tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC August 26, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
are just making the equation that it is not worth it for my long term health or i'm just not enjoying it. i think more so than other sports because football is gladitorial. it is more likely players are like i am out of here because i want to live a life, not just live a life on the field. good afternoon, everyone. i am in for katy tur. it is 11:00 a.m. out west, 2:00 p.m. here on the east coast. at this hour, president trump is on air force one, headed to washington, d.c. he walked back an exacerbated trade war with china, telling reporters during a free wheeling press conference he believes his tariffs are in fact working and he thinks china is ready for a deal. maybe at least. >> we've had many calls.
secretary mnuchin is here, you've had many calls in the last 24 to 48 hours, many calls, not just one. these are high level calls. they want to make a deal. by the way, i think a deal is going to be made. talking about global economic instability. >> one of the things it comes from is back and forth and changing of statements from yourself. >> sorry. that's the way i negotiate. it's done well for me over the years, it is doing even better for the country. >> at this hour, nbc news hasn't confirmed any calls took place between the white house and china, and the president's comments were an apparent rebuke of the president's own comments from just this weekend. watch. >> any second thoughts honest ka lating the trade war with china? >> i have second thoughts about everything. >> after those comments, the trump administration jumped into
spin mode, contradicting the president almost immediately with the white house press secretary telling reporterser that the only thing the president regretted was not raising the tariffs higher. this morning on twitter, the president said negotiations are in fact continuing, which as expected managed to calm a nervous wall street. it has been increasingly volatile on the back of the president's recent china comments. our big question today is this. what exactly is the president's strategy when it comes to china. joining me now, nbc news correspondent. let's pick up on the question i was posing. the president is seeming to suggest that the wild swings that part of his approach towards china were simply a negotiating strategy, but are he and his white house really on the same page when you hear what
top advisers are saying, trying to spin what the erratic statements are about? >> i wish i knew where the white house really is on china negotiations. you heard a couple of opposite sounding things come out of the president's mouth inside 24 hours, but he ended up in a place of pronounced optimism. i would say china wants a deal, that he wants to make that deal, and that they're at least within range on a number of tough issues where they could get that deal. he gave no specifics. he did sound optimistic at his closing press conference, and insisted that there have been calls at a high level between the u.s. and chinese governments which is something that the chinese have not only not confirmed, at least in one instance disputed. >> bill, one of the indications that the president, that his
strategy in negotiating with china would be working would be somewhat of a consensus among the g7 leaders there, the diplomats, experts that are around that summit. what are they saying in terms of whether they feel the strategy that the trade negotiations between the china and the u.s. are in fact working, any indication of optimism? >> no, not really. they simply don't agree with the trade war, they don't like the world's two biggest economies having tit for tat tariffs, something they think will potentially tip the world into a global recession. remember, president trump on saturday said or claimed that none of the other leaders questioned the trade war and they all respected it. boris johnson immediately contradicted him saying we like trade peace and don't like tariffs. of course, they don't like
instability, nor do the markets. that's what we've had the last few days. tit for tat tariffs on sunday and the possibility -- sorry, on friday, possibility of a deal today. last week president xi was an enemy, today he's a great leader. there's no clarity here. there's just confusion. as you heard president trump saying, shrugging his shoulders, that's just the way i negotiate. that may be the case, but it is not liked by other leaders here. >> eugene, one of the things the president and his men have been trying to do is strike a sense of optimism. we have really not gotten that from one of the president's closest allies on capitol hill, senator lindsey graham. he had somewhat of a grim message on the president's tariffs. watch this. >> every democrat, every republican of note has said china cheats. the democrats for years have been claiming china should be stood up, now trump is. we have to accept the pain that comes to standing up to china.
how do you get china to change without pain on them and us. >> lindsey graham saying it is going to hurt us. that's not the message you hear larry kudlow and others saying, this is on china, not effecting american consumers. is that the message they want on capitol hill, that it is basically going to hurt? >> it doesn't seem like it. the president would like to communicate that his plans and strategy won't hurt americans but we do know from comments that it very well could. that's why we have so many farmers including from south carolina, the state lindsey graham represents, saying this is not what they want. they already feel the strain from the trade war, they fear if the president continues in the path he's currently going, things could get worse for them. that could hurt graham and trump in the 2020 election. >> bill, i want your thoughts on the european union. are they prepared for a similar trade fight during the bilateral
with angela merkel, the president said the eu has been just as tough with trade with the united states as china. but do you get a sense on the ground there that the european union is bracing for a similar trade fight? >> yes. and remember, president trump said last week the european union is worse than china, just smaller. at the summit he said the eu was an anchor around britain's ankle. he was talking about brexit. there were negotiations here that went late into the night last night, but there was no bre breakthrough on a trade deal between the eu and eu. he is threatening tax on french wines and german cars, a lot has to do with french taxes on american digital companies like google and amazon and so on. no breakthrough on any possible
eu/u.s. trade war. >> one other question, looking ahead. the president making news about possibly keeping the door open inviting russia to a future g7 summit, the one held in the united states. we'll get into where it might be held in the u.s. in a moment. what did he have to say about russia, do you think again from being there on the ground that others within the g7 share the president's sentiment on that? >> the answer is no, there's no agreement on this. president trump's view is that it is better to have russia in than out. possibly echoing a famous phrase of president johnson. he believes russia is tied to so many disputes and issues like iran, the middle east, and indeed trade. europe says that it is quite simple. russia invaded ukraine, annexed crimea. not ready to come back. even russia said today or over
the weekend that it took -- it would take more than one country to allow it back in. a lot of the countries would say if russia was to be even given observer status at the next g7, that would be fundamentally wrong, legitimizing a land grab, and that would set a dangerous precedent. we know, however, that france and germany will host talks between the russian president and ukrainian president within weeks. there could be an opening there by much russia somehow in a year could come back, and of course theoretically president trump could invite russia to next year's g7 in an observer status. but i think there will have to be a lot more agreement with the allies for that to happen. >> and one of the things we have been talking about overshadowed the g7, the trade war with china. the interesting thing is the president feels bolstered by
what is happening inside china that china wants to make a deal. let me play what he said about china having no choice but to make a deal. >> i think president xi is a great leader who happens to be a brilliant man and he can't lose 3 million jobs in a short period of time, that's going to be magnified many times over and it is going to breakdown the chinese system of trade and he can't do that. so when you say do you think they want to, maybe they want to, maybe they don't, but i think they want to make a deal. i'm not sure they have a choice. >> i'm not sure that they have a choice. does that reflect the reality of the situation on the ground? >> no, not really. certainly president trump is right, sustained job losses, market contraction would be bad for china, bad for chinese business, and bad for chinese leadership. but he is not taking into
account that china remains mostly a command economy, and it is very much a command political system. and president xi will be president of china the rest of his life. he has a very, very long time to wait out president trump if he chooses to do so. >> and eugene, talking about where we thought the president may hold the g7 summit next year, he suggested doral, not necessarily the trump resort, suggesting it would take place there. here's the interesting thing about this. i want to play this sound bite first and then get your reaction. watch. >> in doral, we have a series of magnificent buildings, call them bungalows. they each hold from 50 to 70 very luxurious rooms with magnificent views, have incredible conference rooms and restaurants. it's like such a natural. from my standpoint, i'm not
going to make any money, in my opinion i'm not going to make money. i don't want to make money. i don't care about making money. if i want to make money, i wouldn't care about 3 to 5 billion. at some point we'll detail that and show. i think it is a great place to be. having it in miami is fantastic. really fantastic. having it at that place because of the way it is set up. >> the president making a bit of a sales pitch for why doral would be perfect with the bungalows and restaurants. while explaining he wouldn't make money, it is his resort, part of the trump organization portfolio of properties. isn't that clear conflict of interest? >> certainly appears to be, and certainly appears to be a move to in fact make money. we know of the trump resorts, doral is having the hardest time. this boost if the summit does happen at doral could not only benefit trump from this specific
conference but from showcasing of it, hoping to attract other conferences, visitors, people hoping to do business with the trump administration, so the idea that this would be a move because it was in the best interest of the summit and not trump himself seems preposterous. >> we have to wait and see where it is ultimately held. thank you for your time. still ahead, the president gets a challenger. former republican congressman announces he will take on trump. will it chip away at trump's base or bolster it? and the axios report that had the president tweeting. that report that the president reported stopping hurricanes by nuking them. a new poll that could change the game for 2020 democrats. it shows a virtual three-way tie in that race. virtual three-waye in that race rves when i'm worrit moving into our new apartment. why don't we just ask geico for help with renters insurance?
i didn't know geico helps with renters insurance. yeah, and we could save a bunch too. antonio! fetch computer! antonio? i'll get it. get to know geico and see how much you could save on renters insurance. know what more shrimp!ith steak and shrimp? and you know what goes great with that shrimp? steak and unlimited shrimp! and this year, with two freshly made sides, you'll get more than you imagined. hurry into outback now for our steak and unlimited shrimp. outback steakhouse
to the wait did frowe just win-ners. prouders everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines. mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy a new samsung note. click, call or visit a store today.
all right. we have breaking news to get to. a new poll out in the last hour shows a big shift in the race for the democratic nomination. the monmouth survey finds joe biden, elizabeth warren, and bernie sanders now locked in a three-way battle for the lead. that tie prompted by significant erosion in support for the former vice president. those numbers further set up what politico called a clash of opposites, the most moderate of democrats up against the progressives. and the contrast couldn't have been more clear than recent days with warren and biden hitting
the campaign trail. the vice president played to smaller crowds, took the fight to trump, touted his own electability. >> reliterally have to repair the american fabric trump is shredding every single day. we have to reach out beyond our party and unify this country. i know my opponents, they're all good folks, think that's naive. i find i'm the oldest guy in the race, and i'm the naive one. >> juks to pose that to warren's rallies, drawing massive crowds. she says being the anti-trump is simply not enough. >> it's not enough to be not trump. a country that elects donald trump is a country in serious trouble. >> joining me, msnbc national political correspondent steve kornacki, democratic strategist,
distinguished lecturer from new york, basil smith. what have you taken from the poll numbers? what's stiin there? >> this monmouth poll, he is a point behind. probably the best for bernie sanders all year, tied for first place on the democratic side. there are other indications he might be in decline. obviously the question it raises, what will other polls show, will they replicate what we see in monmouth, will this prove to be an outlier. when you look inside the numbers, you see reasons why biden's in trouble. number one, it is ideological with liberal voters, warren not surprisingly in first, sanders in second. you look at moderate conservative voters, this is a strong base of support i did logically for biden.
still leads, but running in this poll 22% and we have talked about an age divide on the democratic side, over 50 years old, under 50 years old. check this out. democrats over 50, this is what we're used to seeing. biden in first place, double digit advantage, solid lead for bierd e biden. under 50 years old, not only is joe biden not in first place, he is back at 6%. tied with andrew yang among democrats under 50 years old at 6%. for biden, not getting what he normally gets from moderates and conservatives. age wise, used to seeing him not do well with folks under 50. the floor is falling out from at least this polling. >> you lump together the ideological groupings, bernie
sanders, elizabeth warren, some say competing for the same voters, a troubling sign for joe biden. the interesting thing is biden campaign is pushing back saying this type of polling is outlier poll. walk us through that argument. they say the most accurate polls are only phone in only polls. >> couple things you're hearing. back to the first screen, you have to read the fine print at the bottom. it is not on that screen. this isn't the first screen. that's why. let me get back to the first screen. at the bottom we list the margin of error. you can see in this poll, plus or minus 5 points, 7 points in the poll. the reason is sample size, number of folks that are in the poll is 298. that's a little lower than you might normal seeing. that leads to when you have a smaller sample size, leads to bigger margin of error, with a
bigger margin of error, you have room for numbers to bounce around to get readings a campaign may say represents an outlier. monmouth university is considered a solid polster, reliable polster. this is one of the polls the democratic national committee officially recognizes for inclusion in or exclusion from debates. this 298 sample, we looked at previous polls, they were all basically right around there. 298, 310, 306, numbers like that. that's typically what you get from a monmouth poll. it comes with higher margin for error. take that with a grain of salt. it is not new for monmouth. >> stick with me. i was saying when you look at the breakdown of votes on ideological lines, sanders, warren camp is on the progressive side, biden more conservative side within the liberal spectrum. should his campaign be worried
that he won't be winning a lot of if it gets down to three final candidates? >> there are a couple things in there. you talk progressive versus moderate. what we're talking about here is ideology and vision. one of the things joe biden didn't do as much as i would have liked him to do early on is articulate a vision for how he would be president. elizabeth warren is right on this. you can't just be against donald trump, you have to be for something. i think joe biden has had difficulty articulating that, number one. number two, in the poll, there's a lot of support for medicaid for all and public option. even though i think details of that are very important, i think it is a proxy for vision, that voters do want to see you lay down some ground work for how you're going to make their lives better the next four years. you see warren and sanders actually doing that very, very well. what i'm curious to see going forward is we talked a lot in the past about the obama
coalition. who's putting that together? some of the numbers in the poll are correct, and they continue, you can see some moderates are starting to leave joe biden and go towards elizabeth warren, so if she's able to pick up moderate and conservative democrats and young democrats, that seems to me it is mirroring more of the coalition than biden can put together. that's what's going to be dangerous for him going forward. >> is it also dangerous for the democratic party to have such an ideological rift in which some are saying as politico and others characterize that we are replaying the 2016 race between the joe biden/hillary clinton camp that represents the traditional base of the democratic party and progressive in this case elizabeth warren or bernie sanders representing the kind of young, energetic, mobilizing factor within the democratic party? >> so if you look at 2016, what i had a problem with wasn't necessarily sanders versus hillary, but what sanders can't
try to do is make it hillary against $15 minimum wage, hillary against affordable college. it made it ideology versus clinton. that can't happen in the race. you have so many candidates, you have a warren there that can sort of lead voters on a little more of a path than sanders can. i don't know that we get into the same kind of debate. what i'm more concerned about is we don't spend time snieping with each other that barack obama said. i don't think we can replicate what happened in 2016. what we need to do is layout a vision for how we're going to make the lives of voters better in the next four years, and i like to see that warren and others are doing that with energy and with enthusiasm. >> and the biggest fear for the democratic party is some have started to murmur around a contested convention. we'll see. yeah, they're trying to push back against that. always a pleasure. we'll be back in a few minutes. . we'll be back in a few minutes
if there's one thing uniting americans of every political spectrum, it is apparently anger. this is according to a new nbc news, "the wall street journal" poll that finds despite overall satisfaction with the state of the u.s. economy and their own personal finances, a majority say they're angry at the political and financial establishment, anxious about its economic future, pessimistic about the country they're leaving for the next generation, specifically 70% are angry because they believe the political system only works for the rich and powerful. 56% of anxious, uncertain about the economy. this as men at the helm of both those faces a run for re-election and has gained a new primary challenger. former republican congressman joe walsh says he will take on president trump for their party's nomination. >> this election is about trump, period. this election is a referendum on him, the man. he's unqualified. he's unfit. he's a child. he is reckless, he is erratic,
he is a narcissist. he is mean, he is cruel. he lies every time he opens his mouth. if he's our nominee in 2020, the republican party is going to get spanked because young people don't like trump, women don't like trump, and people that live in the suburbs don't like trump. >> joining me, former republican pennsylvania congressman. back with me, democratic strategist. how unusual to see numbers like this for a time that the economy at least until recently seemed to be on solid footing. as we said people feel comfortable and satisfied with their own personal finances. >> right. what's interesting to me politically, you have a lot of republicans retiring. shawn duffy announced he is retiring from wisconsin. what that says to me even though some metrics around what's happening in our country might
be better in terms of the economy, but still there's a toxicity that's in our country. certainly in washington, d.c. and somehow someone has to be able to wrestle with that. what it says also to me is that voters are looking for a path forward that may not have anything to do with this president, but still need a champion. and if we as democrats don't give them a good one, they're going to revert back to this president. having said that, look, if there are republicans that want to challenge a sitting president in a primary, go for it. it is unlikely that would move the needle at all because it is now trump's party. so as we sort of move through the cycle, we have to spend a lot of time picking apart all of the good metrics that may come up from time to time, even with the economy. >> speaking of metrics, i want to dig deeper into the poll. the poll finds out this. those that are more likely to say feelings of anger describe them very well since 2015, they
include women under 50, 48%, up 10 points since 2015, african-americans, 46%, up 5 points, and hispanics, 49%, that's up 11 points. that can't be good for a president that lags behind in polling in those three particular constituencies, many that feel they're under constant attack by the administration. >> i think that's a fair point although i am curious on basil's take as a democratic operative, what it might feed into, though, is desire to see a democratic presidential nominee that also brings a little more fight than the middle of the electorate wants. we saw the poll in terms of maybe slippage in biden's numbers. some of this, yes, the election is about trump. i do believe that. i think it is hard to
prognosticate it will be anything but that. however, middle of the road voters will look at who the alternative is. if the alternative is just as p punchy as trump but with policies that don't align with what i would call a suburban agenda, it will be really interesting to see where the middle of the electorate goes in 2020. >> let me get your take on the former congressman. what do you make of numbers with the constituents and how they view the president with anger. >> i agree. i think that's the debate we're having, as played out with poll numbers, that electability is one thing, but is it going to be enough. voters are trying to figure that out for themselves. do we want someone with more vision that can play to the white working class, suburban voters, bring back 80,000 voters in three states that we didn't get, bring back 4.6 million that
didn't come out at all in 2016 but voted for obama in 2012. how do we talk to those voters. electability in and of itself is not enough. i go back to the point of toxicity. there's a tremendous amount of it in this country now. what i would want to see are republicans fighting the fight in congress and in the senate, not necessarily retiring and doing it from the outside, because that's fine, that's easy enough, but we need real time challenges to the president on his agenda while they're legislating. when i don't see that, that tells me that the party is completely aligned with the president and his policies when you see evangelicals also sort of dropping a lot of everything that they stood for to be in line with this president. to me, all that does is fuel some of the anger and frustration you see in the electorate. >> let me, congressman, get thoughts of joe walsh, he was a tea party candidate, firebrand in his own right.
no problem throwing personal jabs, insulting jabs at president obama. here's what he had to say about that and prior support of donald trump. watch. >> i felt like we were at the tip of the speer when we went to washington. it was a fight for this country. and we let, i let that fight get personal and ugly sometimes, and i've just got to own that stuff. here i am in front of you this morning, yes, raising my hands. i helped put trump in the white house. i'm ashamed of that. i feel terrible about that. i'm going to try to redeem myself about that. but most importantly the country can't let this guy get elected. >> so in its own right, it is an extraordinary admission on his part. some are questioning whether it is sincere. why apologize and who might he want to hear that apology if he's trying to go after trump's base and win them over, and they certainly still support a president that traded in many of the same conspiracy theories and rhetoric that joe walsh did.
>> yeah. look, i don't buy this candidacy. i don't think joe walsh is a credible candidate for the nomination. i also think that if you're sincere about apologizing for past activity, you have to do it before you announce your candidacy for something. this is not going to get anywhere. if there's a republican candidate who is going to take on president trump in a primary that wants to be credible, they would have to talk about climate, background checks for all gun sales, a trade policy that demonstrates some certainty, and maybe other middle of the road type issues. but you're not going to run to the president's right. i also think most republican voters at this point in time, 85% that view him favorably are conditioned to the fact that they don't like what the
president tweets from time to time. they may not like the style, may not like the rhetoric, many do. they look at what the alternative is on the democratic side of the aisle and say i know the president is going to fight, going to punch back, it's going to be an ugly 2020 race, and they're going to be behind the president. that's what i think is going to happen. >> thank you both for joining us this hour. up next, moments at the g7 that found the president isolated on the world stage, including a surprise appearance by iran's foreign minister. and the president's nonanswer, why he skipped meetings on climate change. spoiler alert, it involves windmills. t involves windmills. banjo? (man) go home. (woman) banjo! sorry, it won't happen again. come on, let's go home. after 10 years, we've covered a lot of miles. good thing i got a subaru.
memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. i will tell you, i have very good feelings about it. i think that we're going to do something, it may not be immediately, but i think ultimately we're going to do something. as i said, iran is a much different country than it was two-and-a-half years ago. >> that was the president suggesting he could be open with a meeting with iran. his comments follow what appears to be surprise appearance at the g7. while the president said he wasn't ready to talk this weekend, he did shut down reports that he was blindsided by the foreign minister's appearance. joining me, former special assistant of the bush white house, and former assistant michael allen.
help us understand what macron was trying to do here on the world stage with his invitation to the iranian for enminister. it doesn't look like it moved the needle forward to revive the jcpoa, but it sent a message. >> ever since trump pulled out of the nuclear deal, we have seen iran telegraphing its next steps. it's going to basically whittle around its own participation in the jcpoa, until the jcpoa will fall apart. that's what macron wants to stop. he wants status quo where it is now, and eventually enough calming of waters so he hopes that the jcpoa can be reinstated, and iran can start to get money again, and it will continue to limit nuclear advancement. but the way he chose to do that
was to invite him to the summit, to fringes of the summit to say you see, we all care about you, i told trump you will be here, he is not objecting to it, we can make a show of advancing the ball diplomatically, maybe you won't seize any more british tankers, maybe you won't blow up any more uae tankers, we can calm things down. that's what he wants. that's not what trump wants to talk about. trump wants a whole new deal that's a new nuclear deal that bans nukes forever, not only nukes but research and enrichment and limits or eliminates support of iran for proxy militias all over the middle east, and limits or eliminates iran's missile capabilities. that's not going to happen. >> to that point, iran called this they're open to diplomatic or at least constructive
engagement. what are the expectations if iran is open to negotiations? the president says he is open to negotiations without preconditions. seems somewhat nonsensical. >> i think the iranians are waiting for the u.s. election before trying to substantively engage the united states. i think they've gotten the message that president trump is going to continue to sort of wage serious economic sanctions on the iranians, try and put pressure on them, not with direct military action but sort of militarily across the region. so i think the game for the trump administration is how much farther can the united states turn up the heat to try and induce them back to the table so we can make progress on all of the other items that were just mentioned here on your show, so i think that's what we're after, but i think we have a ways to go until we have serious negotiations again.
>> chris, let me get your thoughts on climate change and the president. this is one of the big issues of the summit, macron trying to make it front and center. listen to what the president had to say about this. >> the united states has tremendous wealth. the wealth is under its feet. i have made that wealth come alive. i'm not going to lose that wealth, i'm not going to lose it on dreams, on windmills, which frankly aren't working too well. i'm an environmentalist. a lot of people don't understand that. i think i know more about the environment than most people. i want clean air, clean water, i want a wealthy country, i want a spectacular country with jobs, with pensions, so many things. we can't let that wealth be taken away. clean air, clean water. thank you very much, everybody. i appreciate it. thank you. >> that was the president's explanation while he didn't attend climate change meeting among the leaders. what do you make of what president macron was trying to
do putting this front and center, knowing the president would take this position as he has publicly. he pulled out of climate change, slow to respond on brazil as you heard him say it is more important to be wealthy, calling himself an environmentalist. >> that's delusional, we're used to that from trump. but this is something macron has been trying to do a long time. if you remember, there was that embarrassing visit of his to the united states, he and trump were kind of touching each other, it was a lot of egos, the bromance thing that was very bizarre. at that point he was trying to keep trump from withdrawing from the paris accords on the environment. he failed there. the environment is a huge issue in europe and france, even more so after the enormous heat wave this summer. he wanted to make sure that at least on his part, macron's part, he was doing what he could do. the flip side of this is that he didn't want trump to blow up again. there was a lot of coddling by
trump and leaders of the g7 that there had not been previously. nobody insulted him, everybody let him do what he wanted to do, everybody let him feel good about himself, if they disagreed, it was down played. so he doesn't show up at the climate part of the conference, so it goes. >> all right. thank you very much. i apologize. we're out of time. certainly an important conversation that needs to be had. "new york times" reports the president's allies have a new plan to combat what he calls fake news. to target journalists individually, maybe even their families. that's next. vidually, maybe ever families that's next. ♪ ♪
applebee's handcrafted burgers now with endless fries starting at $7.99. and get more bites for your buck with late night half-priced apps. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. sleep number 360 smart bed.st sale of the year on the can it help keep us asleep? yes, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus 0% interest for 24 months on all beds. only for a limited time.
we didn't have to stop the movie. i didn't have to call an ambulance. and i didn't have to contact your family. because your afib didn't cause a blood clot that led to a stroke. not today. we'd discussed how your stroke risk increases over time, so even though you were feeling fine, we chose xarelto®, to help keep you protected. once-daily xarelto®, significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. in fact, over 96% of people remained stroke-free. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, a spinal injection increases the risk of blood clots, which may cause paralysis- the inability to move. you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines.
get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. be sure you're doing all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. ask your doctor if it's time for xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com. janssen can help, actually, that's my buick.. your buick doesn't have a roof rack! this is my buick. how are we gonna fit in your mom's buick? easy. i like that new buick. -me too. i was actually talking about that buick. i knew that. -did you? buick's fresh new lineup is full of surprises.
current eligible non-gm owners and lessees get up to 16% below msrp on most of these buick models. or get over 7,000 on this 2019 enclave avenir. the "new york times" reports today that a team of trump allies have launched an attack on journalists whose coverage of the president they deem hostile, people familiar with the operation said the group has compiled dossiers of potentially embarrassing social media posts and other public statements by hundreds of people that work at some of the country's most prominent news agencies including cnn, the "washington post," and the times itself. joining me now is ken vogel. you described this group as a, quote, loose network of conservative operatives." what have you learned about who is in the group? >> you can kind of trace it by look agent the bread crumbs by looking at the way the information is disseminated.
so on the back end, that is the actual calling of social media posts, which can be quite intensive if you're talking about a large group, and going back many years. we understand this goes back at least a decade, and certainly some of the posts they've already released have been quite old, at least old in the standards of social media. but then if you look at the way these posts are disseminated, you can see the fingerprints of folks who were very close to the president's inner circle, including donald trump jr. who actively pushed out this story that was in breitbart news that released informations, old social media posts bay "new york times" editor and another gentleman, arthur schwartz, who is a conservative operative and consultant who is close to donald trump jr. even seeing the breitbart news story that was first to release some of this damaging information about the "new york times" editor, you see quotes
from the white house press secretary and trump campaign advisors. these are folks who, at least on some level, the folks doing the dissemination of this stuff are pretty close to the president. >> the scary thing, you report the group is going as far as researching members of the journalist's family members. >> they're hoping to uncover damaging or embarrassing posts that reveal some of the sort of sentiments that they believe that donald trump, the president, is being unfairly accused of by the media. we're talking about antisemitic sentiments, anti-gay sentiments so they are digging through social media posts and other public statements, you know, potentially including everything from college newspapers to old blog posts to radio shows looking for archive value content in which statements were made by employees of these news
organizations or their relatives, as you mentioned, as being a possible target of this that could be used to suggest that the media itself harbors some of these same sentiments that they believe that the president and his allies are being, in their mind, unfairly accused of. >> is the ultimate goal here -- i want to make sure i understand this. is it a chilling effect on coverage of the president that the group would perceive as negative? >> well, i think the sort of umbrella goal is undermining the media and undermining critical coverage. whether that's by retaliating after a critical story is published in a way that calls into question whether the media outlet that produced that critical coverage has sort of the moral standing to be pushing this type of stuff or whether it's intimidating journalists and getting them to think twice before digging into a topic that could potentially trigger this
type of reaction. >> ken vogel, thank you very much for that important piece of reporting. nuke you like a hurricane. one more thing. coming up next. a hurricane. one more thing coming up next great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ we're pretty different. somos muy diferentes. muy diferentes. (vo) everyone in your family is different. that's why verizon now offers more plans to mix and match so everyone gets what they need without paying for things they don't. new plans now starting at $35. the network more people rely on gives you more.
with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix.
it approaches puerto rico. as dorian churns, so are ideas about how to stop hurricanes in their tracks. why? this reported axios that president trump suggested on multiple occasions that national security explore dropping nukes into the middle of the hurricanes. the president said i got it, why don't we nuke them? they start forming off the coast of africa. as they're moving across the atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it. why can't we do that? well, the briefer reportedly replied "we'll look into it." hillary clinton tweeted in response, we should not nuke hurricanes and noaa agrees. you know, the federal forecasters who actually deal with the sort of thing. even the noaa website says nuking a hurricane would be devastating and might not even alter the storm, believe it or not. not to mention the nuclear waste
released into the air and the water. as noaa puts it, quote, "needless to say, this is not a good idea." that wraps up things for me this hour. >> if you're going to nuke something, it should be the popcorn in the microwave. >> there you go. definitely not a hurricane. >> thank you so much. i'm chris jansing. it's monday, august 26th. i do nothing for politics. i do what's right. that's the president's analysis of his own decision making while wrapping up his trip in france for the g7 summit. among the serious global concerns discussed, the economy, iran, climate change. but trump was particularly passionate in selling the idea of his own golf club as the site of the next g7. answering a question from our own hallie jackson. >> reporter: what reassurances, if any, can you give the american people you're not