tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC July 7, 2017 1:00am-2:00am PDT
even though so many of us with criminalized the communities. they want a way out, they want peace and safety. >> thanks for joining us. >> thank. >> thank you. >> that is all in this evening. tonight tear gas and riot police ahead of meeting with world leaders german police try to take back the streets of hamburg. plus blaming obama. and foreign soil the current u.s. president blames the last one over russia's role in the election, while questioning how much russia is even to blame. and raising the stakes. how north korea has adds one more big layer to the trump putin summit. "the 11th hour" begins now. the fundamental question of our time is whether the west has the willing to survive. the line may sound like churchill or fdrp but it was the question the president posed on
this the 156th day of the trump administration. in for ari mel burn and while trump used the some ber tone in the remarks today, the literal survive was not exactly the issue that dominated, though the health and perhaps survival of american democracy was on the minds of many as trump prepares for the big showdown meeting tomorrow with vladimir putin. so at this joint press conference in war saw halle jackson again asked if president trump accepted that russia was behind the hacks. the president did not cite the authority of the u.s. intelligence assessment. that would be the easiest way for any president to handle the question. no, instead, he went out of his way to cast more doubt and nonloop back to the man who held office before him. >> i think it was russia. but i think it was probably
other people and/or countries. anise nothing wrong with that statement. nobody really knows. nobody really knows for sure. i heard it was 17 agencies. i said boy that's a a lot do we have that many? it turned out to be three or four it wasn't 17. and many of your kpart receipts had to change reported reporting had to apologize and correct. >> barack obama when he was president found out about this in terms of if it were russia. found out about it in august. now, the election was in november. that's a lot of time he did nothing about it. why did he do nothing about it? he did nothing about it. he said let's not do anything about it. he did nothing about it. that's the real question is why did he do nothing? why did he do nothing? why did obama do nothing about it? he did nothing about it. >> it is a good question when phrased that way. the question is whether any of that is the whole story. we'll give you some of the facts
here before we get to our guesting. the u.s. intelligence community as a whole did determine that russia hacked the u.s. election. now the big intel there was based on a three agencies, the cia, the nsa and fbi. critics from both parties have indeed questioned whether president obama did enough to counter the interference as it was going on. but no one who reviewed this would say that the president did nothing throughout the election. as president trump just asserted. ultimately today it ended with the protests ahead the g20 that kicks off in a few hours. rye are riot police using water cannonss and tear gas as keir simeons experienced first hand. >> tlrs dlashs between protestors and police. hear in hamburg, germany where president trump is meeting with world leaders.
and and is now it is now difficult to breathe. there are now running battles between demonstrators and german riot police moving again in this direction to stop -- to stop the protestors we're even staying in in area. >> as seen it was at times dangerous for protestors, reporters as well as the police officers trying to put some order. are estimates put the totals number of demonstrators as high as 10,000 people. there was a mixture of anti-government as well as antiu.s., antitrump abanticapitalist and reformers and more you a all of this and more with the meeting with putin still to come. as promised i want to bring in the expert panel nbc white house correspondent kristin welker and white house bureau chief phil rucker.
phil starting with you put the president's extemp ranes comments here in context. because he wanted to strike a presidential or stark note as i mentioned with regard to the existential question. but he quickly ended up back in a political mode. >> yeah that's right exactly right. it's interesting if you look at his actual scripted speech he gave outdoors in war saw. he was trying to reassure western allies. he made a lot of outreach about nato. tried to signal to european countries that have been wary of his moves that the west can stand together and of course in his mind it's the threat from north korea. but his statement at the press conference and comments to halle jackson about the -- about the russian interference were kind of mind boggling because he is
again not affirming what his own u.s. intelligence agencies have concluded definitively. >> kristin speak to that and our murlt enclosing colleagues reporting. because you do hear from trump white house officials as well as supporters that there is a frustration that no matter what he does and we i goes the russia question looms. the flipside would be in seems to be an appropriate question staring down the barrel of the putin meeting tomorrow. >> abilitily what you had today is mixed messages ahead of the meeting. on the one hand you had him speaking in strong terms, especially criticizing russia, urging russia to stop propping up the syrian regime for example to stand with western nations. and then yet again, questioning his own intelligence agencies. and so it raises the question about whether or not he is going to press russia's president tomorrow when the two meet for the first time on the issue of russia's meddling in the u.s. election. if you take his comments to halle jackson. it would suggest he is not going to.
and i have real questions about whether or not we're going to actually know what is said during that meeting. we do expect him to raise the issue of syria. he effectively did that today. ukraine as well. but will he press him on the key new? you have democrats and republicans urging him to do exactly that. and ari we know there will be six who people in the room. he secretary of state rex tillerson. sergey lavrov. and three translatesers. it's a very small group of people who know what is actually said. and of course the key question will be how tough is he with putin? >> jonathan what will we learn from a meeting like this typically according to protocols. >> normally countries would release a readout of the meeting some within an hour a couple hours of conclusion. the trump white house has been slower than the obama white house was in giving us that -- giving that information to the press. sometimes it wouldn't even come out until the next day. but this is the event that has been months in the making, right? this is sort of the maintain east. we all waited for the trump/putin sit down. there is a possibility won't know what is said. >> what does putin want out of it.
>> first he is going to flatter president trump. he knows the president has spoken highly of mr. putin throughout his campaign and before that. this is a president trump who is still rather inexperienced when it comes to foreign policy. inexperienced when it comes to intense one-on-one meetings. conversery vladimir putin kgb is a kuning operative. in fact once he brought a large dog to a meeting with angela merkel because she knew she was afraid of him. >> how did she take that. >> not well. >> i hadn't heard the dog story had you. >> i had, yeah it's a great story. >> it's a good one. and dogs scare a lot of people. no shame in that. phillip take a listen to the president here on foreign soil talking about the free press. >> yeah. >> because many presidents in both parties talk about this in broad, nonpartisan terms, that the first amendment is something that affords more freedom not only to reporters but citizens of all stripes than we see in many other countries. but the president today didn't
hit that note. instead turned it into more of a time for media criticism, saying we should have a fair press. they didn't say anything about the fair press in the founding documents they just said first amendment rights protected. >> they have been fake news for a long time. they've been covering me in a very -- very dishonest way. do you have that also by the way, mr. president? which cnn and others -- there is nbc is equally as bad. despite the fact that i made them a fortune with the apprentice but they forgot that. what we want to see in the united states is honest, beautiful, free, but honest fres. we want fair press. i think it's important. we don't want fake news. >> phillip.
>> yeah i mean that was just striking for him to make those sorts of comments on foreign soil to be attacking an american institution that the free press here he should be proud of and prompting especially in poland when he is standing to face-to-face with the president of a country who has very restrictive policies when it comes to the press in poland. and he did not really you know call for democracy or free press in that country. and indeed was out there you know really -- really taking -- taking a bat to the american free press. >> kristin, what do you think of it. >> well i think a lot of people were -- as phillip is saying, struck by the fact that he didn't use that opportunity to criticize the crackdown that we have seen to some extent in poland and that he also took aim at his predecessor on foreign soil. it's something that certainly breaks with tradition i think.
and so i think that that was striking. and sends quit a signal as he goes into the other meetings. today he met with the german chancellor. according to the readout from the white house, the official readout they talked about topics on which they share common ground. but as we've been reporting there is a whole range on topics on which they disagree. for example the paris climate agreement. she was unfeweriated when he pulled out of the agreement. that's an area she closely aligns with president obama. that undercuts president trump as he heads into other meetings which is thornier be within difficult where he has vast disagreement. >> that's the foreign side. as home what are you hearing from white house aides about their confidence in the president's ability to stick the landing in this putin meeting tomorrow. >> right it's a great question. i think there is some division. remember h.r. mcmaster said there is no agenda yet. so a lot of question marks. i've been pressing officials inside and outside of the white house about what they make of that, the fact that there is no stated agenda.
i have been told that they take h.r. mcmaster at his word there is no clear agenda. and so that raises a alarm bell was some. but others say look this is a president clearly fudge to raise the issues wove been discussing like syria and ukraine. >> we could take him at his word jonathan if you take him a ht his word from a u.s. national security perspective that would be concerning because when you have the u.s. intelligence agency saying this is a foreign adversary that intervened in elections that would seem to be number one item on the agenda. >> it is and very striking today that the president refused to commit to the idea that he would confront vladimir putin about this. he has time and time against cast doubt on the intelligence agency's conclusion that is russia meddled with the election. it's very clear that his mind suggesting that russia had anything to do with any interference in the election sort of minimizes or delegitimizes his own victory.
he is already insecure because he lost the popular vote. we already know it's something he obsessed about did. he has the map of the electoral college hung up in the white house. and oh suggest that russia played any part in this in his mind makes perhaps he would think others peel he is less of a president. >> the first step to insecurity is to confront it and find love for yourself. that's deeper than we want to go. but well-known truism. kristin welker abjonathan le mere and phillip rucker thank you for joining us. coming up six people expected in the room as we were mentioning when trump and putin meet. this is the first time. we're looking at the politics, the persuasion and problems that could arise when "the 11th hour" continues.
she is saying russia, russia, russia. maybe it was. it could be russia. but it could be china. could be sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds. i notice any time anything wrong happens they like to see the russian. they she doesn't know it's the russian. maybe there is no hacking. you can talk all you want about russia which was all a fake news abry indicated deals to make up for the loss of the democrats and press plays into it. if you don't catch a hacker, okay in the act, it's very hard to say who did the hacking. with that being said i'll go along with russia. could have been china. >> this russia thing with trump and russia is a madeup story, an excuse by the democrats for having lost. >> several of the times preand post-election that donald trump had difficulty saying that russia meddled in the u.s. election. today in poland is happen against.
multiple warnings from the intelligence community but trump said nobody knows for sure. all eyes turn to the meeting with putin tomorrow. and of course it will be the small group, something putin prefers. secretary of state tillerson, sergey lavrov be the counterpart. the back drop to the meeting watt home the new poll finds 54% of americans nink trump acted illegal or unethically with regard to russia issues. a former dpomt in the obama administration, and an russia. expertise in the national security council. and our congressional reporter for npr. starting with you, angela, when you look at a meeting like this, how do both sides decide what are the deliverable ares or results you can get out of what is ultimately an exchange of words. >> so both of the presidents wanted to come out of this looking as if they're winners. president putin wants to come out and tell his population that
he was respected by the u.s. president. i think the same would be true for donald trump. and you've had the huge buildup since the u.s. election campaign where are president trump praised vladimir putin and vice versa. this is the fourth president that ut putin has dealt with. he was trained as a kgb case officers and has been prepping hard for it process. i don't know if he needs any real deliverable. i don't know if there is a deal to be made. he wants to come out with the u.s. president saying this is a man i can work with and we're going to try and work together and fighting terrorism, working together in syria, working on north korea, possibly working together on other areas too. maybe ukraine. and i think president trump, again has to come out of this and say that he had a good meeting with mr. putin, that they're going to work together and he certainly -- there is absolutely nothing in it for him to mention that hacking because
as just was said before this costs doubt on the legislate macy of his own election. >> you mentioned he is kgb that comes up a lot with a citizen sister undertone without drawing more parallels between the two countries russians would point out well george bush senior was cia before president. what are you getting that when you say that? >> what i mean is if you read his auto buyingography when he was a learned how to work with people, work in teams. so he has had long experience as a case officers of recruiting people, figuring out strengths and weaknesses. don't forget he is a master judo pleaers. he has been doing that for a long time. yes george bush was the head of the cia a few years. but he didn't come up as ray operations officers aba case officer. this does give putin a unique
perspective how you deal with individuals and what how you figure out what the weaknesses are, know how to flatter them. again i'm sure he is well prepared for this. i think donald trump is also used to figuring out people's strengths and weaknesses. just think about the debates. you know during the campaign. but it's a different kind of training and he comes from a different background. >> rick? >> you want me to react to that. by the way one thing i would object to is that while trump has praised putin, putin has not praised trump. it's a one-sided bromance the. >> putin said -- colorful was the word he used. putin has been doing this over and over. he's been dealing with american presidents, world leaders. trump is new at this. and putin knows how to manipulate people. i spent three hours with putin in 2007 when he was person of
the year of time. he is -- he is master of every fact. he is absolutely positive and certain of what he is saying. he has a particular issue that he wants to get on with you when he is talking to you. and he will bring up all the grievances. try to put you on the defensive. and basically trump has never been in a meeting like this before. >> was putin happy about being person of the year. >> i talked to kissinger before hand and he says you will be surprised what little effort he makes to charm you. he makes no effort in a human interaction. it's like cold air coming across him. even pretending to be pleased he is just acting. >> an aura. >> he seemed utterly indifferent. he got perturbed at us by certain mistakes. we got the year he was born wrong and almost blew up the
whole interview. he is pretty testimony pest use and but keeps it under control. >> jeff you're not a tempestuous you're a measured roert but keeping an eye on the politics which is although republicans and democrats have obviously hit different tones. it is the one issue, the only issue where we've seen a measurable vote of alliance against the trump administration on the russia sanctions. what are the politics you see in the meeting and any vulnerabilities for the president. >> the sanctions bill you referenced is held up in the house. you're right. republicans writ large have decided that russia's interference in the 2016 election was a real problem and the sanctions bill what it does is it limits the white house's ability to uni laterally lifts sanctions on russia. speaking of the politics, the poll you mentioned .poll that finds the russia question is a partisan question. if you dig into the numbers you find that 73% of the republicans say that donald trump did nothing wrong as it relates to russia's interference in the 2016 election whereas just 13% of democrats say the have very same thing. what that suggests is that in the short-term the president is not pay ago political price for this decidedly naive public response for what was an nefarious russian act.
and whether or not he really believes that russia played a role in the election or not, it's true that the white house has done little -- or next to nothing to stop it from happening again. we know from comey's testimony that the president didn't weigh in on this question of how to prevent a future cyberattack. with he know the attorney general jeff sessions was never briefed in a classified session about it. >> but jeff -- i see you -- i see your poll and i raise you your poll. when you look at the independents there to your point, huge partisan breakdown, of whether something illegal took place. but, rick 27% of independents far more than republicans kr concerned about illegallity. >> the news media has been doing a terrific job in trying to expose what's going on. i think people -- the drum beat of revelations and the fact that he can't cop to it. the thing i find so disturbing is he can't make a distinction between interference and influence. it's one thing to say, yes they interfered but had no influence. they -- he seems to think that interference means they somehow tipped the election that makes him defensive. he can't put them in the separate categories. and jeff said yeah they interfered but didn't influence. >> i think that's well put. in a legal context you think i think people -- the drum beat of revelations and the fact that he can't cop to it.
the thing i find so disturbing is he can't make a distinction between interference and influence. it's one thing to say, yes they interfered but had no influence. they -- he seems to think that interference means they somehow tipped the election that makes him defensive. he can't put them in the separate categories. and jeff said yeah they interfered but didn't influence. >> i think that's well put. in a legal context you think about attempted beleaguer the the former is a crime it doesn't mean your home was invaded that's a separate question. if the underlying event here is the -- as you know from covering so many of these -- the macrofactors that go into any
will you once and for all yes or no definitelyively say that russia interfered in the 2016 election. >> we i think it was russia. and i think it could have been other people in other countries. it could have been a lot of people interfered. nobody really knows. nobody really knows for sure. >> nobody really knows for sure.
well it fends on who you're talking about. as nbc reported while the president continues to cast down that russia interfered in the 2016 election, our own intelligence agencies have said otherwise. that is what is known. then there is the question of what to do about it. democratic congressman from the state of california, ted li the u and you believe donald trump is right about something. what is that. >> hindsight is 2020. but the president's statement was accurate that obama should have done more. and i believe that the obama administration should have notified the american public that russia was hacking our election last year. and i wish that that had happened. >> what about what they said in october? >> well, the obama
administration i thought did not do enough to really let the american public know the gravity of what russia was doing. they didn't just hack the dnc. they hacked multiple american institutions. also hacked the electoral boards of several states. this was a massive operation and the american public certainly should have been warned about it in a much more aggressive manner. >> at the time did you expect hillary clinton to win the election? >> absolutely i did, yes. >> donald trump says that the obama administration had that same expectation and that factored into their thinking. which you're saying was inadequate. do you agree with that part of his assessment? >> it's hard to tell exactly what all the factors were that the president considered. but be again hindsight is 20/20. i think many people would grew
agree that having it disclosed after the election was clearly not as important as having it disclosed prior to the election. >> what do you want to see out of the meeting tomorrow. >> well i don't want president trump to repeat the same mistake. he needs to absolutely confront vladimir putin about the massive russian cyberattack on america last year. if he doesn't raise this issues it a sign of weakness. it's showing trump is scared to confront putin about this issue and that will be unacceptable. >> well, congressman isn't that the the most bizarre part of this. donald trump is not the first politician to offer an ill logical appear ache on the same day he is saying obama didn't do enough when less was known. he is not sure he is doing anything even now that so much is known about it. >> you're asking me to defended rationality of donald trump i'm not doing that at this point. what i'm going to say is he needs to bring the issue of russian cyberhacking. and if he doesn't it only incentivizing them to do it again. >> appreciaty your candor not afraid to point out when you think the president landed or stumbled and not afraid to from press what you think is the right approach. >> coming up the man running the
federaleth ethics in washington, in charge of all that, all the rules has as you may not have heard today. resigned. this is six months early. we're explaining why, what he says about the trump administration making ethics in his job more difficult. straight ahead. unbeatable protection helps prevent early skin aging and skin cancer with a clean feel. the best for your skin. ultra sheer®. neutrogena®.
typically he advises the white house how to avoid egg iks news appear haven't vets appointees and tackles obscure questions whether a gift is basically considered a harmless token or to be a regulated gift. in the trump administration the director suddenly found his job was a lot higher profile. in fact he said he felt torg public. after trump officials sidelined the core of hiswork. he gave a public speech and even tried sarcastic tweets as a rebuttal to trump's refusal to divest from companies. this man is leaving six months early -- i should say six month early. he is explaining thinking here. this is in a new interview with cbs news. >> the think the president and family are using the office to enrich themselves. >> i can't know what their intention is. i know that the effect is that there is an appearance that the businesses are profiting from his occupying the presidency.
and appearance matters as much as reality. >> but at this point it sounds like you're saying you can't be sure. >> you can't be sure. and so it almost doesn't matter whether they are profiting or not. america had should have the right to know what the motivations of are. >> richard painter chief white house ethics lawyers as well as matt miller a form aide to attorney general holder. s richard his work his job and the significance of in departure. >> he is an excellent ethics lawyers i worked with him closely when i was the ethics lawyer for president bush appear and he is very effective, understands the ethics laws, he is not partisan at all.
and it's really too bad to lose him. i'm surprised he lasted as long as he did. he served six months of this administration. i think he deserves six months of combat pay. it's been a very, very difficult six months. i've been a republican for 30 years. i served in the bush administration. i've seen a lot of administrations come and go in washington. and there is a whole new titide in time around toward personal conflicts of interest and also toward the freedom of the press and other fundamental values we hold deer in this country. when you have the president just this week threatening to derail the att -- dsh the time warner deal because he doesn't like the presses knch o kwonch from krn krn that is exactly the type of thing that needs to be reined in and the office of government
ethics has a critical role in dealing with conflicts of interest. but if the administration doesn't want to take ethics seriously it's a very difficult job for wamter and others in his position. i'm not surprised to see him go. >> you negligenced that i want to get to that i'm glad you brought up the issue around the merger. but before we do. we talked about the approach to ethics by the white house. he o i consulted you for your expertise about this at the time process we put in a freedom of information request to look into his dealings with the in white house. and which could be boring. but instead this is what we found a message of him hitting the panic button emailing eye i'm not sure whether you're aware that announcing this cabinet without coordinating with the office of ethics is unprecedented appear creates unnecessary risk and creates unnecessary risk. we have no reliable lienls of kmings with the transition team. a circumstance unprecedented. explain that. it sounds like his view is he was trying to help the incoming administration and they didn't want to return his calls about
ethics. >> well, absolutely. that was his job to help this administration and he did. he reached out to them. and the procedure we followed in the bush administration was that we worked with the office of government ethics to go through financial holdings of potential nominees, two cabinet positions and other positions, to fill out financial disclosure forms. tell them what assets they had to sell to comply with the ethics laws. all that was done before the nominee was announced. this administration chose instead to announce nominees and ebb then tell the government ekt iks afterwards they wanted paperwork jammed through even
though there were serious conflicts of interest. they wanted it rushed up through the senate. s that's not the way it's done. we had several people drop out because they ooifrd conflicts of interest later in the game. and we would have caught those earlier in in the game in the bush administration because we worked with the office of government ethics instead of trying to work around the rules. >> matt miller everyone understands what walter is saying he can't do anything more and doesn't want to sit around and be window dressing. the flip side which you know about from doj is, does it reward the white house's approach to these issues when people respond to their approach, stonewalling or being iced out by throwing up hands and leaving because now the president gets his type of ethics person in six months earlier. >> if he does replace them which he may not he may leave an acting person a weekend career person which has a similar effect. i think he was resigning somewhat in protest. what he was trying to do was draw attention to this. one of the problems that his tenure has shone and the donald trump conditionedcy revealed and now his presidency revealed is how limited our laws are in being able to police the president's behavior.
donald trump -- oount you know a lot of rules and norms and precedence that apply to presidents and governored presidents in the past are just norms and not regulations. he as he said he doesn't have to follow some of the rules as of cabinet officials. previous presidents release the tax returns andy vested their assets. something donald trump refused to do. what schwab is doing is drawing attention to the flaws in our system trump has pointed out. maybe one of the aftermaths at the end of the trump presidency is hopefully there is finally a look at ethics in government and what we need to to do to tighten the loop holes. >> you make an important point. there was nothing legally stopping george w. bush from running of an oil business while president. he just chose not to. this is the first time we've seen someone want to do business
out of the white house. last thing what matt miller reading from "the new york times" report white house advisers discussed a potential point of leverage over the adversary. a senior administration official said a pending merge earn between cnn parent company time warner and at&t buried in the article that seems significant, matt. >> it's absolutely significant. if this is true it's not just an abuse of power by the white house, it's potentially a criminal act. where you have a officials threatening to take an official action in exchange for a thing of value. presumably better press coverage out of cnn. it's has a prr are parallel in
watergate where the deputy was ordered by nixon to drop an antitrust investigation which is what the review into the at&t time warner merger was. . there are big questions for the justice department when whether they've been contacted about this. if it's just an aide mouthing off it's one thing. if the white house has contacted the department of justice and urged them to do something with respect to this review, it's something much much more serious. >> yeah, i don't care if it's cnn, fox news headline news, the notion the misuse of government resources to effect, chill or bully the free press is extraordinary. we need to get more to the bottom of what that aide was suggesting as you say. thank you both. >> thank you. >> coming up from deep red to deep blue, the one trump administration ask that is uniting states from coast to coast. we'll be right back.
we don't need to sacrifice the privacy and the security, the sangtty of elections by putting all this information in the hands of an administration, katy, that yourself as news media has reported has a little trouble keeping things confidential. >> that is kentucky secretary of state explaining why they did will not hand over data to the commission put together by the white house thepts birthdays voter history, the the last four digits of your social security numbers and more. in fact according to the brenden center for justice 27 states either said no to the commissioner put some some conditions on what data will they hand over.
another 16 say they will not provide frgs only information not protected unthe laws. . president of the center for justice be the nyu rmt center for justice. he wrote this piece. on the voter commission. also gild an daniels who serve in the lgtd kmrgs. she is now assist brofser of university of baltimore law school. starting with you gilda, there is all the discussion about the daft which is superimportant. but i wonder whether we should begin with the original sin, which is this is taxpayer dollars and government resources that the president has said will be devoted to pursuing what can only be described as a baseless, discredited conspiracy theory, that 3 million plus people illegally voted and no one saw them. the largest unknown conspiracy -- invisible conspiracy in the history of the world. >> right.
ari you are absolutely right. this is delusional. we are chasing after the delusional tweet he made and trying to use taxpayer dollars to do so. and this is a complete fares. it's a complete it's a complete sham. the secretaries of state are correct that they don't need to turn over this private information to this administration who's only using this information to arrive at a already decided upon conclusion. if it really wants to look at elections, why don't they look at expanding the voter base as opposed to trying to restrict it which is what they plan to do by trying to display there is voter conduct which there is not. >> like justice brennan, you are also a pragmatist. you worked in the white house for clinton, but also doing all
this voting rights stuff. how do you reconcile the idealism and pragmatism in all of this. the data is in the weeds if the whole thing is illegitimate. >> there are problems with the voting system in the ways in which the rolls are a mess and which are likely to be exploited by this commission for misbegotten purposes. this is not just donald trump's ego not being able to handle having lost to the popular vote. it's used to set the stage to make it harder for a lot of people to vote. the driving force behind the commission is the kansas secretary of state, chris covac, he's been the johnny apple seed of these laws, going around the country drafting them for other states. ironically one of the states where you cannot legally give out the social security number is kansas. and secretary of state collette had to form his own commission that he was barred by law from doing it.
>> that moment, gilda, i don't know if you saw the movie "higher learning," but there's where the officer puts the flashlight and says let me see your i.d., and he said let me see your i.d., and he has his own flashlight. he turns around and realizes, no, we can't give it up because of our own rules. what is going on on this commission? >> what's going on is that, again, this is a completely illegitimate commission. it has no purpose. it has no usefulness. its only purpose is to try to create the illusion that what the president tweeted out months ago that it's correct. it's completely incorrect, a complete waste of our tax money. and it should not go forward. >> michael, let me read from the "washington post" on the data piece. the staff will download these
files under white house computers. an employee in vice president mike pence's office will collect and store any data. do you see any problems there? >> well, former homeland security secretary chertoff, a republican, said that there was a huge security risk here to ask all of our millions of personal files to be all sent ironically enough through unsecure e-mail. and they're going to take this and try to compare all the files and show that this imaginary conspiracy is really real. there is a silver lining here. the response to this from not only democrat, but republican officials, is really new, and really powerful. they understand that there's something wrong here. you've started to see with the extremism of how trump has handled this issue claiming the election is rigged and all that sort of thing, you start to see
a lot of people say, no, really, there is not this kind of voter fraud. maybe that creates a new break point so we can actually get some of the positive voting changes we need without suppressing the vote. >> as the saying goes, facts, it's what's for dinner. appreciate both of your time tonight. >> thank you. now, coming up, there is a new admission from a republican governor, and i will give you a personal update of my own right after this break. "the 11th hour" continues.
they have been fake news for a long time. they've been covering me in a very -- a very dishonest way. do you have that also, by the way, mr. president? what we want to see in the united states is honest, beautiful, free, but honest press. we want to see fair press. i think it's a very important thing. we don't want fake news. by the way, not everybody is fake news. but we don't want fake news. very bad for our country. >> not everybody is fake news. that was president trump on his topic there, fake news earlier today, the joint press conference was with the polish president. he was not the only republican to express disdain for the press today. paul lepage calling the media for an out-of-state vacation during a government shutdown and ongoing budget negotiations. something lepage's office said itself is fake news.
here he is today. >> they are so, so vial, and inaccurate, and i tell you, i just love to sit in my office and make up ways so they'll write these stupid stories. i mean, they're just so stupid, it's awful. i'm sorry, but i'll tell you, the sooner the print press goes away the better the society will be. >> that is a sitting u.s. governor today saying all print press, the stuff you read should go away. not the first time he's taken on the media. he told middle school students said reading newspapers in the state of maine is like paying someone to tell you lies. he's forgetting most people are reading the paper online without paying for it. i want to thank you for joining us. i want to tell you, you can always find me at facebook.com/ari arimelber. tune in for more details to come. good night from new york.
as a g-20 some met gets under way, german authorities have used water cannons to try and disperse the crowds. and president trump will meet face to face with vladimir putin, and what will he say behind closed doors? members of congress taking heat over how mitch mcconnell down plays the prospects of passing a bill as protests take place across the country.