tv Deadline White House MSNBC September 12, 2017 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT
course we're trying to get fema aid down here, it's a challenge but it is under way. what we do know, the governor did speak to the president. he mentioned on the air last night that the president told him he's looking forward to try to put together a visit some time in the next week or so. >> ron, we look forward to your reporting from there to let us know exactly how help is coming to the u.s. virgin islands. ron mott for us on his way now, about 45 minutes from st. thomas in the u.s. virgin islands. that brings this busy hour to a close. i'll see you back here at 11 eastern with stephanie rule. thank you for watching. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00. the trump campaign has begun turning over documents to bob mueller's special council investigators. according to one of the president's lawyers it's going swimmingly. quote, jones day has a wonderful team handling the production, according to john dowd, one of those lawyers quoted in the "daily beast" today. also making headlines, jared and
his russia baggage were viewed as unsustainable according to reporting from "the wall street journal." quote, some of donald trump's lawyers concluded that jared kushner should step down as senior westinghouhite house adv aired concerns about him to the president, people with the matter familiar said. from the firing of jim comey to the undisclosed kiss clee yalyas and all the unanswered questions about financial possible entanglements between trump and kushner's businesses and russian money. to our reporters covering all of this, kristen welker at the white house, julie pace joins
us, mark leibovitz and juan barate. julie, a lawyer described this as a bloodness entity, suggesting there aren't a lot of human beings left associated with the campaign. talk about the significance of this document production from campaign e-mail accounts is what i understand it to be. >> right. look, it shows that bob mueller continues with this investigation of pace. he has running a broad investigation. it touches on people who are currently in the white house. it is certainly going to start looking into people who were on the campaign but didn't end up in the white house. really, the significance of him getting documents from the campaign goes back to just the heart of what happened during the 2016 election. we've spun off so many stories
about james comey, about what's happened with the drafting of statements about don jr., but really the heart of this investigation is what happened during the 2016 election. were there any contacts between the trump campaign and russian persons, russian entities that were suspicious. and that is why the campaign documents are significant, because if there is some type of evidence that the campaign was in touch with russia, you would presume that you would find some potential links in those documents that the campaign is now starting to hand over. >> julie, you made a really important point and i think you're right. we conflate two things. we know that the special council is looking into two distinct sort of mountains of evidence. one is this original sin, this question of whether or not there was collusion or coordination between the trump campaign and russia. we also now know that he's interested in potential obstruction of justice, that in the process of investigating russia's role did the white house make statements that were
not true. this is the classic questions about the coverup, were crimes committed while covering up anything involved in the original investigation or the original sin. it seems to me that this campaign request and the production of documents is around that first bucket of questions, around the original question of russian intervention or russian assistance or russian involvement, russians putting their fingers on the scale, whatever you want to call it. the bromance is what hillary clinton calls it in her new book out today, between vladimir putin and donald trump's campaign. >> absolutely. i think it's important to keep an eye on that bucket. there have been so many things, as i said, the firing of comey, the revelations about the drafting of don jr.'s statements that have occurred since trump took office. mike flynn and his dealings during the transition, certainly those are important. certainly mueller is going to be intensely focused on those developments. but at the heart of this, this is an investigation into
potential collusion between a presidential campaign and russia. it sometimes can feel like we get numb to what that really means, if there was something there, if there was potential collusion, the impact of that on our political system, our democracy, is really monumental. while it can be sexy to turn onto some of these other things that trump has done since taking office, that really is the heart of this investigation. >> kristen welker, there's an expression in politics that a hit dog barks. sarah huckabee sanders with a very aggressive pushback today and really i think trying to get herself on the offense against jim comey in the briefing. >> that's right. she was asked again, nicolle, about steve bannon's comments in which he called the firing of comey the biggest mistake in political history. yesterday she dispute that characterization, said the president stands by his
decision. she doubled down on that today. take a listen. >> everybody knows exactly where the president stands on that issue. the president is proud of the decision that he made. the president was 100% right in firing james comey. he knew at the time that it could be bad for him politically, but he also knew and felt he had an obligation to do what was right and do what was right for the american people and certainly the men and women at the fbi. i think there's no secret, comey by his own self-admission, leaked privileged government information weeks before president trump fired him comey testified if an fbi agent did the same, he would face repercussions. comey leaked memos to "the new york times," politicized on investigation by signaling he would exonerate hillary clinton before he ever interviewed her or other key witnesses. he's very happy with the decision he made and i think he's been fully vindicated by a lot of those things and knowing
that it was the right one. >> that sounded a little bit like a very aggressive, very well planned strategy to punch comey today. >> right. you could see she was reading from some notes there. this was clearly a prepared statement. our colleague followed up with some of what she said when she said some of his actions may have in fact been illegal. holly asked her does that mean that the justice department should look into prosecuting comey and she said that is something that the justice department should look into. it's not something that the president would directly weigh in on. really amped up some of her rhetoric in that regard, nicolle, and i think it speaks to the conversation you were just having with julie. the fact that this is not only getting under the skin of this president but it is becoming increasingly a political problem for this administration and they're punching back. >> eli stokeles has a great term about presidential tells and one of them is that when the russia probe gets close to family donald trump -- i'm paraphrasing
eli here -- loses his mind a little bit. what do we know about the white house posture on this reporting? i personally heard from white house sources who push back aggressively on the idea that jared kushner would be asked to relinquish any of his various responsibilities at the white house, but what are you hearing about "the wall street journal" reporting that's been matched by "the washington post" about lawyers defending the president worried about kushner's role or potential involvement in the russia investigation? >> based on my reporting, my sense of it is that there were probably some conversations that resolved around that. john dowd didn't dispute that but pushed back vigorously against this notion that any of that discussion made its way to the president. ty cobb pushed back against that. i spoke with him overnight. he said the bottom line is this is a narrative that's being pushed by jared kushner's enemies, some of them who used to work in the white house. you heard sarah huckabee sanders
take that same stance today to defend and dig in. remember, he's someone who's been referred to as the secretary of everything. he continues to really be engaged in everything from middle east peace to some of the inner workings here at the white house to trying to make sure that operations are streamlined here at the white house. so you're seeing the administration, the president on down, really rally behind him in the wake of these new reports that we're getting. >> i know you have other responsibilities. thank you so much for spending a little bit of time this hour. mark, let me bring this to you. you see the president getting behind jared kushner but if not jared kushner and ivanka, then who else? sort of an obvious person for the president to display his loyalty towards. >> well yeah. it's unclear if he is disemploying displayin displaying -- it sounds like the people leaking the stuff about the lawyers suggesting that jared kushner leaf the white house probably -- if you want to be kremlinologist about this,
this is coming from the bannon camp, another in the longer chapter of bannon v kushner playing out for many months now going back to when bannon was in the white house. again, it is unclear -- i was listening to sarah sanders' comments earlier and they really did throw the kitchen sink at comey before. the question is, are they protecting jared kushner because apparently bannon was suggesting that maybe kushner was behind the firing. it's all very strange. it also sort of brings the story back to these very convoluted questions of why they fired him in the first place. >> bannon goes on 60 minutes in a barely veiled swipe at jared kushner tells charlie rose he should ask a lot of questions about jared's role in the firing of jim comey which he describes in hyperbolic terms even for the
most hyperbolic and overrated political strategist today that it was the biggest mistake in modern political history to fire jim comey, and then today there's a story or last night there's a story saying that he should have gone. i mean, this seems like someone who wants to take out all of the competition now that he's out too. >> yeah. if you read the tea leaves today coming out of the white house it would seem to me that the president was probably irked by a lot of things in this bannon interview with 60 minutes. in part because it was reasserting bannon's role as a mastermind. obviously that interview got a great deal of attention. it was quoted up and down for several days. probably stuck in the craw of the president because he really is very sensitive to any notion that bannon is some kind of king maker. secondly, he actually made some charges. the comey charge, the implication about kushner's role here. and it would seem at least from the communications coming out of
the white house today that there is a level of defensiveness if not aggressiveness coming from the president himself about some of the news that came out of that bannon interview. >> juan, let me bring you in on this. we've had some conversations off tv about sort of how russia roles. one of the things they do, they deploy everything at their disposal. mark warner suggesting that facebook and twitter may have to come before congress and testify to their role in spreading fake information or bad information about hillary clinton. axe yoes reporting that russia stole the u.s. presidency. >> this is russia's best case scenario. it's a vicious cycle for us of information operations. they can put out innuendo, statements like this, and now we've got to circle around everything they say. as you say, nicolle, they are masters of the world of hybrid warfare. they use information warfare, cyber attacks, little green men in the ukraine as well as
traditional means of influence to try to affect what's happening in other countries, to include the united states. we've seen that in traditional ways with old media like r.t., russia today, all very kind of conventional ways of influencing. we've seen it with their funding of political campaigns and parties in europe. we've seen this in the world of social media which is why facebook and twitter are now in the cross hairs. the question of whether or not russia's driving nonstate spammers and trollers to actually influence what's happening in places like the united states. it's a brave new world of social media and the russians have figured out how to harness it in order at least to confuse us -- >> i know you have a close relationship with the current cia director. does donald trump's posture on russia where he's reluctant to say anything critical about vladimir putin, reluctantly signed those sanctions. he refuses to in a clean way acknowledge their role in the
2016 election. does that impede or make more difficult the job of our intelligence agencies in stopping this effort, this concerted campaign from russia? >> i don't think that it necessarily has a material impact. >> do you think pompeo has to lie to trump about how aggressive he's being, seriously? >> i don't know what those conversations are like but i don't think there's any lying going on. >> you think pompeo tells him everything he's doing to respond in coinkind? >> pompeo has been very open about this. >> he said to brett stevens, oh, russia always does this. they don't always do this. this was a ramped up and concerted run at hillary clinton. >> it was ramped up. i think what the cia director and others in the intel community are trying to do is not only assess what's been done but what they're planning on doing. i think you've seen elements of pushback against the russians, what they've done in syria to push back and even to put russian aircraft and troops at risk. you've seen a pushback on the energy front in the polish
speech. so there have been places where you've seen glimmers of where that intelligence community view the classic national security view has sort of seeped into the president's rhetoric and policy. agreed, the president hasn't come out with a full throated confrontational policy with respect to russia but a lot of his advisers actually are there. >> julie, this brings me back to where you started me. donald trump has not come out with a full throated posture against a known adversary, vladimir putin. why? >> that's the million dollar question here. he's done the opposite of that. he keeps flirting with this pros tekt of a close relationship with putin where the u.s. and russia could be partners. that prospect of being partners with russia isn't one that's inherently bizarre for a united states government to talk about but it's the fact that trump seems to be willing to overlook so much in order to get to that type of partnership that has a lot of people concerned. obama talked about trying to
partner with moscow where the u.s. could, certainly in syria it's an area where the u.s. feels like if they could get on the same page with russia there could be progress there. but it's the fact that trump seems willing to overlook what russia did in the election, what russia did in the ukraine with crimea that has people wondering why he's willing to do that. it's a question that so far has been unanswerable although there are plenty of theories. >> mark, let me put you on the spot for your theory. >> my theory on what exactly? >> just on this sort of -- juan talked about how donald trump's foreign policy advisers who are the very people -- the very kinds of people that steve bannon really rebuked in his interview with 60 minutes, people who are aligned with the kinds of thinking of condi rice and bob gates, the kinds of people that have been installed in his national security establishment. but they're the kinds of people who know full well that russia and vladimir putin is an american adversary, yet we still see the president pause and
stumble and sort of fall over himself to be kind to putin. >> yeah, no. i mean this is again a huge question. i think you can answer it in two ways. one, is this just another case of the president being extremely stubborn and being loathe to admit any kind of -- for a second admit that his great victory was somehow compromised by something beyond the scope of what a u.s. election is. so there's that. and on the other hand, the more nefarious reading is that the russians have something on him, that he has a private arrangement with russia, whether it's putin or his associates, that is obviously the source of a major investigation going on right now and maybe this is the upshot of that. so again, this is something that a great many resort are being devoted to finding out, but i think it would somewhere probably go between those two instincts of the president. it is bizarre to this point that
he hasn't given an inch. >> julie and mark, thank you so much for starting us off. juan is staying put for the hour. when we come back, don't poke the bear or he'll tweet at you. two powerful women out with books about the 2016 presidential campaign today. the president of the united states tweeting against, quote, people writing books early this morning. we'll dig into hillary clinton's account of the trump/putin bromance. also ahead, it's rage, disgust, hatred. it's when a woman gets a job that a man wanted and instead of shaking her hand and wishing her well, he calls her a bitch and vows to do everything he can to make sure she fails. that's hillary clinton writing about misogyny in her new book and we will go there after the break. slept...
they save us from gettingones? lost, getting hungry, and getting tired of places like this. phones changed everything - shouldn't the way pay for them change too? introducing xfinity mobile. where you can pay for data by the gig, and share it across all of your lines. no one else lets you do that. see how much you can save when you pay by the gig. xfinity mobile. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com.
there's mounting anxiety in the west wing as bob mueller's investigation rolls on. axe yoes reporting that, quote, republicans close to the white house say every sign by mueller from his hiring of mafia and money laundering experts to his aggressive pursuit of witnesses and evidence is that he's going for the kill. time to bring in our panel. joining januauan and me at the table, jen, former communications director of the clinton campaign, megan murphy and dave hoppy, former chief of staff to house speaker paul ryan. let me start with you and just this idea of bob mueller's investigation -- i hate the term closing in but focusing in at
least. there was a list of six white house aides who he was interested in talking to and i wonder from your sources on the hill where you think that probe is and whether this question of loyalty which we know is on donald trump's mind all the time in dealing with members of congress and dealing with his own staff, how do you think that plays into who has the most exposure in this investigation? >> the people on the hill i think are happy to let director mueller do his investigation. he's a person who doesn't have to prove anything about himself. some previous special counsels have had to prove their worth. >> like who? >> you look at what went on sometimes in the '90s and -- they were proving they could get to something. scooter libby, what we had is the guy who was going after the guy who leaked it. two weeks later we knew who leaked it, everybody did and he said it. >> scooter libby was my colleague but he did per jer himself. >> once again, what was the
problem? the problem was that this name of this woman was let go and made public. who did it, that's what we're after. mueller doesn't have to worry about that. this is a man who is accomplished and seriously accomplished things in his life. so i presume and the people on the hill think this is a man who will do the job he needs to do, go find the background information, take it wherever it leads him and give us a response. the hill is very confident that he will do that job. >> one of donald trump's lawyers today described bob mueller as a truth seeker, not on the record but even in private not a lot of questions about bob mueller's integrity. >> that's right. that's the feeling on the hill. everybody is confident he will do the job. >> i think that's right. what you have to keep in mind too, bob mueller is aggressive and he's going to be looking not just for the tale of the tape in terms of the campaign but he's also looking for questions of influence. remember, he's the former fbi director. the fbi is responsible for counter intelligence. there is a concern about what russia has been doing to not only try to influence the last
election did you teo they have influence over the current president. alludes to the questions you've been posing to us, nicolle. you have to keep that in mind that the aggressiveness and the posture of the investigation is not just around the dos and don'ts of the actual political campaign but is there influence around what the russians have been doing, is there compromise over the president. he's fixated on that and that's why there's the money laundering dimensions of the investigation which are under way as well. >> you look at all these things but we have to be careful we don't get too far ahead of bob mueller. let him do his job. >> here's what we know -- jen, let's get in the weeds because our viewers are smart and they're following this. to your point, there's evidence that bob mueller is looking at the period of time from when sally yates went to the white house council and said mike flynn may be compromised -- what's the russia word? >> compromate.
>> and you have him sitting there as an acting national security adviser. we know based on the people that he's asked to talk to that he's looking at that period of time. >> there's that period of time which i think was 11 days from when they knew that to when he was actually fired. then there's his decision to fire comey. and then there's what happened in the campaign and then there is all of the financial information. i think all of the -- when you consider -- when you step back to consider all of that, it's an overwhelming amount of work to be done but moreover damaging evidence that's likely to be there. and it feels to me like something's about to happen, right? all of a sudden having worked in the white house before, when people start -- someone's outing kushner. sarah had her very well scripted remarks about comey today. i feel like something is getting ready to happen that the white house is trying to manage on the front. >> let me ask you about one other bucket.
the list on friday included people whose connection to the investigation is in the alleged coverup, the story that was told about that meeting between donald trump jr., jared kushner, paul manafort, and russians who promised dirt on hillary clinton. john heilman said on this show collusion took place. it's not necessarily illegal to have colluded with the russians but the occasion for collusion is known. >> that's what bob mueller can really be focused on, what was promised, what actually happened in that meeting. are the stories that we know that have changed so many times actually true. getting and staying in the weeds when we look at that period of time, when we closer examine that period of time, more people knew about this, more people knew about the shifting stories, what was the vice-president level of involvement and knowledge. these are all the questions that he's going to be tremendously focused on. collusion in the sense that, yes, we know what was promised in that meeting and what was given. what did they act on, what phone calls were made, what e-mails were out there. we saw the e-mails that are
public knowledge. if that's what was being discussed, what is out there that we don't know about. you're right, i don't want to get ahead of this either but people are lawyered up, mouths are tightening and the hill wants to know. >> those who advocated for transparency are making it clear where they stand tochlt your point, the tells inside an investigation. i worked in the white house under the investigation of the leaking of valerie plame's name and enron. when we come back, the obama administration knew russia was trying to impact the 2016 presidential campaign but their efforts at the time amounted to not much. hillary clinton calls for a new approach, treat a cyber attack as an act of war and respond in kind. we'll put the issue to our table when we come back. for your heart... your joints...
or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. every year we take a girl's trip. remember nashville? kimchi bbq. kimchi bbq. amazing honky tonk?? i can't believe you got us tickets. i did. i didn't pay for anything. you never do. send me what i owe. i've got it. i mean, you did find money to buy those boots. are you serious? is that why you don't like them? those boots could make a unicorn cry. yeah, tears of joy. the bank of america mobile banking app. the fast, secure and simple way to send money. i kept looking for ways to manage my symptoms.
i thought i was doing okay. then it hit me... managing was all i was doing. when i told my doctor, i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease even after trying other medications. in clinical studies, the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. just managing your symptoms? ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.
look, putin from everything i see has no respect for this person. >> well, that's because he would rather have a puppet as president -- >> no puppet. no puppet. you're the puppet. >> it's pretty clear that you won't admit that the russians have engaged in cyber attacks against the united states of america, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up nato, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him because he has a very clear favorite in this race. >> wow. feels like hillary clinton and donald trump have been fighting about vladimir putin forever. we get hillary clinton's perspective on how it all unfolded during the 2016 in her new book "what happened." she writes, in 2016 our
democracy was assaulted by a foreign adversary determined to mislead our people, enflame our divisions and throw an election to its perfect candidate. many americans lost faith in the institutions that previous generations relied on for objective information, including the government, academia and the press. by the time vladimir putin came along, our democracy was far sicker than we realized. the panel is with me. jen? >> i think that she really i think in that pretty tightly scripted paragraph there she nailed what the problem was. it is that we were sort of suss superintende september sibl to this because people no longer trusting our own institutions but then you had the game changer here as a foreign power that was willing
to -- a semihostile one, that was willing to weigh in and try to influence this. so those two things were a very toxic combination and i think she's right in terms of how you handle that and how you respond and how you respond at the administration, whether it's the obama administration. i don't think we can rely on the trump administration to handle this well. what the right response is is a hard remedy to know. >> do you disagree with anything that she said that russia was doing, that because americans had lost faith in institutions including our own, including the press, that we were susceptible to all the tools that we've been talking about all hour? >> there is a bit of that. i think she misses a couple things which i would like to stalk abou talk about. the question of attribution is important. part of this is we've been desensitized to all the cyber attacks over time and what she misses i think is that the united states has actually been very slow in figuring out the right doctrine, strategy,
approach to respond to these attacksme attacks. remember you had the sony attack by the north koreans. you had the chinese hacking major u.s. systems including those that contained former government official information like yours and mine. the russians and chinese at it for years and we, frankly, didn't respond with the right kind of deterrence, the right kind of approach. i think it emboldened the russians at a time when they realized we really aren't going to websibite back. it's not to suggest it's easy because you've got questions of proportionality, what tools do you use, is it cyber crime or cyber warfare, all sorts of issues. but the reality is this was in the making. >> president obama's blackberry was hacked. >> you missed the most important one in bringing the private sector into this which is privacy which is why we have had
such a slow response is this internal debate about how much data should be released. is the government going to be safer with your data than the private sector. is there a coordinated international aspect in place. germany, great britain has been investigator more advanced than us. i think it goes to the question of was there an institutional laziness among policy makers and the media about the extent to which hackers could hack our democratic process. no one disputes russia tried to hack our democratic process. politicians on both sides of the aisle agree that it happened. it is time to come together with a coordinated response to come up with exactly the response in a bipartisan way. >> dave, let me put a question to you. hillary clinton has been critical of republicans in congress who, when presented with all of the information that the intelligence agencies came up with in the fall of 2016, resisted going to the american public with this information
about russia's role. marco rubio has been sort of a rare bright light in saying, hey, next time it could be us. where do you stand? >> the united states can never allow a foreign country to do this in any way, shape or form, and we have been far too lax over years in how we respond to it. >> including mitch mcconnell in 2016? >> everybody across the board. >> i take that to include mitch mcconnell in 2016. >> once again, everybody across the board. we have not been as sensitive as we have to be. we have to be careful. we have to make sure it doesn't happen again. we don't have a policy. we haven't set it out. we haven't looked at it as a form of warfare. now, whether or not mrs. clinton described it in exactly the right terms, that's not the issue. the issue overall is the united states must protect itself. everything, we've got phones in our pockets and so much goes through this and so much is known about us, things we don't know google knows about us they know about us. somebody can get this sort of information, you lock at the
energy grid, they start going after that. we have to be -- >> incredible, incredible. >> have to be ready for this and we are not. republicans are not. democrats are not. the obama administration wasn't. the president trump administration isn't. this has to be taken at a much higher level and a much more important level than it is. >> bipartisan incompetence is what you're describing. >> absolutely. >> thank you for spending time with us. grab them in the, you know. sadly, we all know how that sentence ends. hillary clinton finds her voice on the impact of sexism and misogyny in the 2016 when we come back. [ "livin' thing" by electric light orchestra ]
♪ sailin' away on the crest of a wave, it's like magic ♪ ♪ rollin' and ridin' and slippin' and slidin' ♪ ♪ it's magic introducing the all new volkswagen tiguan. ♪ higher and higher, baby the new king of the concrete jungle. it's ok that everybody ignoit's fine.n i drive. because i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident free. and i don't share it with mom! right, mom?! righhht. safe driving bonus checks. only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it. but on the inside, i feel chronic, widespread pain.like most people. fibromyalgia may be invisible to others, but my pain is real.
fibromyalgia is thought to be caused by overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. i'm glad my doctor prescribed lyrica. for some, lyrica delivers effective relief for moderate to even severe fibromyalgia pain. and improves function. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, 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've had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can do more with my family. talk to your doctor today. see if lyrica can help. nitrites or artificial ham has preservatives.tes, now it's good for us all. like those who like. sweet those who prefer heat. sfx - a breath of air
and those who just love meat. oscar mayer deli fresh. sweet! to make something original... ...has grown into an enterprise. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. now, i'm earning unlimited 2% cash back on every purchase i make. everything. which adds up to thousands of dollars back every year... ...and helps keep my passion growing... ...in every direction. what's in your wallet? you've called women you don't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals. your twitter account -- >> only rosie o'donnell. the next day they did the most beautiful story about what a lie
it was from nbc. she's back there, little katie, she's back there. what a lie it was. no, what a lie. katie, what a lie it was from nbc to have written that. >> donald trump said the following about you, quote, look at that face, would anyone quote for that, can you imagine that, the face of our next president. >> i think women all over this country heard very clearly what mr. trump said. >> one of the worst things he said was about a woman in a beauty contest -- he loves beauty contests, supporting them and hanging around them. and he called this woman miss piggy. then he called her miss house keeping because she was latina. >> that person was a miss universe person, and she was the worst we ever had. she was the winner and she gained a massive amount of weight. it was a real problem. >> i'm automatically attracted
to beautiful women. i just start kissing them, like a magnet. just kiss. and when you're a star, they let you do it. you can do anything. >> whatever you want. >> grab them by the [mute]. >> that was something of a highlight or low light reel from the campaign. that he won anyway is something hillary clinton spends a good deal of time on in her book, writing on the difference between sexism and misogyny. quote, misogyny is something darker, it's rage, disgust, hatred. it's what happens when a woman turns down a guy at a bar and he switches from charming to scary, or when a woman gets a job that i man wanted and instead of shaking her hand and wishing her well, he calls her a bitch and vows to do everything he can to make sure she fails. i want to bring in msnbc panelist elise jordan. elise, go first. >> that was the best part of the book, in my opinion, and it's incredibly moving and i think that everyone in the country who's interested in women in society --
>> which should be everyone, right? >> i think everyone should read it. this isn't a partisan issue. one of my favorite lines was she wrote that joan of arc had a lot of interesting things to say before she was burned at the stake and was talking about how relatively new it was for women to have power and to be in the spotlight. it just talked about the harsh microscope and the double standard that women face. i think that she was in a tough position, but it's something that we all should be cognizant of going forward in looking at how we evaluate candidates. >> the criticism is always -- well, she didn't talk about being a woman and after '16 it was she didn't talk about how in the '90s bill was bad to women. she just couldn't win on this question of being female. >> she couldn't win on it and i think it's really important to separate what actually happened to her. there's no question she was the victim of some extraordinarily hateful remarks, treatment on both sides of the aisle we
should put out. some of that behavior still continues today. when i look at my 3-year-old daughter and look after some of those comments, that reddihetor it is appalling and has no place in a presidential campaign. so many of us on there have developed a way to tune it out and it's really important with the katy tur and the best revenges, she has a book out. we have to learn the lessons of this and look at was this treatment exclusive to women, exacerbated because she was a woman. jen and i have talked about mistakes that she made that were political but some of this behavior was unacceptable in any society. >> jen, you and i talked all the time during the campaign. we talked about how there is no analogue to a male candidate who is held responsible for his wife's infidelities two decades
prior. >> it is. there's just no -- there's no analogue. there's no analogue. i feel like in the campaign there was -- there was very ugly misogyny. there was irrational hatred of her and we don't need to spend a lot of time on it but i would say the way the e-mail story was covered was irrational and the hatred -- >> talk about that. what do you mean? >> there are other cabinet secretaries for example that use personal e-mail. it didn't blow up to be the kind of -- >> colin powell used personal e-mail. >> a lot of people in the clinton administration that did. john kerry did when he was secretary of state, even after she had been secretary of state. but i would press the reporters on this and i would say, if barack obama did this, you wouldn't have the same questions. well no, because it's obama so it's different. but why, but why. keep pressing but why. eventually there's not an
answer. there's something vexing about her, there's something that makes people suspicious. i think that this is very -- it's deep. it's not necessarily sinister. misogyny is sinister but there's something else at play here which is we don't have a way of thinking about a woman in this job. it occurred to me at one point in october in sort of a sickening moment, i was like, great, we have made her to be a female fax similarly of the qualities we look for in a president. we don't have a way of thinking about a woman in that job. that doesn't mean everybody is sexist who didn't vote for her or had questions about her but as a society we haven't wrapped our heads around what that looks like. >> is that a unique problem. we look at teresa may. i'm not sure i'm willing to paint everyone with that brush
that we don't know how to think about it. the issue for the democratic party is that this rift still has not healed and this bad will is still out there and i think we still see it, we see the reception in the book. we were talking before the show, it's exactly the way we thought it would go down. i think the bigger question is this debate still exists, is she the best vessel to carry it forward. >> i really think it's worth examining. i don't think we just move on. i think that's a mistake. i think it's worth examining what happened and why. >> elise, let me bring you into this. the question i heard over and over again and i heard this before the election and after the election when i went out and interviewed democrats that had voted for trump, was, it wasn't that we weren't ready for a woman, we weren't ready for that woman. that was the only woman on the menu. i thought, what's a woman go to do, make it worse? our politics are so fractured, so broken. there's a lot of people who use the that woman excuse for not voting for her, not just
republicans but the dead enders who held onto the bernie dream for months after it was mathematically impossible for bernie to be the nominee. >> i think it was so many years of public life and all the conspiracies that were fine tuned by the time that this election actually rolled around, and the punishment for bill clinton's sins that i think is incredibly unfair that she's supposed to be judged by something she might have said or didn't say about a mistress. who is going to judge someone by what you say about your husband's mistress. >> she wasn't a human being except that she may have reacted emotionally about her husband cheating her on. >> the second debate and the stunt that donald trump pulled, bringing all those women and weaponizing against hillary clinton before a presidential debate. and the fact that there wasn't more outcry just over the decency that he just had no sense of boundaries. >> let's also make sure the broader point is here. these were demeaning comments
about women as a whole, you're fat, ugly, not worthy. that's the bigger, broader point. it goes far beyond hillary clinton. it goes to the way women are characterized throughout the campaign, how reporters were characterized. we cannot have that again. >> let me give you the last word. characterized. katie tur. we cannot allow that to happen again. >> there is something to be learned. that's what i think it's ultimately a useful exercise for her to write the book. she knew this was going to happen, everybody was going the tell her to go away. she knew this was going object the reaction and she did it anyway because we needed to have the conversation. when we look at hurricane irma, the administration's point man on the environment says it's insensitive to talk about climate change.
so that's the idea. what do you think? hate to play devil's advocate but... i kind of feel like it's a game changer. i wouldn't go that far. are you there? he's probably on mute. yeah... gary won't like it. why? because he's gary. (phone ringing) what? keep going! yeah... (laughs) (voice on phone) it's not millennial enough. there are a lot of ways to say no. thank you so much. thank you! so we're doing it. yes! start saying yes to your company's best ideas. let us help with money and know-how, so you can get business done. american express open. are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? so you can get business done. try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®.
we're back. the head of the epa scott pruitt has said that now is an insensitive time to discuss climate change. pruitt's emotional sensitivity goes against the views of many of those actually affected, including the republican mayor of miami, who said, quote, this is the time to talk about climate change. this is the time that the president and the epa and whoever makes decisions needs to talk about climate change. i'm back with my panel, elise jordan, what's wrong with republican party on this? the old debate used to be, yes, climate change is real but we need to decide how much of our
sort of economy we want to sacrifice to save the air. that used to be a choice. i feel like we sort of innovated our way out of that what is the republican party's problem? >> i don't know if it is just a republican party problem as far as specifically just with the trump administration. >> fair enough. >> the sensitivity complex and victimhood and wanting to shy away from anything and just branding it as this is the wrong time. it skreemgs weakness. you are supposed to be the epa director. know your facts, defend your case if that's the way you feel. don't complain about there being a better time to discuss something that's clearly affecting hundreds of thousands of people right now. >> it is a republican party problem. you can count on one hand the number of republican senators who would talk about the impact of man made climate change and the impact. to be fair, this is time you can going to science, the rising sea levels, the intensity of the storms. >> why can't we get on the
solving this? why are we still here elise is it is a regressive. the trump administration is regressive on women, as we just discussed. it's being regressive on climate change. rex tillerson, the head of exxonmobil, it took him a while but he came around on climate change. what the administration is less than what he was willing to say and do as the head of the world's largest energy proprietor. >> ten seconds. >> sisters are doing it for themselves. we have got to -- this is the same sort of argument as what people say after a big school shooting or something. we can't talk about gun control. well, when are we going to talk about doing something to solve problems? the problems are too real. everyone has to address it not just for what you do about it but what's behind it. and the more the trump administration tries to hide, i think it does -- you hear more voices to come out to say no we have got to address it. >> especially republican voice, republican mayors. all right we will hit pause.
healthy energy, all in one. strong muscles, all in one. highly digestible, and a taste he loves, all in one. purina one smartblend is expertly blended... with 100% nutrition, 0% fillers, always real meat #1. lifelong smart nutrition. it's all in one. purina one. 'saved money on motorcycle insurance with geico. goin' up the country. later, gary' i have a motorcycle! wonderful. ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ geico motorcycle, great rates for great rides.
stop whatever you are doing and settle in for the hour. chuck todd is about to interview kate etur who saw donald trump up close and way too personal for longer than just about anyone. for our part, we thank our panel for joining us. that does it for our hour. i'm micolle wallace. "mtp daily" starts receipt now with chuck and katie. >> hi, nicole. i'll wave across the room. we are in the same studio, little do they know. magic of television. if it's tuesday, guess who is coming to dinner at the white house? >> tonight, six senators, two parties, one president. >> the president is reaching across the aisle to cut deals that help the american people. >> will tonight's working white house dinner change the political calculus in the run-up to campaign 2018? >> i'm going to be a listener. >> plus, the president's so-called voter