tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC October 23, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
military personnel in grand prairie will deployed to assist in hurricane harvey disaster relief operations and glad to be of some help to our very gracious hosts. we have a close partnership on security operation, including trans national security and terrorism and cyber security. singapore has lent early and consistent support to the defeat isis coalition. we were one of the first ku countries to participate and only asian country to contribute military assets and personnel. as i told president trump when we met, singapore will extend our existing deployment to the operation into 2018 for an additional year. president trump and i naturally discussed the situation on the korean peninsula. we strongly oppose a nuclearization of the korean peninsula as it affects the peace and stability of the region. and like the u.s., we condemn the dprk's dangerous
provocations. these pose a serious threat to regional and international peace and stability. i shared with president trump what singapore has done to pressure and isolate the dprk, going beyond u.n. security council resolutions. b but there's no quick and easy solution, pressure is necessary but so is dialogue. the u.s. will need to work with others, including china and south korea and japan and russia, to resolve the issue. president trump will be visiting china in a few week's time as part of his first visit to asia. singapore like many other countries watch your relations with china very closely. it's a most important bilateral relationship in the world. china is a u.s. third largest export market for goods and services and for agricultural exports it's the second largest. buy soybeans and grains and cotton and farming machinery. i'm quite sure as incomes go up,
they'll buy more and more good american beef. i express my hope that the u.s. will be able to maintain a stable and constructive relationship with china. and engaging each other at the highest levels, building trust establishing institutional mechanisms. good u.s. china relations will benefit the region and the world. it will enable countries in the ayaz pacific including america and china themselves to enjoy regional stability, peace and prosperity. finally, i look forward to seeing president trump again in vietnam in philippines next month to attend the apeck and asean and east asia summit meetings. his presence in asia will mean a lot to america, to america's many friends and allies in the region. an it will open doors and develop markets for u.s. exporters and investors. although the president is not visiting singapore this time around, i invited him to visit the earliest opportunity and i'm
very glad he has accepted. singapore will be the asean chair next year and we hope to strengthen our ties -- asean's ties with the united states and further asean/u.s. cooperation. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, everybody. >> can you tell the public what happened in niger? >> you can hear the shouted questions about the ambush in niger that resulted in the death of four americans but the president very decidedly ignoring those questions, leaving with the prime minister. it was interesting, he had a shout out for new balance and shout out for boeing and to the surprise of a lot of people, this is the second largest asian investor that the u.s. has. is there any headline or news out of this? what did you notice as you watched these two men? i didn't hear any big news, you heard talk of dialogue with
north korea and that i think is an important theme throughout asia right now and one we'll be hearing a lot more about as president trump travels to asia in early november. singapore like many of north korea's neighbors is very eager to see this stand offbetween the united states and north korea end in a peaceful fashion. and so although trump is himself not emphasizing dialogue right now and emphasizing you know, an american power and the retribution that north korea will face potentially if it acts aggressively, many of its neighbors are really hoping there will be a diplomatic solution to this crisis and that was what i focused on on those comments from the prime minister. >> and peter alexander, we were talking as we were going into this that the white house said, you never know essential there there wasn't plans for questions. it was clear the way the
president turned quickly, he was not going to answer questions. do you have any sense from within the white house, is there a procedure? do they go to the president and say do you think you're going to answer any questions and he says no probably not. they say probably not. how does this come to be? >> there generally would be a procedure. there certainly has been in past white houses but with this one most procedures like that are thrown out the window as evidented by an official that he's not supposed to take questions but you never know. the bottom line if anything, he gets a couple of points for discipline on three separate occasions he's been tossed by questions and now here as he met with us in the rose garden and he ignore the those questions in spite of the tweet early this morning that obviously reignited this entire bitter back and forth between himself and myesha johnson, the widow, the gold star wife to sergeant la david johnson. but the president when presented another opportunity on this
recognized at this point he probably ought to let it go for the moment. we wait and see if this is the end of it or another opportunity to press him on this topic. >> thank you. i appreciate that as well. again, peter mentioned this earlier but if you weren't here, there will be no briefing today. so that was probably our last opportunity to get an official statement from the white house, what we just saw with the president about this back and forth and among the other questions that the widow of la david johnson has is what happened to her husband and why wasn't his body found for two days. no briefing again by sara sanders today. that's going to wrap this up hour of msnbc live, my colleague kasie hunt takes over right now. >> if you're just joining us, we were just watching a news conference with president trump and prime minister of singapore. the president took no questions. despite shouts from the reporters who were gathered there in the rose garden, you can see it. the shouts were about the news
that we have been talking about all day, those lingering questions surrounding the deaths of these four soldiers. many of the details about that october 4th fire fight in niger remain a mystery. why were troops deployed there? why doesn't congress seem to know about it? and why did it take two days for u.s. officials to locate the body of sergeant la david johnson? all of this as a dispute over differing accounts of a condolence call continues to play out in public. this morning the widow of sergeant la david johnson broke her silence, giving her own account of the conversation that she had with president trump. >> i need to see my husband. i haven't seen him since he came home. i heard him stumbling on -- and that will hurt me the most -- it made me cry even worse. whatever ms. wilson said was not fabricated. what she said was 100% correct.
>> moments after that emotional interview, the president was firing back at the gold star widow. he posted on twitter, i had a very respectful conversation with the widow of sergeant la david johnson and spoke his name from the beginning without hesitation. let's get right to it with our team of reporters, nbc's peter alexander is back with us at the white house. and hans nichols at the pentagon, joining me from the "washington post" national political reporter michael sharer and in the newsroom, wall street journal reporting eli stokeles. thanks for being here. peter, i want to start with you, the president leaving that rose garden appearance without taking any questions. that seems to be a little bit of a different tact than he's used in the past week or two. what in your mind explains how he handled that? >> to be clear, this is a different circumstance than for example when we saw him out here
with an american ally in mitch mcconnell where the president did go for 40 minutes taking questions. there are agreements made between the white house and the foreign country, the advice tors here to the white house. it's not that the president starts taking question. i suspect on this day they would be making joint statements and expectation is there would not be any questions presented. there's nothing to stop him from answering if they were tossed out as they were on thoccasion. the white house realizes this is not a topic they want to be focused on. more urgently the issue of tax reform. he likes to refer to it as tax cuts, and tomorrow he'll go to the hill to meet with senator republicans to talk about this a little more broadly. and the bottom line, that's where they would like the emphasis to be, not about the back and forth that existed between himself and the gold
star widow, the widow of sergeant la david johnson. kasie? >> thanks so much. i know you have a busy day there. we'll let you go. i do want to show everybody a little bit more of that conversation that myesha johnson had this morning where she talked about exactly how she felt about president trump and what she would say to him. take a look. >> i don't know how he got killed, where he got killed or anything. i don't know that part. they never told me. that's what i've been trying to find out since day one, since october 4th. >> congresswoman wilson reported that and you explained she was in the car with you. >> yes. >> she's been close to your family for a long time. >> yes. >> the president said that the congresswoman was lying about the phone call. >> whatever ms. wilson said was not fabricated. what she said was 100% correct. the phone was on speaker phone.
why would we fabricate something like that. >> your little girl is going to be born in january. >> january 29th. >> what are you going to tell her about her dad? >> i'm going to tell her how awesome her dad was and how a great father he was. and how he died as a hero. >> very emotional interview there from myesha johnson. i want to start with what she was talking about at the beginning and hans nichols, there's so many questions about what exactly happened here. we're told that she was not able to view her husband's body, that she does not have any information about what happened. is it normal for the military to approach this in this kind of a fashion or does this raise more questions? >> it is the military ultimately makes those decisions on return of the remains so that isn't necessarily abnormal. there are a lot of questions here. kasie we just learned the peg
will host a press briefing by the chairman of the joint chief of staff joe dun ford. this is significant we rarely hear from dunford, once before during the trump administration, at least in this press conference format. they have to clear up the what, just what happened in niger but also the broader question of why. you started to hear that on friday from lindsey graham. you've been down on capitol hill as well. the overall role, the theory of the case why u.s. forces are spread out all across africa and is there enough congressional oversight, pentagon gathering information all week, i was in touch with sources trying to figure out the facts to present to congress as well as the american people and we're going to get quite a bit more detail in just about two hours from general dunford. >> hans, i've sort of been trying to sort through this myself in my own reporting. there are a couple of members, chuck schumer, lindsey graham who went on sunday shows and said we didn't actually know this was going on.
is that because they didn't have access to the information because the pentagon wasn't telling them or simply because we're so spread out that most members of congress even at a senior level don't necessarily go looking for this kind of information? >> there are pro forma notifications to congress when they are doing this. the trump administration has done that previously. obama administration had done that. they informed congressmen and sometimes need funds when they say building a new drone base as they are in niger, also building one in cameroon, a little bit to the south. it's very clear there has been congressional authorization. it hasn't risen to a level where it's on everyone's radar screen where they say, hey, we have 800 troops in niger, 350 in mali and overall lake chad basin close to 1400, 1500, whatever the number is. that sort of conversation isn't part of the back and forth in part because bad things haven't happened there. most of the missions there are about advising and building drone bases. we do hear a fair amount when
there's a strike against say isis in libya and where that drain might have taken off from and what sort of asset they use but in terms of the overall footprint all across west africa, it isn't like this is greatly discussed. it's discussed in somalia and lots of back and forth in amazon mission there. but all of that said, there have been notifications sent to congress. the pentagon has informed them but they haven't shouted about it. >> not necessarily authorization but notification. eli, let's talk a little bit about the politics of this and you heard that gold star widow talk a little bit about her phone call with the president, essentially coming down on the side of congressman frederica wilson. what's going to be the next turn here. is john kelly coming under pressure to apologize? the cbc has called for him to do that. any signs in your reporting that that's something that might happen? >> i would be surprised if he comes out -- they may issue a
statement, may address this tomorrow at the white house briefing. but when he came out on thursday, and really tried to lend his experience and memorial authority he has as a general and gold star father himself to this president to explain the process, not just the process of bringing a body home but the process in the white house of what he said to the president and how that call came about, there was nothing from him acknowledging that what the mother of the soldier sergeant johnson had already said, which is that they were upset, they felt disrespected. there was just a defensive posture and attack on the congresswoman. you do get the sense from the white house, the administration sara huckabee sanders followed up the next day saying if you didn't understand the phrase empty barrel, i can say all hat no cattle. there's been an eagerness to go after this african-american congresswoman and tangle with this family. you saw the president himself after the widow was on tv acknowledging and putting her
name out there and talking about this very painful situation, he couldn't say, maybe i got the tone wrong. it was nope, this is my version. i did it correctly. and everybody in this administration has to take their cues from this president who can't apologize. >> michael, how does the white house move on from this? it seems the posture they are taking, the president tweeted this morning but we're not going to get a white house briefing. is that the sfrtrategy, try and stop talking and hope the president doesn't keep tweeting about it? >> no doubt that's the strategy, whether that's what they do is up to the president and what he's thinking when he's back at twitter. the president likes these fights generally, likes picking fights with individuals and using them to attract the nation's attention and rally his base around different causes. he wanted this fight though to be against representative wilson, not the widow and that's
the problem they have this morning. last week they tried to frame it around the congresswoman. this weekend the president tried to frame it around the congresswoman. then the widowically endorsing and the president taking the bait in a tweet changes it somewhat. if you remember what general kelly said at the briefing on thursday, it was about respecting the families of these fallen soldiers and so just is not consistent to have a war of words with a mourning pregnant widow. >> thank you both so much for taking the time to talk to us about this today. i want to get to richard haas joining me from new york city. president of the council on foreign relations and msnbc contributor and the author of a world in disarray. i highly recommend it if you hadn't already picked it up. thank you so much for being here. i really appreciate you taking
the time. >> thanks, kasie. >> i want to start with the conversation about the discourse we've been having and i think we have a little sound from senator john mccain, who has been out talking kind of more freely than we've maybe seen before about all of this. he seems to have -- the new york times said it was mccain in twilight, that was something that his twitter account retweeted so something clearly that he's embracing but let's look at what he had to say this morning and we'll talk about it. >> we should not be fighting about abrave american who lost his life serving his country. that should not be the topic of discussion in america today. >> yes. >> whoopi is right in that americans should know what's going on in niger. >> yeah. >> should know what caused the deaths of four brave young americans and should know what kind of operations we're engaged in. and one of the fights i'm having right now with the
administration is that armed services committee is not getting enough information. and they deserve it because we represent their families too. >> i mentioned that i had faced greater challenges. >> but the point is that we've got to -- i hate to keep going back to the big picture, we've got to lift the national dialogue. let's stop insulting each other and start respecting each other. >> yeah. >> mccain clearly playing a critical role, in part trying to get information about the pentagon on this raid? >> sure, it's not just tactical questions why the soldiers went whether they did, whether they were properly ordered and adequate intelligence. what the senator is talking about is the strategic mission. exactly why do we have somewhere between 750 and 1,000 american troops there. why are they taking offensive raids of this nature? doesn't that risk being whack a mole. their principled purpose i
always thought was to support local troops rather than take their place. why are we doing this? do we need to do this in as many countries as we are. we're seeing a lot of this throughout africa as well as the middle east. so i think these are legitimate questions. there's also the question of congressional oversight. so actually i think it's a real moment for congress to have some hearings about american foreign policy, about american defense policy to use the classroom, if you will that a congressional hearing has historically been to have administration witnesses and outsiders testify because what we're debating, not just here but everywhere else, fu fundamental questions far more fundamental than i would say we've seen in decades. whether we should stay in nafta. what about the question of american alliances. should we use military force vis avis on north korea. how do we manage the rise of china and how do we deal with a difficult russia.
if there was ever a case for a set of big hearings on foreign policy, it is now. >> richard, one of the things that struck me over the weekend watching sunday shows, general david petraeus on abc and said that the biggest foreign policy threat, one of the biggest foreign policy threats that we as a nation face is parochialism at home. he described sort of the ongoing debate we're having in this country as something that could fundamentally threaten our security. do you agree with that? how would you frame that kind of conversation? >> short answer is i agree 100%. if you think about it, we talk about foreign policy and domestic policy as those they were distinct. if you think of them both as national security, two sides of a single coin, then i think the integration of the two becomes para mount. if we're distracted at home and divided at home and not making ourselves competitive. if the debt is allowed to grow, all of these issues will affect america's both its focus on the
world and how about bandwidth we have and as well as the resources we can bring and vulnerability to what goes on in the world. i actually think it's important to break down the barriers because a lot doesn't stop at the border in either direction. >> certainly the russians seem to think that when they were attempting to meddle in the u.s. election in part by inciting political division here at home. richard haass, msnbc contributor, thanks. also the author of a world in disarray." coming up, we have the jfk files in just three days, thousands of documents on his assassination will be released for first time. i'm going to talk with my colleague and jfk expert, resident here at msnbc, hardball host chris matthews. in fighting in the gop, we'll break down the latest on president trump and the establishment. we'll be right back.
♪ ♪ everyone deserves attention, whether you've saved a lot or just a little. at pnc investments, we believe you're more than just a number. so we provide personal financial advice for every retirement investor. ...from godaddy! in fact, 68% of people who have built their... ...website using gocentral, did it in under an hour, and you can too. build a better website - in under an hour. with gocentral from godaddy. when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. i just snapped a photo and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company
definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. (avo) but you also have a higher risk of heart attack or stroke. non-insulin victoza® lowers a1c, and now reduces cardiovascular risk. victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar better than the leading branded pill. (avo) and for people with type 2 diabetes treating cardiovascular disease, victoza® is now approved to lower the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (avo) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash,
swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so, stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. ask your doctor about victoza®.
that is wrong. if it's a new week, it's a snu wipe at president trump from john mccain. he may not have mentioned the president by name but the comments not too far to figure out. president trump received a draft deferment for bone spurs in his heels. steve bannon is continuing his war against the republican establishment, who is going to be his next targtd? we may find out this afternoon. speaking at an event in washington today. the his attacks are not limited to those already in office. >> president bush to me embarrassed himself. speechwriter wrote a high if a loouting speech. there has not been a more destructive presidency than george bush's. >> further evidence that the republican party is far from united. will anything change as president trump heads to the hill and tries to get a win on the board with tax reform? joining me here in the newsroom to talk about all of this is
michael steele, former rnc chairman and political analyst and bill cristal, the weekly standard. two of my favorite republicans in twilight in the trump administration. >> i reject that. it's dawn. twilight and dawn look similar. >> fair. talk to me about what you heard from steve bannon, calling bush's presidency the most destructive. >> speaking to the california republican party, i mean the republican party -- this is a drawback in the past few decades but also a strength is a pretty loyal party. they sort of like their -- respect the people who ran for office before, whether it's bob dole, won or loss, bush or dole or mccain. >> there's been a traditional deference. >> yeah. >> you follow the tea party insurgent, thrp assimilated into the party. a story about bannon personal y
personality, it's a genuine attempt to destroy the current republican party and replace it with something else. the only question if our adult lifetime, you weren't born at this point, early 60s, hated lyndon johnson more than they hated republicans. he hates george bush more than he hates the democrats. and i think that's what bannon has in mind. >> on that point, mitch mcconnell has become something of a very unexpected and well known boogie man, the reporters who have gone down to alabama, a lot of the reporting was, yeah, people knew mitch mcconnell's name which was unusual. i think that we have a little bit of what mitch mcconnell said on sunday about that if we can take a look. >> to make policy, you've got to win elections and some of these folks that you've been quoting as i said are specialists and nominating at people who lose. that isn't going to help president trump achieve his agenda.
>> so who's right here? mitch mcconnell or steve bannon? who is the president listening to? >> i think the president is probably listening to more steve bannon because they are sim bee yotic mind with respect to how the president wants to go about deconstructing the administrative state, that includes mitch mcconnell. mcconnell is ultimately right, you don't get too do policy unless you win elections. >> he might have five more republican senators to work with if they listened in 2010 and 2012? >> absolutely right. all of this talk about replacing mcconnell with whom? to do what? what are they going to do differently than mitch mcconnell is already doing or not doing to sort of save the space that he's in? and understanding that aspects of what it means to be majority leader takes finess and little bit of cunning and mcconnell will not go out as you know start laying down the nails and talk about what he's going to do. he just doesn't. >> i respect mitch mcconnell but
this argument does not work with voters, the argument that you've got to nominate someone who can win. we don't know who's going to win ahead of time. crist made it against rubio, et cetera. secondly, voters would like to vote for someone they believe in or has policies that will help them. this only being foit by the bannon side and they are hunkered down in the feetal position. you have to fight ban on issues, do you want protectionist republicans or those who accept the 21st century or want to roll everything back 60 or 70 years or believes in america's role in the world or not. they have to make a substantive case and not say it's too risky. if moore wins, what was sacrificed? >> they look at the races lost where they nominated -- but to your point, it doesn't change. >> there does seem to be a difference between somebody who
is on the same page as steve bannon on things like big issues tpp trade than a christine o'donnell in delaware, people who have said thing that are unpal atable. that may be the disconnect? >> but it may also be the link that makes bannon work better than what we saw play in 2010. those candidates aren't gad flies spoutding out witch craft crazy, they are talking about the substance of policy. you're right, the counter measures what is mcconnell and leadership prepared to do, particularly after the two failures on health care and the seemingly to get around an idea on tax reform. >> let's talk about tax reform for a second. this is a thing where i think congressional republicans seem to feel there's a little momentum going forward, the message that hey, if you don't pass this bill, you are probably going to lose in 2018, seems to have been received. but there seems to be a lot of
nervousness how the president will react at any given moment to the details. what happened with 401(k)s is a good example, no how, no way. he seems to want a middle class tax cut. republicans in congress want something else. >> i think donald trump, the moment any revenue raise or tax increase will be put on the table, and that's an unpopular reaction. donald trump is going to walk away with it. they'll end up with a massive tax cut and no revenue and blowing more of a hole in the federal deficit and debt. that's an issue for some republicans. again, think they need to make the argument for the bill. you're absolutely right, the strongest thing going for this bill we've got to pass this or we're really in trouble in november. that's an argument that could motivate members not one you can make publicly to voters, i voted for the tax bill and it looks lopsidedly prowealthy and stale ideas but i voted because they told me i couldn't win re-election unless i voted for it. they need to make an argument on
the merits for this bill and there they've made less progress. >> the president has a very good sense where they are and who they are looking for. thank you both so much for taking the time today. great conversation. up next, a new twist in the bill o'reilly sexual harassment scandal. the claims the former fox news host played a $32 million settlement to one of his accusers. it would be one of the biggest settlement in his time ever. we'll talk with one of the reporters who broke the interview. ter. so fresh from the farm. delicious. perfect. only one egg with more great nutrition- now with 5 times more vitamin d, 10 times more vitamin e, and 25% less saturated fat. only one egg good enough for my family. because why have ordinary when you can have the best. eggland's best. the only egg that gives you so much more: better taste.
backed me up... big time. before movantik, i tried to treat it myself. no go. but i didn't back down. i talked to my doctor. she said: one, movantik was specifically designed for opioid-induced constipation... oic. number two? my movantik savings card can save me big time over the other things i tried. don't take movantik if you have or had a bowel blockage. serious side effects include opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain, severe diarrhea, and stomach or intestinal tears. tell your doctor about side effects and medicines you take. movantik may interact with them causing side effects. don't back down from oic. talk to your doctor about mo-van-tik. and how you can have a $0 co-pay.
by hill o'reilly is back ine news, he struck a $32 million settlement with former network legal analyst wiehl back in january, that would be the largest settlement to date. accused him of repeated sexual harassment and nonconsensual sexual relationship and fox new about the settlement before they resigned to a an extension worth $25 million a year. nbc news has not verified "new york times reporting and released a statement. once again they maliciously smeared bill o'reilly failing to prince a sworn affidavit from his former lawyer lis weihl, and
relied on unsubstantiated allegations and anonymous sources and incomplete or stolen documents. the parent company of fox issued this statement, thinks new contract made at the time typical for renewals of multiyear talent contracts added protections for the company, specifically aim at has asments, including he could be dismissed if the company was made aware of other allegations or if additional relevant information was obtained in a company investigation. the company subsequently acted based on the terms of this contract. this morning on the "today" show, megyn kelly raised concerns about her former colleague's behavior to the presidents of fox. >> o'reilly's suggestion that no one complained about his behavior is false. i know because i complained. i did something that day i've never done before, i wrote an e-mail to the co-presidents of fox news, big shine and jack
abernathy, an e-mail i never made public but sharing now because it speaks volumes about powerful men and the roadblocks one can face in taking them on. i wrote in part, perhaps he didn't realize the kind of message his criticism sends to young women across this country about how men continue to view the issue of speaking out about sexual harassment. >> joining me now is michael schmit, one of the reporters behind that "new york times" story and msnbc national security contributor. there's so much to talk about here. you sat down with bill o'reilly on wednesday, we should point out before your story over the weekend. here's what he had to say and i'll have to have you explain it all. >> we have physical proof that is this is [ bleep ] [ bleep ] okay? it's on if you want to destroy my children further. it's all crap. i've been in the broadcast
journalism business 43 years. i've never had one complaint filed against me by a co-worker in any human resources department in 43 years, that encompasses 12 different companies. so all of a sudden, all of this stuff happens and the pain it brings to my children is indescribable. indescribable. >> michael, can you walk through what was he talking about there when he used -- i'm not going to repeat the words he used. was he talking about the entirety of your story, specific things inside it? can you explain exactly what you were talking to him about there. >> he was talking about all of our reporting dating back to april where we first reported that he had five deals that he had reached during his two decades at the network. he was trying to make the case
to us that he had been the victim here in the aftermath of roger ailes leaving, he was someone easily targeted my people for money, fox would make deals with them. he was -- he had been taken advantage of and it was -- he had really suffered because of that and his family suffered because of that. that was his argument to us. we heard him out. it was about an hour long interview. it was an unusual interview. there wasn't much of a discussion. it was a lot of sort of us asking very pointed questions and him giving us either no answer or very animated angry answers. >> michael, can you give us a little back story why he decided to talk to you? was he trying to get you not to write the story? >> i don't think he thought he could get us to not write the story but maybe he thought that he could bully us into not doing it or get us -- push us into not doing it. it certainly wasn't the type of interview where he tried to
charm us. it was clear from the beginning that this would be unlike any other interview i had been in, where he was going to push as hard as he could to make the case that this was -- this was not fair and that we weren't really following the facts. and we spent a lot of time there just asking him questions to try to learn as much as possible about his side and about why these things may have happened to hear him out so we could incorporate that into our story. >> it seems to me based on what we just heard, that piece of your interview, that he made some claims about his own background, the lack of complaints to human resources departments or other things and heard from megy n kelly refuting that. did you feel he was lying to you straight out? was that a consistent theme throughout your interview? >> he has taken this argument for more than a year with us, in which he said there's never any complaints against him at all. we found that sort of curious
because he actually today he himself acknowledged on the air he had settled himself three cases during his time at fox news. there's three others that we know about. so i don't know how he can make the argument that these deals were reached. certainly the fox news legal department, human resources department knew about some of them. and but what he takes the perspective of, there's never been a formal complaint filed against him. it seems to me a distinction without a difference and that's his response and i'll have to leave that at that. >> we do have some new information as well, bill o'reilly tell beingiing glenn b this coming in the last couple of minutes, if he had to do it all over again, i never would have settled and says he settled to protect his kids. he also responded to megyn kelly, was played the clip you
all just saw where kelly said she complained about his behavior. he has straight out, number one, she didn't file a complaint, not that i know of, never brought to our attention of that megyn kelly did anything. bill o'reilly continuing what michael schmidt you have just described it a pug nashs set of interviews on the topic. >> you know, he's out there saying this stuff and trying to just make his case and i get that. we published -- we had this podcast that went up today that had his side and i think if you listen to it, you can hear why he feels the way he did and why he did the things he did and his sort of explanations for that. i think he deserves to be able to make that case. but as we saw yesterday in and after the story came out on saturday, his side put out a statement. they didn't raise any factual issues about the story. and they said we hadn't been fair to them and other things but there was no factual
questions about the story. >> at the end of the day that's the most important thing. michael schmidt of the "new york times," thanks for taking the time today. i appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. >> up next, the jfk files, thousands of classified documents set to be released to the public on thursday. hardball host and jfk author chris matthews joins me next for a preview of what we might learn. right now, ivanka trump is speak ting at the town hall in bucks county, pennsylvania, and promised that 401(k)s won't be touched. we're keeping an eye on it. you're watching msnbc. the uncertainties of hep c. wondering, what if? i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more
than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni.
in less than 27 hours, never before seen government files on the assassination of president john f. kennedy will be released to the public. a ruling all documents could be released in 25 years unless the president deemed it a danger to intelligence or national security. the bulk of the records come from the cia and the fbi, and president trump made his decision public on twitter on saturday. "subject to the receipt of
further information, i will be allowing as president the long locked and classified jfk files to be opened." the national archives has until this thursday to release the files, unless the president changes his mind. joining me here in washington is chris matthews, host of "hardball" here on msnbc and also author and expert on several kennedy books, including "jack kennedy: an illusive hero," and "bobby kennedy" available on pre-order, i'm excited about it, chris. explain for -- a lot of people watching who have different memories of this. jfk's assassination came up on the campaign trail, this president bringing up theories exactly what happened. what do you think we'll find out we don't already know? >> when it happened i was at college and it changed everything. like the movie tape had broken. like something changed in history. kennedy's dead?
how can he be dead? the way we were brought up to think of drama, must have been somebody big who did it, not somebody like lee harvey oswald. didn't make sense. seemed too important in our lives, every remembers it. everybody remembers it. never satisfied with documentation. get a lot of paper this week. my hunch is, maybe there was somebody -- i thought -- 1992, interesting year. president of the united states, former head of the fbi herbert walker bush. something happens when somebody commits a horrible assassination, crime, shooting, why didn't we know? >> or watching for that in advance? >> right. also president johnson afraid knowing how hot the war was, soviets had anything to do or the communists, i don't think it
was a conspiracy, i think it was oswa oswald. the parade route wasn't set until the day before. no way anybody would have known that until the day before. how could anybody know? it happened a crime are opportunity for oswald who already tried to shoot general walker, president nixon. and going to the soviet and cuban embassy in september before the assassination, why were no records kept of those meetings? a sweaty guy, been a pro-communist, still in fafatua with castro. dangerous and i see why they kept that quiet. >> your new book is about bobby
kennedy. what were the theories? >> first off, that afternoon, horrible news from j. edgar hoover, talked to an impressive newspaperman and so much bitterness. thought it would be me. he thought it was all about desegregation. how kennedy was so unpopular down in dallas. first instinct. then head of the cia said, was it you? was it you? both very roman catholic and religious and got him to swear basically on his soul it wasn't them. he believed them. of course, the mob, bobby had been fighting with the mob since '57. jian kage giancano, quit his relationship with sinatra, all of these guys might be after my brother. first answer was, thought it would be me. thought he had more enemies than his brother. amazing story. >> why has all of this been kept
secret so long? >> we're going to find out. won't we? people love to keep secrets. alger his, a hiss, a spy, came t with decryptions, he was a spy for moscow, but they kept it secret for years. why? you know? secret keeping is a problem. >> and uttering conspiracy theory after theory for decades. >> makes it easy. easy for olver stone. i said a minute ago people wanted bigger answers. a great filmmaker, olver stone, jim garrison in texas and a gay guy, tommy lee jones playing in the movie. all of this stuff, historical stuff and people say, sounds right, because we don't know enough. until we get all the papers people will remain unsatisfied. >> might be a bombshell or just -- >> the kennedy brothers are more fascinating than anything because of what they stirred in this country.
the excitement and hope that they stirred in the country. >> absolutely agree. author of "jack kennedy: illusive hero" and "bobby kenny: a raging spirit." a book coming out next week. looked forward to it. thank you. there is a new call to impeeve president trump. this time not coming from a lawmaker. >> obstructed justice at the fbi and in direct violation of the constitution taken money from foreign governments and threaten to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impreemping and removing a dangerous government, then what has our government become? >> a mega launched an impeach campaign including an eight figure tv ad and seven digit buy all out of his
pockets. joining me, tom stier, president and founder of next gen america. thanks for being with us today. sir, i have beenterior interesting in following this closely and take it upon myself to start asking a variety of democratic lawmakers about your ad, your push. i talked to democratic senator al franken. listen to what he had that say and then we'll chat about it. >> i think we have to wait until what bob mueller comes up with. we have a process in place. i think tom stier is a great guy but i don't agree with him on this one. >> that answer is similar to others, who seem to be uncomfortable and on the spot when i ask whether or not the president should be impreached. at what grounds do you believe there are high crimes and misdemeanors and aren't you causing a lot of problems for elected democrats right now? >> well, the president met the
standard for historical impeachment already and clearly has done so. the standard of all previous impeachments has been a violation and trust of the constitution and with the american people and obstruction of justice by firing mr. comey, trying to stop the russia investigati investigation, the president already violated the constitution and obstructed just is. elected officials are hiding behind the mueller investigation to try to come up with something that is already evert and clear and that the american people want to see happen. >> do you think that democratic donors should withhold campaign money from democrats who are not willing to say that the president should be impeached now? >> what our organization does, kasie, is to organize grass roots conversations around the united states, citizen to citizen conversations about the biggest issues of the day. and we believe anytime those
conversations are held, people will move to a more progressive approach. so the fact of the matter is that isn't a question we really ask ourselves. what we ask ourselves is, how do we get a broader, more just society? how do we get a more broad, more complete democracy, and that is something we'll never give up on and don't see that is in anyway conflict with the call we're making now to impeach this president. >> on the need to impeach site you have taken dianne feinstein who at one point said the president could potentially be a good president, what are your future plans here? are you planning to challenge her or rather be governor of california? >> i've said repeatedly, i am willing to do anything that will push us forward, because i believe we're in a political crisis. >> where could you best do that? >> i haven't made a decision. i don't know, kasie. maybe you'd like to give me that answer. the fact of the matter we do right now that this president
has got to go. he's met the standard for impeachment. he's a clear and present danger to american citizens. their health and their safety. it's very clear right now regardless what i do personally, this guy's got to go. the american people know it. they need to tell their elected representatives because they are -- [ inaudible ]. >> we just lost democratic donor tom steyr and want to thank him for joining us. setting up a difficult test for those running in 2018. that wraps up things for me. rauch the rachel maddow show for her interview with attorney general eric holder. for now, ali velshi from new york. >> good afternoon. i'm ali velshi. this hour the president presents the medal of honor to an army medic served during vietnam and saved numerous lives. this as the white house faces