tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC May 30, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
that wraps up this hour of msnbc live. katy tur standing by. i'll see you tomorrow morning on "today". >> hey, craig, how are you? >> i'm great. thank you for having. >> have a good hour. >> an hour off, at least. >> yes. it is 11:00 a.m. out west and 2:00 p.m. in washington, where in just 45 minutes, we're expecting the first official white house briefing in over a week. and it is reasonable to expect reporters will press sarah sanders with this. does president trump still have confidence in his attorney general jeff sessions? if the president's tweets are any indication, that answer is a pretty hard "no." cherry-picking comments from republican congressman trey gowdy this morning, president trump tweeted, quote, i wish i
did pick someone other than jeff sessions. hee conveniently ignored, though, trey gowdy's other statement last night. >> president trump himself, in the comey memos said, if anyone connected with my campaign was working with russia, i want you to investigate it. and it sounds to me like that is exactly what the fbi did. >> a reminder, he has still offered no evidence the fbi spied on his campaign. donald trump has not. but back to jeff sessions. "the new york times" has the details of another controversy in the trump versus sessions sa saga. a march 2017 battle over trump's recusal from the trump investigation. mr. trump had told aides that he needed a loyalist overseeing the inventory berated mr. sessions and told him he should reverse his decision. sessions did not. this episode is being eyed by none other than robert mueller. it should not come as a surprise that the president does not want
sessions as his ag, after all, he said out loud that he wants an attorney general who will protect him, not one who recuses himself and gives up control over an investigation that the president can't escape. so the big question right now is if president trump is so unhappy with jeff sessions, why hasn't he fired him? let's bring in our reporters and analysts. first up, msnbc's kristen welker at the white house. kristen, where does the relationship stand as of today, wednesday? >> reporter: well, today, katy, was yet another moment where we saw this simmering tension between the president and his own attorney general bubble up into public view. in this case, in the wake of that "new york times" report, which you cited, which said that president trump back in march actually pressed his attorney general to reverse his recusal, just to remind everyone, katy, the reason why jeff sessions recused himself in the first
place was because there were revelations that he met with russia's ambassador during the campaign twice. those meetings hadn't initially been disclosed, so he made the move, which, by the way, within the legal community, was broadly seen as the right one to recuse himself. but president trump, ever since he recused himself, has frankly lashed out at him in various different forms, on twitter, in public settings. so this was another flare-up of that. and he did, quote trey gowdy to take another shot at him. trey gowdy said, look, he can understand why president trump is frustrated. he said, quote, there are a lot of really good lawyers in the country. he could have picked somebody else. mr. trump added to his tweet, "and i wish i did." so, again, katy, really underscoring what we've heard from this president in the past, which is that he thinks he may not have picked the right attorney general. as to that big question, why doesn't he vus fijust fire him? well, we saw after he fired james comey, that sets off a whole another round of potential
issues. that could be one reason why this president has not made any moves. and we could get to ask sarah sanders about that within the hour. >> kristen welker doing a good job battling the white house lawn mower for airtime today. kristen welker, thank you very much. natasha bertrand is a staff writer for the atlantic and an msnbc contributor. jake sherman is the sior writer for politico. and chuck rosenberg is a former u.s. attorney, senior fbi official and msnbc contributor. natasha, i want to pose a big question to you. if president trump is so unhappy with jeff sessions, why in the world doesn't he fire him? you wrote a story about this very thing, i believe, last month. >> right. this is really the big question. and there are a number of competing theories. the first is that it would be, obviously, politically explosive for him to fire his attorney general. jeff sessions is additionally very well liked among republicans. so it would just be, it would just not be good for the president's image, overall. the second is that there's
something to be said for keeping sessions in his orbit. because, of course, if sessions were removed from the white house altogether, then he might be more vulnerable and more inclined to cooperate with the special counsel's investigation. we know that sessions himself might have some legal exposure, because there are questions about whether or not he perjured himself during his confirmation hearings before congress when he said that he had to communication with russian officials during the election. of course with of course, that's not true. he did meet with the foreign russian ambassador, sergey kislyak. so there are a number of different theories here. but of course, other people i spoke to said that they don't think that trump would hesitate at all to fire sessions, if he felt lake he had never political cover to do that. and they pointed, of course, to the fact that he did fire the former fbi director, jim comey, with very little consequences. and of course, he also desperate celebrated the dismissal of the deputy director, andy mccabe, two days before his retirement. so there are some people who say
that the president can't do this because it might be perceived as obstruction and it would be politically disastrous for him to do it, but there are others say when the time is right, he may pull the trigger. >> jake, is this the squirm and coil for the republicans. would this create a rift among republicans if the president did decide to fire jeff sessions? is this one of those line that he shouldn't cross? >> it would be healing the symptom, but not the cause, perhaps. and if you read between the lines and listen to what paul ryan and mitch mcconnell have said on capitol hill, they've said that they are in touch with the president and they are counseling him on tow f how to handle stregs. and again, we're reading between the lines. i'm not sure if either of them have said this exactly. but they said they are not concerned about the president dismissing anybody involved in this investigation. again, reading between the lines, that means they have some assurances from the president that he's not going to take these steps. i think we have to pay very close attention here to the
politics. we are 160 days until the midterm election. a midterm election that is historically going to be, if we base this prediction on history, very bad for the republican party. and if the president is seen as meddling in this investigation, republican leaders tell us all the time on capitol hill that that would be treacherous for their electoral prospects. >> hold on, jake. hasn't he already been seen as meddling in the investigation? do they not see him as meddling before now? >> i think some might, but i think this would be a step in a direction that would be troubling to a broader swath of house and senate republicans. remember, there is a live bill in the senate that would protect bob mueller brekt h, protect hi bob mueller's job. so again, i think that this -- again, if we believe what's been reported and we do and bob mueller wraps up some time in september and there's a report on the doorstep of capitol hill, that indicates a whole sort of -- a whole broad set of
allegations against the president and congress has to act in some way, shape, or form, that would not be a useful political element going into the election. >> chuck, let's talk about the legal ramification. natasha alluded to this a moment ago, what sort of legal exposure that jeff sessions might have if he was no longer a member of the doj. what would that look like? >> well, i don't think it changes very much, katy. first, his obligation to tell the truth when he's talking to investigators is precisely the same, whether he's the attorney general or the former attorney general. and if he's done something wrong, it frankly doesn't matter either way in that case, right? if he's broken the law, he's broken the law. and being the attorney general isn't going to cover him from that. so, if the president wants to fire this guy, he absolutely has the authority. it probably would be a bad political call, but it's a relatively easy legal call. he has the legal ability to do it. but i don't think from jeff sessions' perspective, his
obligations or his cover changes very much. >> chuck, what do you make of trey gowdy over the weekend? he was in that classified briefing with devin nunes, looking at the classified material about the informant within the trump campaign. and he came out very clearly and said, hey, with listen, this looks like the fbi doing exactly what it was supposed to do. remember, the president asked james comey according to the comey memos to look into his campaign, to make sure that nobody was in there that should not have been in there. do you think that that sort of statement is going to -- well, what effect will that statement have? >> well, it depends on who you're talking about, katy. on the president, probably not a darned bit of difference, but i'll tell you, mr. goudy who is a former federal prosecutor is spot-on in his analysis. imagine from the reverse perspective, imagine that the fbi knew that a hostile foreign power had infiltrated the campaign of a candidate for president of the united states
and then decided to do nothing. that is truly outrageous. the fact that they were speaking to an informant, somebody that saw stuff that bothered him and was relaying it to the fbi is precisely what we would expect our fbi to do. mr. goudy knows that, lots and lots of thoughtful people know that. it's obviously the right answer. >> mr. trump knows this he would soon end up end up if he fired jeff sessions. thank you, you guys. michael cohen is back in federal court today. judge kimba wood has given his attorneys until june 15th to review several millions items seized in the fbi raid on his offices and homes. whatever documents or items cohen's team is not able to get through will be sent to a privileged team to sort through. remember, at issue here is whether any of the seized items would be considered attorney/client privileged. as of now, there are only three times that prosecutors have not turned over, two blackberries and the contents of a sclhredde
which prosecutors say they are still reconstructing. michael avenatti was also there at the court, asking the judge to ask cohen's lawyers about leaks, but the judge refused, saying as of now, avenatti, who is representing stormy daniels, has no standing in this case. >> we now have what i will refer to as the trump tapes. mr. ryan admitted that there are audio recordings that michael cohen was taking for years and that those recordings are to quote him, not only do they exist, but they are under lock and key and some of them relate to my client and her attorney/client privilege communications. >> nbc news investigations reporter tom winter was in that court for that hearing. what is avenatti talking about? what tapes? >> so, katy, we first started to hearing about these tapes last week. and michael avenatti said that he believed that there were audio recordings that were
leaked to the media from either michael cohen or michael cohen's attorneys or both and these tapes or recordings may have something to do with stormy daniels. today we learned a little bit more about that, in that those recordings, according to michael avenatti, may have -- may have been made between michael cohen and keith davidson, who is an attorney that used to represent stormy daniels, and that some of those conversations that were recorded had to do with statements that stormy daniels made as part of her attorney/client privilege. i know we need a map to kind of understand this at this point. but basically, what michael avenatti is trying to do here is saying, hey, look, i think my client had some discussions with her former attorney, and some of those discussions were relayed to michael cohen, and that i want to make sure that those recordings are protected. i don't understand why i'm getting calls from a member of the press. he didn't say what media outlet had them or what media outlet called him, but he did express concern about it in court today. the judge didn't want to explore
it too much further, katy. and really, we don't have a resolution at this point as far as where those recordings are and what they may say. >> tom winter, tom, thank you very much. next up, why ambien may want to include a new side effect on its warning label, or maybe not, frankly. may be wlblamed for bouts of racism. they'd say no. but then something happened. we had to deal with spam, fake news, and data misuse. that's going to change. from now on, facebook will do more to keep you safe and protect your privacy. because when this place does what it was built for, then we all get a little closer.
roseanne's firing and lo and behold, he made the controversy all about himself. quote, bob iger of abc called valerie jarrett to let her know that abc does not tolerate comments like those made by roseanne barr. gee, he never called president donald j. trump to apologize for the horrible, in caps, statements made and said about me on abc. maybe i just didn't get the call. i don't really know what he's talking about. not many people seem to know what he's talking about. not clear what he's asking an apology for what was said on abc. meanwhile, barr, who had promised to leave twitter, has not. last night, she re-issued apologies. she asked her fans not to defend her. called her tweets about valerie jarrett, quote, unforgivable and blamed her actions on ambien, but if you go to twitter now, many of those posts have now been deleted. in their place, a barrage of re-tweets that criticized abc for giving her the boot and
pushbacks on claims that she is a racist. this as tvland, hulu, and others have announced they, too, will pull "roseanne's" show, the re-runs, to be specific. and sanofi, the maker of ambien, isn't letting roseanne's claim that the drug influenced her behavior slide. earlier today, they issued a statement saying in part, while all pharmaceutical treatments have side effects, racism is not a known side effect of any sanofi medication. joining me now is elise jordan, a former aide to the george w. bush white house and state departments, a "time" magazine contributor and msnbc political analyst and also a woman, zerlina maxwell is former director of progressive women for the clinton campaign, and an msnbc political analyst and also an awesome woman, and nancy giles is a -- >> giles. >> sorry, i was so close. almost got this through that script. an emmy award-winning contributor to cbs news sunday
morning, it's actually just cbs sunday morning, it's the best show on television other than this one here. also hosts the podcast "the giles files" and also an awesome woman. ladies, thank you so much for being here. let's talk about roseanne. ambien. did you see the ambien tweet, the shade tweet. >> yeah, i love it. again, here's what's interesting. she makes these racist, bigoted comments, and like many racists, bigots do, she won't take responsibility. and it's something else, it's some other entity that made her do it. and look, in a way, if she would just own it, i think i would respect her more. but first it's a joke, then it's the drugs, then it's the drugs that made her do the joke and none of it plays out. and i do pharmaceutical ads sometimes, so those side effects, side effects may include not being racist, i just want to say. so, she's full ofit. it's crap. >> i've heard of sleep eating on ambien, but never heard of going out and being racist. >> right, there's been side effects of ambien that we've talked about in the past. people cooking full meals,
right, on ambien, but racism is not something that you can take a drug and all of a sudden become. you are a racist or, you know, you articulate racist ideas because you believe them or you're ignorant to other cultures. and so i think it goes to the fact that, you know, hate speech has consequences. and i think that that's what we're abc is being praised for the swift action and canned the show within a few hours. but they hired roseanne back. i mean this is a woman who posed next to an oven in nazi garb in a mustache cooking little gingerbread men. that's pretty horrible. offensive, awful, anti-semitic. yes, i think that abc was trying to take advantage of, you know, trump's win in the election and wanted to tap into that audience and the trump voter. i think what they -- the mistake they made, one, hiring roseanne in the first place because of her long history, not the only example as you said but also all
trump voters are not racist. they tolerated racism in voting for trump and overlooked his racism in order to cast their votes but everybody voted for trump for a different reason and so i think that there are ways to actually demonstrate that on television and show a diversity of characters. >> you don't have to hire roseanne. >> this is what we were talking about. hollywood chose to go were the caricature of what they think a trump supporter is in the form of the roseanne show. i just remember growing up. my mom would never let us watch the roseanne show because she thought it was trashy so there's a big divide even among people and my mom voted for trump. >> is the character really that off from the people that would go to the trump rallies. is it that off? >> i'm sure she represents some of those people but not all. there is no show on television that represents everyone, you know, it's not going to be that way. jumping on what she said, abc took a risk knowing, look, she called susan rice an ape and grabbed her crotch while singing
the star-spangled banner. controversial kind of out there chick and they took a risk hoping that it would pan out and seeing that their risk didn't pay out in very bad ways channing dungey who green-lit the show and took a lot of heat fothat w parofhethat said, no, . >> what do you make of the blowback that is coming in on twitter from those who support roseanne who say those who are argue that this is the liberal media and the liberal elites trying to silence a certain portion of the country. >> they want information to be about black women being apes. i say drawing the line and prohibiting black women to be compared to apes which is racist is where we could draw that line. >> a good place to draw the line. >> what about the president making this about himself?
>> here's what i can't understand. what horrible things that abc said. he's talking about abc news. is he talking about -- >> maybe because the reporters haven't said how wonderful he is. how big his crowds are. >> apparently if he's quoted, let's say, something like mexicans are rapists, that's a quote of his. i don't know. >> does it even matter what this said. it just matters to donald trump that it's about him. and he cares about it being about him 24/7 and he had to find some way to even know this was tang jenninentially related. >> everybody who has come out and tried to walk this trumpian line, say things you would never be able to say before roseanne, don wlablankenship, rick saccon they've gone down, eric greitens
just resigned. everybody who has been tried to be trumpian has suffered. >> except donald trump. >> donald trump has not. the only place you can say racist things is when you're the president of the united states. >> seems like the coarsening of american culture there are consequences for everyone but donald trump and i can't help but to feel that, yes, there will be consequences for donald trump too. >> i think -- of course, it's like things rot from the head, okay. so if the leader of the free world is showing that he has bigoted thought, idea, has made bigoted comments over and over again. i rememberim throwing paper towels to people in puerto rico. the kind of dismissive language -- >> laughable. >> that he likes to call immigrant, some immigrants animals. the same kind of dehumanization that was -- that happened to black people when they were compared to apes. a way to make people not count so if that's our example, it is going to filter down to how other people talk and act and
interact with others. >> how do we get back on the same page that there are lines, period? >> we have to have this conversation and black people talk about race all the time. i would say white people don't talk about race as often as black people do. i think we have to talk across differences. when you saw last night at his rally the call and response now is what did i call them and the audience is saying, animals. that is horrifying. that is dangerous. because black people and brown people all over this country are in physical danger right now with rhetoric like that out there and being completely unchecked as inappropriate. >> so how do you go out there and push back against the president and push back against this movement and this reaction towards -- these call and response sessions. >> i'll say one thing and i think i got to applaud msnbc, the show last night about racism is something that i feel like everyone should see and not to jump on you two ladies because you're white but i think -- as
you said white people really need to understand the way it is in this country when you're brown skinned and the kind of treatment and the little micro aggressions you have to deal with every day that make it exhausting to have -- said it in the makeup room. so sad to talk about racism. that's how it is but maybe the more people get to know our struggle and understand american history they'll stop demonizing us and stop acting like we're the other and something to be afraid of but it's got to start somewhere. >> we have to be honest about our history too. i think that, you know, white supremacy is the idea that white skin is superior to black skin and they had scientific evidence to back it up going to the ape stereotype and have to be honest about it so we can move forward. >> maybe also don't say there are very fine people marching alongside -- >> exactly. >> very insensitive. >> we have to leave it here but i agree.
let's have the conversation. let's talk about it more. lady, fantastic lady, thank you for joining me. and coming up a russian journalist was reported to be dead. murdered but then he turned up today very much alive. that is next. liberty mutual stood with me when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night. hold on dad... liberty did what? yeah, liberty mutual 24-hour roadside assistance helped him to fix his flat so he could get home safely. my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. don't worry - i know what a lug wrench is, dad. is this a lug wrench? maybe? you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
the nation's largest senior-living referral service. for the past five years, i've spoken with hundreds of families and visited senior-care communities around the country. and i've got to tell you, today's senior-living communities are better than ever. these days, there are amazing amenities, like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars, and bistros, even pet-care services. and nobody understands your options like the advisers at a place for mom. these are local, expert advisers that will partner with you to find the perfect place and determine the right level of care, whether that's just a helping hand or full-time memory care.
best of all, it's a free service. there is never any cost to you. senior living has never been better, and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. call today. a place for mom -- you know your family, we know senior living. i support the affordable care act, and voted against all trump's attempts to repeal it. but we need to do more. i believe in universal health care. in a public health option
babchenko was reported to have been shot and killed in ukraine's capital. his wife mourned. the world reported on his death. the russian government was blamed. and then today babchenko showed up at a news conference very much alive. apparently the ukrainian security service staged his death as part of a sting operation. they had a contract for $40,000 had been placed on his life and faking his death was the only way to catch those who were after him. he had previously moved his wife and child to the capital of ukraine to kiev from russia because he did fear for his life. let's bring in russian historian amy knight who knows babchenko, also the author of "orders to kill," the putin regime and political murder. ever heard of this, the ukrainian or any other government faking a death in order to catch those after him. >> no, and i'm really very
surprised. he was here in new york at a conference. and he is a very, very courageous impressive journalist. he was a war correspondent in chechnya and he's -- he's articulate. he's talented writer and fearless, so he said that at the time in march when i spoke with him that he had moved to kiev because he'd had death threats against him. and he moved with his wife and child to kiev. and he implied that he wasn't completely safe. but this, this just shocked me. >> why would he be getting death threats in russia? what was he saying? >> well, he was very, very critical of initially, of course, russia's policies in chechnya where he reported, but more recently, of course, he was very critical of the takeover of ukraine -- of crimea and the
russian military presence in eastern ukraine and also syria so he's been pretty outspoken about russia's aggressive foreign policy and i think that he, you know, he definitely is someone they wanted to get rid of. >> so the ukrainian government says they have at least one person in custody after all of this. the sting operation apparently has yielded something. how is russia going to end up responding to this? how will they? >> first of all, as we know, the kremlin always denies everything. i mean, they've denied involvement in this poisoning -- >> this is the ukrainian government being involved. >> interesting because you see there is a lot going on behind the scenes in ukraine. many -- well, not many but quite a few people who work for the sbu have connections from the earlier period where ukraine was
part of the soviet union and so there's kind of a network, i think, of informants so it makes everything a little murkier. now, i don't know how this whole plot was figured out. but it would stand to reason since they faked the actual murder, i think this was a big mistake on the part of the ukrainian security services. because it just enables the kremlin to say, we can't trust these people. i think it kind of discredits the whole idea that, you know, somebody like babchenko who is such a courageous, honest journalist -- yes, they probably are right that it was a plot and it probably did come from the fsb. but i think the way they've gone about this is perhaps not very good from a public relations standpoint. >> do you think he's safe now? >> i think he's safe for awhile.
one never knows for sure. but, you know, for russians, another thing is that when journalists or democratic opposition of some murdered in russia the kremlin controls the investigations. the police, the judiciary so whatever happens they can always cover up. >> yeah. >> it's a little more difficult as this example shows when they try to do something now in independent ukraine. >> or if, say, in the uk or somewhere like that. >> amy knight, thank you very much for joining us and helping us understand. we appreciate it. now for something completely different. >> i really believe that if jesus was physically on the earth today he wouldn't be riding a donkey. think about it for a minute. he'd be in an airplane preaching the gospel? that is televangelist jesse duplantis. he wants to take his preaching to new heights. >> we believe in god for a
brand-new falcon 7. >> is he serious? are you telling me this man is asking his followers for a 50 million -- i'm sorry, $54 million private jet? >> yep. >> what in god's name? >> people are saying, my, look, can't you go with this one? >> yes. >> but i can't go with one stop. i said i want you to believe me for a falcon 7x. the first thing i thought of how am i going to pay for it. in 1978, flooded into my mind and said, jesse, i didn't ask you to pay for it. i asked you to believe for it. think about that for a minute. >> i don't know. >> the end time, i mean it's coming fast, ladies and gentlemen. and he said go in the world and preach the goss mel to every creature. how we going to do that? i can't live long enough to travel by car or ship or by train but i can do it by an
airplane. >> so then what's wrong with delta or united for jetblue or emirates. >> that's why we're on that airplane. we can talk to god. now, using flier lines -- back then it got to the place where it was agitating and spiritual. people coming up to him. he had become famous and they needed to pray for him and all that. you can't manage that today. >> right. >> this dope-filled world and get in a long tube with a bunch of demons. >> right. that's exactly -- >> it's deadly. >> you know what, i just remembered. i've got a bridge i want to sell you. unbelievable. it took a whole lot more. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. everything. and that 2% cash back adds up
to thousands of dollars each year... so i can keep growing my business in big leaps! what's in your wallet? i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans,
it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel - and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations.
remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now - and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. welcome to holiday inn! thank you! ♪ ♪ wait, i have something for you! every stay is a special stay at holiday inn. save up to 15% when you book early at hollidayinn.com
president trump says the russia investigation is all fake. he's called the probe into the 2016 licorice and ties to it a witch-hunt over 50 times on twitter. so many tweets we can't fit them all into one graphic. we need the big wall graphic. apparent in recent months the president is waging a public campaign trying to tear down the credibility of the investigators in order to save himself. he realizes if it comes to impeachment to keep republicans in line, he needs to keep his voters on his side. and if you live through the impeachment of bill clinton it is a familiar line of attack. back then harold ickes said ken
starr's investigation smacks of get tap poe and paul begala called his behavior frightening and absurd. there's a lot of differences between the two but tactics to attack the investigator are similar. laurence tribe has written all about it in "to end a presidency." mr. tribe joins me now. what a pleasure and an honor, sir. >> great to be here. >> thank you for joining us. obviously and again the differences between the investigation into bill clinton and to donald trump are wildly different. >> the one that's going on now is investigating whether a foreign government meddled and interfered in our election and whether the trump campaign has anything to do with it. that is very serious. the tactic, the way they're going about tearing down the investigator -- >> it's a familiar tactic. sort of the tactic of anybody who is being investigated, you try to discredit the investigator. the big difference is that in this case there are a lot of
indictments that have been handed down, a lot of guilty plea, the attempt to make it look like a witch-hunt is more difficult. but the talent of donald trump in telling repeatedly the big lie that there were spies in his campaign, that there's nothing there, there's no obstruction, that talent is holding him pretty well. but the big difference is that ken starr was out there digging stuff up looking for something. in this case mueller is looking for stuff and in the meantime, he's being undermined and what he's discovering is too complicated for anybody to uncover. what is needed is a broad, open, public investigation in which there are witnesses that are actually subpoenaed and in which the house intelligence committee or the house judiciary committee does the kind of thick that happened in the nixoned period when there was a ten-month period when the public really was brought on board.
was brought to see what was going on. >> my mom sat in on those watergate hearings. >> she did? >> why do you think that hasn't been done in the case? why has there not been open public testimony? >> trey gowdy says there has been no misconduct by the fbi. but everything is in the hands of devin nunes. devin nunes is in cahoots with the white house. it's pretty clear and that's why the house intelligence committee has basically shut down before uncovering things that the public could understand but i believe that even though impeachment is an extraordinary power and ought thought to be bandied about loosely, i don't agree with the people who say impeach now as if it would do any good. it would backfire. even though it's that kind of power. it's really critical to bring the public along. there are people who are going to believe donald trump no matter what. but there is a large group in
the country that doesn't want a constant focus on negativity and on getting rid of the president but who also is not fully aware of the fact that as james clapper recently concluded in his book "facts and fears" the government under vladimir putin may actually have stolen the election. that's something that people don't really believe yet because the facts aren't all out there. >> you have a president going out screaming witch-hunt, witch-hunt and making it -- >> he knows how to do it. he is a very effective entertain enary gradually gets people to believe what he says as long as he says it often enough. >> in your book you point out before the 2016 election republicans were talking about impeachment. you reference "the washington post" article written a day before the election. senior republican lawmakers are openly discussing the prospect of impeaching hillary clinton should she win the presidency. you say republicans use these
threats to achieve two goals increasing their odds of winning the electionsnd laying groundwork for their siege a likely clinton adminirati. >> well, actually both sides were doing it. ever since the clinton years impeachment which was previously an extraordinary power has become an ordinary tool of political division. this was the first election in our history in which both sides before they even knew for sure who was going to win were saying whoever wins is going to be immediately impeached. the democrats were saying that trump should go the moment he gets into power. the republicans were saying hillary clinton should be jailed and certainly she should be impeached. it's become a weapon of political discourse. and it's much too important a power to degrade that way. >> well, what's interesting is republicans behind the scenes in private conversations were talking about whether they would want to impeach donald trump
before the election as well should he win. they were so worried about what he would be like. >> never a trump group -- >> never a trump group and a group of republicans still around that have not left donald trump's side that said the same thing before he was actually elected. >> right. >> publicly they haven't left his side but privately a lot of them say they are deeply in remorse over what they have to deal with. >> wonder why people don't say those things publicly. lawrence, thanks for joining us. your book "to end a presidency: the power of purple rain many." everybody go out and buy. next, what zero tolerance really looks like at america's southern border. e for your demi, mr. billingsley! do your worst, doctor. i will. but first, a little presentation. hijacking earth's geothermal energy supply.
pack in even more adventure with audible. with the largest selection of audiobooks. audible lets you follow plot twists off the beaten track. or discover magic when you hit the open road. with the free audible app, your stories go wherever you do. and for just $14.95 a month you get a credit, good for any audiobook. if you don't like it exchange it any time. no questions asked. you can also roll your credits to the next month if you don't use them. so take audible with you this summer... on the road... on the trail... or to the beach. start a 30-day trial and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime, and your books are yours to keep forever. no matter where you go this summer make it better with audible. text summer17 to 500500 to start listening today. you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain.
with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. stunning new report on what the trump administration's zero tolerance immigration policy actually looks like along the u.s. border. for migrants arriving in the u.s. it means mass trials and family separations. listen to just this one story from this piece of reporting. from a central american woman in i.c.e. detention. quote, before fleeing her country she was for years beaten up, cut, assaulted with guns,
and threatened with death by her partner. he also threatened to kill their young child. the woman said she turned herself in to the u.s. border patrol and told the officers that she and her child needed asylum. she described the beatings and assaults and death threats. oh, come on, she said the officer snickered. you and everyone else with thou old story. you are going to be deported she remembers them telling her, and your child will stay here testimony next morning the child was taken. the reporter who witnessed these trials and talked to that woman joins us now. debby nathan is an independent journalist specializing in u.s./mexico border issues. she also wrote that piece for "the intercept." debby thank you very much. you are the ones -- not many of us can see what is happening. in fact the vast majority of us are not seeing what is happening down at the border. describe what these trials look like and what the process is. >> you know, first of all, it's hard to even get in because
there are people lined up usually 40, 45 people lined up on side of the wall, on the other side of the wall of the courtroom, and all the spectator bench, sitting at tables n the jury box. and they will tell the public or reporters there is no room. so i have to sort of argue to get in. so then what you see when you come in is you see all of these dozens of people chained, triple chained at the feet, at the waist, and then their hands chained at the waist. women is men. many small, tired -- you know, they are small, just exhausted looking people. and they are all -- it's just like a cattle call. the judge reads from a script and tells them, you know, are you happy with your attorney? they have usually spent about seven minutes with an attorney. everybody has to say at once, yes, and it almost -- it's terrible to say this, but when
everybody bellos out yes, it sounds like cows belloing. so there is just a lot of sort of mass response because there is no time for people to be called out by name and to give their responses individually. and it feels like an assembly line. it doesn't feel like due process. you have 41, 42 people processed and pleading guilty within about 45 minutes. and they are there is -- there is all this clanking of chains, and the judge says to people, all right everybody stand up now and swear to tell the truth. raise your right hand. they have a hard time raising their right hand because it's chained to their waist. it's very, very shocking. i -- -- >> let's show that picture one more time. i want to keep it up on the screen. this is the courtroom that you are describing. these are i think about 40 immigrants who crossed the border, some of them seeking
asylum in orange prison jumpsuits and as you said shaelked, their hands and legs shackled. they are basically being processed all at the same time. at lot of these people are people who came over with kids. according to the reporting that's out there they are people who came over with kids to seek a better life. they are fleeing just horrible violence in the countries they are coming from, including the woman that you described in your piece. the judge doesn't seem to know that the children are being separated. you talk about that in "the intercept" piece. and doesn't seem to understand that the kids are not going to go back to the parents. unfortunately, sfz just started talking. but debby please come back to talk to us further about this extraordinary important story. >> retract his allegation that the fbi was spyin on his campaign? >> clearly there istill cause for concern that needs to be looked at. the deputy director of the fbi was actually fired for
misconduct. the president is earn concern about the matter. we will continue to follow the issue. >> -- was in the briefing, he knows what was done and says these allegations are baseless, there was no spying on the campaign. >> the president feels cause for concern and should be looked at. like i just said, the deputy director of the fbi was fired for misconduct. -- i'm not finished. there are a number of things that have been reported on that show i think not just for the president, but a number of americans, a large cause for concern. and we would like to see this fully looked into. and we'll continue to follow that matter. steve. >> based on what evidence -- >> sorry john we are going to keep moving. >> what does secretary pompeo need to hear from the north koreaned today in the meeting in new york for the meeting to go forward. >> we are continuing to hear from the north koreans. if the president says, if it happens we will certainly be ready. we have not only the meeting you
just mentioned. secretary of state pompeo is meet meeting with the president currently. when he finishes that meeting he will be headed to new york for dinner tonight as well as a day full of meetings tomorrow. the advance team led by deputy chief of staff joe haegan met with the north korean team in singapore earlier today. and again, expected to do so tomorrow. and we want to thank our strategic partner in singapore who has been incredibly generous in agreeing to host the summit. and the president is thankful to prime minister lee for all of their efforts. we have reports back from the dmz, the u.s. delegation led by ambassador sung kim met with south korean officials earlier today as well. their talks will continue. so far the readut fro these continue to move forwardvand with them. >> do you think it will take place, now, the summit? is there a denuclearization plan taking shape. >> the conversation going to be
focused on denuclearization of the peninsula. that's what these ongoing conversations taking place now will be centered on as well as this summit that would take place in singapore. and we are going to continue as long as that is part of the discussion, we are going to shoot for the june 12th and expect to do that. zeke. >> first on north korea. in interest in the nuclear program that north korea also has other weapons of mass destruks, chemical and biology weapons, does the president intend to raise that sub. >> i'm not going to get ahead of all the topics that may come up. the discussions are feick used on the denuclearization of the peninsula. but certainly i think a number of topics are likely to be discussed at the summit. francesca. i'm only going to do one question day.
fran she's ka. >> i have two, if you will indulge me quickly. >> i'm going to do one question. >> i will make it one question. on north korea and the possible summit, can you tell us what your deadline is at this point for deciding whether or not that will or will not happen? and on a completely separate topic, kardashian is supposed to be at the white house today. can you tell us more about that, who she plans to meet with? it's reported she will be meeting with jared kushner as well as president donald trump. >> she is expected to be here at the white house. i can confirm she will be here. we will keep you posted on meetings that take place, what those looks like. in terms of north korea, as i have said, we are preparing and expect that to take place on june 12th. and we will be ready if it does on june 12th. if it's not, then we will be ready if it takes place on july 12th. >> if the attorney general is not living up to the president's expectations, if he is so frustrated with him why doesn't
he just fire him instead of nursing the grievance publicly. >> the president made his viewpoint known and i don't have any personnel announce its. >> the president said that drug makers will soon be announcing what he called a voluntary massive drop in their prices. is there anything else you can tell us when this is going to happen and how large the massive widespread drop in prices will be. >> i can't. we expect policy pieces to come out. >> has the president spoken to roseanne bahr which? why did he choose to address the abc policy instead of the underlying issue about a racist comment she tweeted out? >> i'm not aware of any conversations that have taken place. the president was calling out the media bias. the president is the president for all the americans ands