tv MSNBC Live MSNBC October 22, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor. celek hi, everybody. i'm tom matt roberts. great to have you with me. this feud continues as fredricka wilson calling for an apology from trump's chief of staff. he says he will help cover the legal fees for staffers caught up in the russia instigation.
bill o'reilly says they knew about a settlement for sexual harassment and renewed his contract anyway. you can rest assure that president trump is on a golf course. he showed up at his club in northern virginia. while spending his time on the links, he teed off driving a shot at her. wacky congresswoman wilson is the gift that keeps on giving. pt you wat for the republican party. a disaster for dems. you watch her in action and vote "r." >> that's the way he is. i am sick of him giving nicknames. he doesn't want me to give him a nickname. today, i want to set the record straight. i want people to understand what
is happening in africa and try to connect the dots. this is going to be this administration's benghazi. >> wilson is responding to white house xhe house chief of staff's claim that she publicly boasted about securing money and that was refuted when it surfaced this week. >> john kelly, i guess you could say he was a pickup pet uppet o president and he was trying to divert the attention from the president on to me. i don't appreciate people lying on me. the character assassination he went through to call me out of
my name an empty barrel with all the work i have done in this community. not only does he owe me an apology, he owes an apology to the american people. >> nbc's mike vicera is live. >> reporter: i think the focus should be drawn to sergeant ladavid johnson's funeral. it was just yesterday. there are questions about the mission in niger as well as the four americans that died and ended up giving their life for their country. the congresswoman mentioned it could be the president's benghazi alluding to the on going scandal pushed by republicans for several years in
president barack obama's administration when the ambassador died there. there are these fundamental questions that need to be asked and, indeed, there is an investigation on going. president trump, you are right, he is golfing again today. it is a beautiful day in washington. he gave an interview that aired over the weekend. his version of that condolence call, remember, this is part of the genesis of this, the origin story, if you will, of this controversy. his version of the call, which the congresswoman was in the karlcar listening with the widow. he says, i was so nice to her. and congresswoman wilson's version was that he said that's what he signed up for speaking of sergeant johnson. and that the president didn't really know sergeant johnson's name. the things that president trump and his chief of staff have taken such offense to. he said he was very nice to her on the phone. he takes exception to what's happening here.
he says the media is drumming up this controversy. as he continues tweeting and taking political shots, he says the media is using this controversy to divert attention from the many successes he has had in his nine months as president. >> mike, good to see you. joining us is john donnelly and paul singer. john, let me start with you. with the end of what the congresswoman had to say about the ambush in niger and drawing the dots between this being what benghazi was for the obama administration. do you see it the same way? >> not necessarily. i do want to make an observation about how this started. it didn't start with the phone call from the president to the johnson family. it started with the fact that it took 12 days for the president to say anything publicly about the loss of four american
soldiers in niger. that was the genesis of the whole thing. he has contacted gold star families but he had not contacted virtually all of them as he had claimed. he had to make that assertion and claim he was better at this gold star family contacting than any of his predecessors. he sort of created this crisis. >> when you think about the creation of this crisis, yes, he was pressed for information about what really happened with the loss of these four soldiers and we wait to find out and he did not tweet about it. he did not talk about it publicly. 12 days went by. when we think about where we are now and the story itself, explain, john, the issue with why the white house wasn't commenting on this or even the
state department? what do we know about the investigation or the lack of intelligence? >> i don't know exactly why they did not comment on it. that's really a good question for them. they have been asked it. they haven't given a very good explanation as far as i can see. once it became clear this is a political problem, then they started talking about it. the president made the claim that virtually all the families had been contacted. the story that i broke on friday was disclosing e-mails between the white house and the pentagon where on tuesday, at about 5:00, the comment the president made was tuesday morning. tuesday at about 5:00, the white house was contacting the pentagon saying who are the american service personnel that died this year? what are their names and what are their contact information, send us the notice of death in order for the president to contact these families. it is implicit that the white house knew what the president said was not accurate. we have since learned that several news organizations have
contacted families, i think the number is about 25. nearly half of them have not been reached by the president. the president doesn't have to contact those families but he is the one that made the claim that he did. >> so, paul, i want to ask you, because we had the congresswoman, fredrica wilson joining joy reid. they discussed, as john was pointing out there the origin and tale of this. she is a family friend of the johnsons. she happened to be in the vehicle and nearby this family when they took a call on speaker phone. the widow taking this call. now, kelly has used the podium and the press room to stage this attack against the congresswoman and went after her pretty viciously. now, she wants an apology for misleading people about her. this is what she asked for. listen. >> the character assassination
that he went through to call me out of my name an empty barrel and all the work that i have done in this community, not only does he owe me an apology, he owes an apology to the american people, because when he lied on me, he lied to them. >> so, paul, here it is on the 19th of october, a thursday that we have john kelly coming out and using this moment to try to give cover to the president but provides a fish tale about the congresswoman that he claims he was an eyewitness to. he admonished the press to tell them to get better sources. if he doesn't apologize to the congresswoman, haskelly surrendered his credibility? >> this whole thing is bananas, the president of the united states and the chief of staff making a national figure out of a congresswoman. the only thing she is known for is wearing fancy hats.
her own wikipedia page describes her battle with the congress to let her wear a hat on the house floor as her primary legislative achievement, effort. suddenly, this woman is supposed to be the foil to the president of the united states, the most powerful man on earth. it is just bizarre. i think the challenge to general kelly's credibility. i think we all give him an enormous amount of respect for the service he has brought to the country, to the loss of his son and to some degree to the service he has brought to the country now stabilizing the trump white house. the problem they have is who in the white house is able to say, we might have been mistaken about how we remembered that? this administration is never -- >> if they deent on't do that, kelly surrender his credibility? he just used that podium to admonish reporters and said, i don't think i am being fired. he said, i'm not leaving and i think i need better sources. he told them he was an
eyewitness to wilson boasting about getting this funding in public statements that video contradicts? if he doesn't apologize, what is his credibility moving forward? >> the issue is with whom. what we used to consider traditional credibility no longer matters. the president of the united states routinely uses facts that are not accurate. his chief of staff is saying something not accurate. the spokesperson for the president has routinely used information that is untrue. what does it mean to lose your credibility in this context. maybe with you, maybe with me, maybe with john. i'm not sure what trump considers his base really cares whether this is true or not. >> gentlemen, thank you very much. it is an amazing pivot in our times when we think about what the press room is supposed to mean, the chief of staff, the credibility that kelly has been heralded for bringing to this administration replacing reince priebus at chief of staff.
it is amazing times. john donnelly, paul, great to have you on. great scoop breaking that story about the president trying to proactively reach out to people after claiming that he had contacted virtually all of them. bill o'reilly is going to respond to what his team calls a smear case. president trump crediting social media for his campaign victory one day after claiming that facebook favored clinton. hey grandpa. hey, kid. really good to see you. you too. you tell grandma you were going fishing again? maybe. (vo) the best things in life keep going. that's why i got a subaru, too. introducing the all-new crosstrek. love is out there. find it in a subaru crosstrek.
it was always our singular focus. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now.
months before fox news settled the contract. she says she was paid $32 million to settle a case. fox says she did know there was a settlement in january. they were informed by mr. o'reilly saying he settled the matter personally saying that the terms were confidence. his spokesperson pushing back on this reporting saying "the new york times" has maliciously smeared bill o'reilly. he tweeted on saturday. my investigative team has done a superb job exposing the lies and smears. i will speak with you on monday. joining me, claire atkinson. this is a big deal because of the fact, $32 million, if "the new york times" has its figures correctly and also that 21st century fox was aware of this settlement and still engaged with that new contract. >> $32 million. let's just address that.
what a humongous number that is. that's going to set a new bar for any sexual harassment lawyers coming forward saying my client was abused. i'm sure the harvey weinstein, the lawyers for the ladies probably looking at that number saying, wow, is that something we should be shooting for? the prior record was gretchen carlson who received $20 million from fox news. the question of why fox decided to sign bill o'reilly. they knew it was happening about you bill was going to settle it on its own. it is understandable because bill was their number one highly rated moneymaker, bringing in $320 million a year. that's the reason they re-signed him. >> how much sunshine is this putting on to the fact that the weinstein company had a caveat within weinstein's contract saying he would settle things? now we are finding out that they figured that o'reilly would take
care of this personally. this is not a 21st century fox problem. is that a bigger issue knowing that employers are turning a blind eye if they think their employers are going to handle and mop up their own messes with their own cash. >> after the harvey weinstein story broke, nobody can hide anything these days with other film directors being accused of sexual harassment? we have seen other people use their jobs. the amazon guy was accused of sexual harassment and instantly fired. the question with bill is, is his career over? will people shun him in the same way they are shunning harvey right now? or will he be able to go on and negotiate with other networks and revive his career? my guess is monday that's what we will find out. >> that's what the lawyer thinks this is about, a smear campaign, so he can't get back on traditional cable or broadcast tv. >> nobody pays $32 million for false allegations, nobody,
gretchen carl sson tweeted. they have claims from the o'reilly team that there are. they have contradiction torey evidence to go against this. we are trying to find out if "the new york times" is accurate in its reporting of this figure. in this current climate, how does fox news address itself to say, we have cleaned up our act if there are more potential cases that could be exposed like this? >> i think he this have to address them one by one. in a climate where no corporation should be tolerating sex harassment in the work place, the problem is, there are two sides to every story. these are tremendously difficult thing toss figure out. >> we shall see what happens on monday. bill ow ohio riley has said thi. the latest headlines leading many women to come forward and
share their stories under the #me too. our colleagues sat down with some of our nation's female senators who are adding their own voices and sharing their own personal stories. >> he was chasing me around the desk, trying to get his hand on me. >> he put his fingers on my face and said, men will always beat their wives and you can't stop them. >> he said, did you bring your knee pads. >> my initial reaction is, isn't it a shame that it took something as horrific as this kind of event to make people feel strong enough to actually speak up the voices of all these women are so much stronger and louder together. >> i wish i could say that i was surprised. knowing my life and what happened to me early in my career, it wasn't shocking to me and i understand why so many people keep things like that to
myself. >> statements that are made, observation about our appearance, these kind of unwanted attention occurs in a situation where there is uneven power. it is usually the woman who has less power. >> what it means now, that so many people have spoken out, is it is a way to say, we're here for each other and it is also a way to say, no, it is not about what you did. he is the one who stepped out of line and this is on him. what's ! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪
now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches... ...over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the... ...hotelock it in. tripadvisor. ...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. what's in your wallet? president trump saying he is optimistic his tax reform plan will be passed by the end of the year. senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell, says those details have not been hammered out just yet. >> we are just beginning the process of actually crafting the bills that are crafted in the ways and means committee in the house and the finance committee and the senate. it is way too early to predict the various details. the goal here is to get middle
class taxes down, to prevent job ex po exportation which our current business taxes encourage people to go offshore. john harwood, great to have you with me. just want to pass this note along. house republican leader sources saying two nbc news that president trump plans to participate in a conference call today at 4:30 to talk about budget and tax reform. we have mitch mcconnell there saying those details have not been worked out yet. it seems as if we know which direction president trump wants to go. >> certainly, we do. we have outline. we know the details are incredibly hard. if you are going to do tax reform, that means you are doing
rates. you close loopholes but don't lose a lot of money. a lot of the ways they have thought about raising money has been rolling out with the tide. the border adjustment tax, gone. the state and local tax reduction, getting rid of those. they are talking about curtailing that now. the challenge is, if you do that, either the tax cut has to get smaller or the deficit is going to get a lot bigger. >> for the middle class, is this really going to funnel down their way. >> this is not principally a middle class tax cut. the middle class, most middle class people would get a tax cut in the outline that they have released so far. the biggest tax cuts would go to wealthy americans and to the corporations and the wealthy americans who own the corporations. that's the challenge, is that they are trying to -- republicans believe in stimulating growth by cutting the top rate, cutting the
corporate rate. that is not putting money directly in middle class workers pockets but one of the reasons we haven't gotten the details, they know they are vulnerable on that score. they are trying to adjust it so they can deliver more assistance to the middle class. >> we know the president dropped on the forbes list. the president being one of the bigger, richer corporate owners in this company with the trump organization, we have never really gotten a full accounting of his own taxes but the suspicion is that he is going to benefit greatly from whatever he does. >> we know he would benefit greatly from what we have seen so far. we are talking about the elimination of the alternative minimum tax, meant to prevent rich people from wiping out tax liability all together through tax deductions. that saved tens of millions of dollars to donald trump. he cut the top rate from 39 to 35. that would benefit donald trump
tremendously, get rid of the estate tax. that would also benefit donald trump tremendously. the question is, can they withstand the arguments from opponents, public opposition, to the idea that so much of this tax cut would go to people at the top. we know from our nbc wall street journal poll that most people think that taxes on corporations and the wealthy should go up, not down. they have a big selling job. >> specially if this imitates kansas as a state laboratory for our federal system. people need to check that out and learn the mistakes that republicans are warning our congress about right now. cnbc's john harwood. thank you. appreciate it. >> social media matters. how online platforms impact politics and this presidency. ea. 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. looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor.
saying it helped his white house victory. >> i doubt i would be here if it weren't for social media. when somebody says something about me, i am able to go, bing, bing, bing, i take care of it. the other way, i would never be able to get the word out. >> trump went on to call his social media accounts, twitter, instagram, and facebook, a tremendous platform. less than 24 hours ago, we have trump accusing facebook of being on hillary clinton's side during the campaign. he said, crooked hillary clinton spent hundreds of millions more than i did and facebook was on her side. joining me now is msnbc intelligence analyst and former double agent, author of "how to catch a russian spy" navid jamali and tony rahm.
nabib, let's start with you. trump is very social media savvy and we know that twitter is one of his go-to additions. bing, bing, bing, whether it is politicians, celebs, media outlet's that he doesn't like. the base seems to dig it. this is a form of entertainment in some capacity. it does not hurt his agenda. even he uses it to tear it down at the same time, it benefits him? >> i think that's right. it doesn't negate the fact that clearly there are foreign actors. we are struggling here. these are questions about free speech. should it be regulated? who should regulate it? frankly, at the end of the day, where i weigh in, what concerns me is that in spite of all of this, there has not been one doll dollar spent on increasing national intelligence. you are right. i any donald trump is going to continue to use social media.
>> we have these representatives from facebook, twitter, google and they are going to testify about russia and any influence of the 2016 election. we have senators warner clobishaud and mccain. can they get anything done in terms of being able to filter out what naveed and others consider are bad actors which makes us complicit if we share this? >> these three companies are in the hot seat on november 1st when their executives are set to testify. it is important to note what it does and doesn't do. the piece of legislation that is put forward by warner and others, would require more disclosure. they have to have the same disclosure information that those on broadcast have to have that doesn't do anything about
d disinformation spread. this is an important first step on the part of these lawmakers to address some issues of the election but it is not the only thing that needs to be done. >> based on what tony is saying, naveed, is that headed in the right direction? >> the honest ads act, while it is well-intentioned, i think it is not going to make much of a difference from stopping foreign actors and intelligence services from playing in this field. just as donald trump said it is an effective tool. they see it as an effective tool. they are going to keep using it. there are ways around it. it is not a way to stop russian interference. it is simply a way to hold political ads as being labeled as such. we are seeing there is an ability to use plausibility denibld denyability. you can have fake news spread.
they can sidestep this pretty easily. >> there is information na woth would allow that could show connective tisch shoe batisch connective tisch shoe batisue b russia. why not just reveal it? >> we have some information in the context of facebook. we know there were about 470 accounts tied to russian-backed trolls and those accounts purchased about 3,000 advertisements seen by 10 million u.s. users before and after election day. we don't have the exact contact. they sought to spread this information into social and political unrest. there is an effort on capitol hill to release that information. facebook is working with the house intelligence committee to make that data available. i wouldn't expect to see that until after the november 1st
hearing. >> how is this different than "homeland "? we know there was the report that russian actors like to watch "house of cards" to get inspiration. "homeland" pretty much clocked this out for us. they laid out how these work. >> i can't speak for that. there is a big effort on capitol hill to address these. >> naveed, you watch "homeland," don't you? >> i do. at the end of the day, when it comes to national security, you ought to be able to say this comes back to russia. from a legal standpoint, that's what investigators look at. it is not so clear. this is not something that facebook, twitter, and who i have spoken to at length, what you are talking about is looking for a profile. you can say, this is a russian actor. can we trace it back to the kremlin? the short answer is, no.
this should be put in the field of national security. it should be put in the government. it is not up to facebook or google or twitter or alphabet to stop russian intelligence efforts. it is just not. it is a national security effort. i am interested to hear what comes out november 1st. this is a national security concern. we are not talking about that. that concerns me. >> we all need to do our part. >> naveed, great to have you on. tony, great to meet you in person. we have the former presidents and this president's pledge to help staffers offset costs associated with the russian investigation. it does raise ethical concerns about the price of loyalty. we'll talk about that right after this. stay with us. i love you, basement guest bathroom.
white house staffers. the president will spend about $430,000. the rnc you might recall has already covered fees for the president and his son, don jr. in that amount. joining me now to break down more, democratic strategist, nicole rapport and republican strategist, great to have you on. we know both of you, as we look back over history, this is not a precedent because of watergate. are you surprised because if the loyalty issue of your benefactor paying your legal fees, they have a good reason not to imcripple nai imcripple nai imincriminate their factor. >> i will believe it when i see it. he has made promises before that he hasn't come through with. if you and i commit a crime together and you offer to pay my legal bills, even though i have to testify under oath and say
the truth, right? what is my incentive? who am i going to be loyal to if you are paying my legal bills to defend our crime together? i am going to be more loyal to you. there is an ethical issue that is questionable from the very least. >> from the question of ethics for the gop, are you concerned that already the rnc has invested itself with paying for legal costs for the president and also his son or is that not a concern for the republican party as a whole? >> well, i mean, first of all, you have to look at this. these aides, his son, the people around him, that are being investigated with this, they are already loyalty to him. it doesn't matter if he pays their fees. it doesn't matter if the rnc pays his fees. one thing i will tell you, i like the fact that he is going to step up to the plate and pay this out of his own pocket versus having the rnc pay for more of this. you have to look at this. we have some tight races coming
around for 2018. the rnc just raised a record of $100 million. the only person, and i say this kind of with some humor. the only person that need to be concerned is probably the law firm, because donald trump is na notorious for negotiating invoices. his legal fees may go way up there. who says he will pay what the invoice says. >> are we expected to get more specifics about that? the rnc is raising a lot of money. i got a text if i registered within five minutes for president trump, that i would enter a chance to go to texas and have my picture taken with him. it was just for $3. i could register twice. that's the kind of money na could be raised and utilized in this staffing defense. >> the rnc has been bleeding out
money paying for the legal fees. the president has said the $433,000 is not a reimbursement for the fees they have already paid for the defense of his son. the fees are going to keep going up for this russian hacking and this investigation. secondly, i agree, i don't think he will actually pay. let's see. he doesn't pay his bills. we know this already. let's actually see the invoice and let's see the check at the end of the day. i'm actually glad it is not taxpayer money, by the way. >> that's what's going to fund bob muller's investigation and the other issues that kind of persist around the administration currently. that is going to be a big number. the amount of hours and time that's been invested in proving the birth right, so to speak, of this presidency and whether or not that they are somehow working with a foreign entity to get him elected, willingly or
otherwise? >> well, you know, if you ask the gop, they see this as a witch hunt. any see this as a waste of taxpayer money but if you ask some of the democrats and you ask the opposite side, they see this as a good use of spending taxpayer money to try to shut the president down. so you have got both sides. who is to say? you have to take a side on it, whether you like taxpayer money being spent on it or whether you don't. a lot of democrats say, i don't mind spending taxpayer money if it brings this president down. on the other side, it is like it is a big witch hunt. >> there is a big difference for spending taxpayer money around oral sex in the oval office versus russian hacking. >> yes, and we shall leave it there. i do not want to ask another question. dorian, thanks so much.
noel, thank you so much. what's next for health care in this country? we are going to take a closer look. a new bill gaining bipartisan support in the senate. what it means for insurers in america. stay with us. so tell us your big idea for getting the whole country booking on choice hotels.com. four words, badda book. badda boom... let it sink in. shouldn't we say we have the lowest price? nope, badda book. badda boom. have you ever stayed with choice hotels? like at a comfort inn? yep. free waffles, can't go wrong.
a new health care bill is steadily gaining bipartisan support in the senate, formally announced on thursday by republican senator lamar alexander and democrat patty murray. now, this bill is aiming to restore $7 billion worth of subsidies to insurers that the president cut off almost two weeks ago. the new bill has emerged after several failed attempts to fully repeal obamacare, motivating many to step into the spotlight and run for office. now, former cia officer abigail spanbe spanberger announced her candidacy in the seventh district, previously held by freedom caucus leader dave brat. and she joins me now. good to have you with me. first let's start with health
care and let me ask your reaction to president trump's condolence call to the story of gold star families, then we'll dive into the aca. >> great. well, thank you for having me, thomas. you know, i'm really disappointed, frankly, that the death of a u.s. service member would become such a political issue. for me, this is really a time for us to be mourning that soldier and expressing our condolences to the family, and i think it's unfortunate that as a country, you know, we're doing anything other than that. >> when you think of the lingering effect that this has about a divide created between those that are civilians and are service, how can we fix it? what would be your answer to constituents in the seventh district of virginia? >> well, i think that we've seen so much of a partisan divide. there is so much rhetoric coming out of washington, and it truly is divisive. it's tearing our communities
apart, and it's not productive as we're looking at what sort of bills can move forward in congress and how we can move forward as a country. so, i think this is yet another example where issues are becoming political issues that really shouldn't be. they should be issues that as a community we can join together and express our condolences, as a country, we can join together and express our condolences. and i think it's unfortunately another example of the sort of rhetoric that we see coming out of congress at this time. >> well, i guess some people can take a little bit of ease thinking about what this means in terms of the aca and a bipartisan effort to create some unity on this with lamar alexander and patty murray. we had chuck schumer, who was on "meet the press" earlier today to discuss this new bill, and i just want to play for everybody what he had to say. take a look. >> this is a good compromise. it took months to work out. it has a majority. it has 60 senators supporting it. we have all 48 democrats, 12 republicans. i would urge senator mcconnell
to put it on the floor immediately, this week. it will pass, and it will pass by a large number of votes. >> so, if the president wants to suffocate, basically, the funding for the aca and help for the insurers to dephrase certain costs, how confident can democrats be that mitch mcconnell is going to move forward with this? >> well, i'm glad that you're talking about this. for me, and you mentioned it in the lead-in, the day of the house health care vote was really the day that i definitively decided to run for congress. as a former cia operations officer, my entire -- the entirety of my job was ensuring that the president and policymakers could make strong and informed decisions. and what we saw back during that vote was that congress was pushing through a bill without so much as a congressional budget office score, and that really ran antithetical to everything i had ever worked for as an operations officer. and right now when we see the type of rhetoric and the type of divide coming out of washington, i'm heartened to see this
bipartisan effort to be put forward in the senate, and i'm hopeful that we'll see forward movement. you know, we really need to make a strong effort to stabilize the insurance markets and to keep costs from going up even more than they already have. >> we know where dave brat kind of stats on all this. how do you think constituents are going to take your opinion and see you where they have just put him into office recently? >> well, you know, across the seventh district, as i've traveled to meet people, across our district, health care is really the number one concern that people are raising, and it varies. it's people concerned about rising costs. it's people concerned about whether or not they're going to lose their coverage of pre-existing conditions. it's people concerned about their children and their children's health security. and so, it was a very unpopular vote when he voted for the house health care bill, and people are coming to me with their concerns. you know, we had in virginia just recently, we had a large health care insurance provider announce that they would be
leaving the market, and they based their decision on the instability caused by all of the rhetoric coming out of washington. they've since reversed their decision, but you know, for the time when we thought that they were actually leaving, there were people across the district when i would go to events and meet-and-greets who were really very frightened. they were looking at losing their health insurance and didn't know what would happen next. >> the virginia seventh delivers some surprises, so we'll see how it goes for you, abigail spanberger. thank you for being here. good luck with your run. stay with me. you were a hero. you are my hammer out there. don't let these young guys see you fold. ♪ i'm only human ♪ i make mistakes get down! ♪ i'm only human ♪ it's all it takes ♪ don't put the blame on me thank you for looking after my son. we're brothers. we look after each other. thank you for your service. rated r.
in theaters friday. jimmy's gotten used to his whole yup, he's gone noseblind. odors. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily for all your hard-to-wash fabrics... ...there's febreze fabric refresher. febreze doesn't just mask, it eliminates odors you've... ...gone noseblind to. and try febreze unstopables for fabric. with up to twice the fresh scent power, you'll want to try it... ...again and again and maybe just one more time. indulge in irresistible freshness.
febreze unstopables. breathe happy. for her compassion and care. he spent decades fighting to give families a second chance. but to help others, they first had to protect themselves. i have afib. even for a nurse, it's complicated... and it puts me at higher risk of stroke. that would be devastating. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®... to help keep me protected. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. for afib patients well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop.
it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and before starting xarelto®-about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. it's important to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know™. hi, everybody. great to have you with me. i'm thomas roberts here in new york, and this sunday, we give you a look ahead this hour to what is in the future for republicans and their efforts to reform our tax code and then democrats' efforts to win back the control of congress with house minority leader nancy pelosi weighing in on that very issue right here on msnbc.
but first, we focus on the feud that is continuing. it erupted this week between the white house and congresswoman frederica wilson, a feud that doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon. president trump calling the florida democrat "wacky" on twitter and wilson calling out the president and his chief of staff, john kelly, about now debunk accusations about his remarks during a 2015 building dedication. >> that's the way he is, and i'm sick of him giving people nicknames. he doesn't want me to give him a nickname. john kelly is almost, i guess you could say he was a muppet of the president, and what he was trying to do was divert the attention away from the president on to me, and he basically just lied on me. and i don't like -- i don't appreciate people lying on me. not only does he owe me an apology, but he owes an apology to the american people, because when he lied on me, he lied to