorial water. you couldn't make, or at least north korea couldn't make a sovereignty argument. they are analyzing this launch. they know how high it went and how long it flew. that gives you a theoretical distance. it did survive reentry. they don't know reentry into the atmosphere.

59 Views

1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on