tv With All Due Respect Bloomberg November 29, 2016 8:00pm-9:01pm EST
i mark halperin. mark john: with all due respect : to donald trump, who suddenly an expert on flag -- pres.-elect trump: i don't know what all of the stripes represent. john: mr. trump, can we ask for your birth certificate? on our political color palette tonight, trump's congress, and the green party's jill sign will -- jill stein will be on the show in a few moments.
donald trump nominated georgia congressman tom price, a six term as republican, and longtime arch enemy of the affordable care act and medicare system. >> the president is delusional. this is real-time stuff for real people and real people are getting hurt because of the president's program. this is unconscionable. the description he is causing for the men and women out there trying to care for patients in this country is astounding. we must get a handle on the spending in this country. it has to be few medicare reform, medicaid reform, and social security. they are destined for failure. we have a plan i hear, a positive plan that puts patients and doctors and families in charge.
the president has not called it. john: price has repeatedly proposed legislation to repeal obamacare with a measure that would offer -- today, chuck schumer called the hhs pick way out of the norm. there may be enough senate votes to block confirmation, citing price's controversial view that medicare should be privatized. mark, this is a big appointment, not as big as the secretary of state, but pretty big anyway. what do you think of the price nomination and what do you think that it portends?
mark: donald trump did not win the popular vote but ran against the affordable care act. it would be hard to argue they don't have the mandate to change the affordable care act. i think they will go slower than comfortable think and get a chance to try the free market ideas republicans have wanted to try for a while to lower the cost of health care and expand coverage and i think donald trump may surprise some republicans going back to his pledge of saying there should be universal health care coverage. i think he is going to be very resistant to kicking people off of coverage they have and very resistant to roll back things people have. this is learned to play out over time, but in price, republicans want to scrap it, now they have the best advocate they have in terms of their leanings. john: what i meant was an indiana health care policy expert, not indian. i think all of that is true. one of the great mysteries as we head into the new age of trump is what donald trump actually
believes is a whole lot of things and to me, health care policy is one of the most person -- one of the most pressing ministries of what trump thinks. for a long time, trump was a democrat basically and in favor of universal health coverage. in this campaign, even though he talked about scrapping obamacare, he was way to the left of most of the republican party when it came to his views on entitlement and medicare reform. the questions now are, having put price in this job, does that mean trump is subjugating his past views on policy to price? or are they on a collision hasse the things that price , those are not think donald trump has ever said he was for other than the general notion that obamacare should be repealed and replaced. i don't know how much daylight there will be between the two of them. it will be fascinating to watch them play out.
mark: you could say the same thing about the speaker of the house, mitch mcconnell, every republican trump will have to deal with. they don't cap about universal coverage or avoiding big restraints -- talk about universal coverage or avoiding big restraints. in price, trump has someone who is like most republicans on capitol hill, but he cares about universal coverage. we will take him at his word. trump tower was once again the scene of many comings and goings through the lobby and up the elevator. cameo today by the former vice president of the united states, dave quail who had a meeting with mike pence. donald trump will ultimately pick someone to beat secretary of state this afternoon. bob corker of tennessee.
trump is having dinner with one willard mitt romney, another face-to-face meeting. talk about the meeting trump had yesterday with the retired general, david petraues. a lot of buzz about him and maybe him being the front-runner in trump's mine. would he be a good pick? work kind of secretary of state would he be? john: you recall what i said. the conventional wisdom is that if he is in the lead, look, there is no one, literally no one in america who has as much military expertise as david petraeus. petraeus has a great political antenna. the secretary of state job is not a military job, however. he knows the world of store
-- petraeus knows the world extraordinarily well. we talked yesterday about the vetting issues he will face between the things that got him in trouble for handling classified material and the things hillary was accused of by donald trump, so there is some interesting little questions yo. is he qualified to be secretary of state? for sure. mark: there are some questions. i think the establishment would be as happy or close to as happy with petraeus as they would be with trump. romney. i think there are people around trump and they beat himself, concerned about the notion of retired military in the big three national security jobs. i'm telling you, i think it is still in the balance. the dinner tonight will know a long way towards if trump decides, having just met
face-to-face with petraeus, whether he's going to go with petraeus or romney. don't count corker out. trump has built this up in a way that he will give it one last hard thought before he pulls the trigger. john: i agree with that. i think the dinner with romney tonight is not for show. i think it is a real thing. let us just remember, it may be that -- i think republicans would be happy -- the establishment would be happy with romney. the republican establishment would be happy with petraeus. you know who else would be happy with petraeus? a lot of the democratic national security establishment would be happy with petraeus, people who wanted him to run as an independent or democrat. he would be the most bipartisan pick that trump could make. donald trump is expecting another cabinet today, elaine chao as the next head of the department of transportation,
which will put her front and center in the effort to pass that john infrastructure bill through congress. luckily for her, she already has a man on the inside, her husband, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. we have seen a lot of trump appointments. in addition to tom price, trump has bestowed big jobs on jeff sessions, attorney general, mike matteo, fbi director, and socially considering bob corker and tom cotton and michael mccaul, duncan hunter and lou barletta. and that is not even factoring in all the former capitol hill officials that trump is talking to. in short, the outsider president-elect is preparing to stack his team with capitol hill insiders. if trump makes to make good on his promises, he will have to help bigly with his promises.
tells about his forthcoming relationship with congress. mark: pence and preibus will have to make good. all of these people will be part of the problem. it raises the question of what is steve bannon's role corks -- role? trump's legislative strategy is to play everybody off against each other to move legislation weekly, the pixie has made are pleasing to cap old republic -- pleasing to republicans on capitol hill and family democrats on capitol hill although obviously, prices not fine at all with them. john: they know they have a republican president to deal
with and would rather see trump with devils they know than devils they don't know. it will be interesting to see when trump begins his victory lap, so to speak, around america. he's going to go to a couple of other places. there is always, for a president, the inside and outside game. it looks to me like priebus is in charge to some extent along with trump and playing the inside game in an inside way. when trump goes out to amerialand, is that where we will see steve bannon? mark: look potentially for some economic appointments in the next 24 hours including someone with wall street ties or two guys with wall street ties and a democrat potentially. john: i would like to hear more about that. that was a very deep teas, but we don't have any more time. up next, we have donald trump tweeting again.
mike: history will record and remember last night. .resident-elect began trolling retweeting some of trump's name-calling supporters including one whose twitter profile says he is 16 years old. they were upset that the reporter dismissed trump's claims. trump cnn bashing continued this morning, but it was overshadowed by another seemingly unprovoked
and the controversy media went wild. >> president elect donald trump called for a penalty of the flag burning in a tweet earlier this morning. >> but it is this week by the president elected this morning -- >> donald trump puts out a new tweet. >> [speaking spanish] >> we don't know who mr. trump is tweeting. >> donald trump went on a twitter tirade against cnn networks, going after our esteemed colleague about his very good reporting. >> we know people who work in his orbit and asked how many new twitter followers i got. >> usually very colorful. >> that one gets going on and on and on. >> donald trump keeps going on and on on twitter, right? [laughter] trumps tendency seems to go on.
they have a tendency to distract from more unflattering storylines, like business conflicts of interest. when that happens, media has a choice. they could ignore trump's trolling, but that would mean accepting this as the new normal, or we could cover trump's digital outburst and risk playing into his apparent games of misdirection. john, what do we do? john: one of my favorite phrases is a false binary. either/or. i say and both. let us cover both of these things both aggressively, the real stuff, business conflict of interest, the things trump is doing on substance that are problematic, but also the temperament matters in a president. and the idea we are having a discussion about the president-elect of the united states and casually referring to , interdigital is that he behaves this way. it is childish. do it astinues to president-elect and president of united states from his twitter account, it is genuinely dangerous. we have to call out the falsehoods when he tweets them
and an obligation to cover the other stuff with relentlessness and rigor. mark: i agree with all of that. assuming there is a daily briefing, once they take office, i'm hoping whoever's press secretary is intensely questioned about this. i'm not totally optimistic about that. i hope that happens. i think people around trump should be questioned about it all the time and i think they have got an obligation to get him to stop. it is so bad for the office of the presidency, bad for the republic. there's nothing wrong with being untraditional. but i will say, unfortunately, this is a freak show. the stuff that is the most out there will get coverage in some quarters. unfortunately, there is nothing we can do to some extent. john: i don't mind him being untraditional. i mind him being an uninformed liar in social media. that's my problem. mark: and a troll. john: we have not heard very many campaign autopsies from within clinton world since the election, but we have gotten a
few drips and drabs. joel benenson, pollster and senior strategist, here is one reason he offered for why his candidate fell short. >> a lot of the coverage and the us a session with a nate silver and the upshot focuses on who is going to win. what is the probability they are going to win? when we have people talking about there is a 93% probability hillary is going to win, you don't feel that the election is at stake as much as you do when you hear hillary is ahead by two points in the polls. there is a very big difference when you got to vote when there is only a two-point difference. but then there are these scientists and geniuses who say that it is a near certainty that she is going to win. that as a whole other issue for the media. way too much attention on that kind of data instead of what is really going on beneath the
service -- the surface with voters. john: in the long and storied history of this program, i have rarely asked a question to which i was more certain of which your answer was going to be? does joel benenson have a point? mark: i think he has a small point. i think the news organizations that turn their prominent real estate over the two the ridiculous averaging of polls, usually by people who have never covered a presidential campaign event. but bennison's own data suggested the same thing that clinton was going to win easily. i think the fact that those people who did not vote for hillary clinton were more discouraged by a lack of a clear message than they were by what was on some website. so he's got a tiny little point. but, man, taking some criticism and justly so that people who are questioning, blaming comey. did comey play a role? sure. but that is not the fundamental reason why she lost. john: it was the first part of your answer i anticipated because i know how you feel
about this matter and how i feel about this matter which is the excessive specificity and certainty now discredited precision of these polling averages which would come up with likelihood she was going to win is ridiculous, was ridiculous, and in the new york times, there is a huge amount of handwringing and retrospective analysis. i agree with you also. it is not the thing that made the difference in the outcome on election day. mark: great reporters coming up and then later, we will ask the green party presidential candidate jill stein about her election recount maneuvers, when we come back. ♪
♪ john: there is a so much trump transition news, we were compelled to call in for backup. joining us now are two of our favorite reporters. jenna johnson of "the washington post" and bloomberg's very own jennifer epstein. great to see you. i'm going to start with you here because you're sitting next me, jennifer. i'm curious what you are finding not now that you are covering the campaign. your lifefferent in as a reporter covering trump versus covering clinton? jennifer: the most interesting contrast was going from frustration from wanting more details and logistics and policy ideas to just wanting any
answer, wanting any response, wanting any sense of can we go home for the night or do we have to stay here for longer? kind of thing.t i'm also just getting used to being in new york most of the time versus being on the road most of the time. john: so the trump campaign seems less organized? jennifer: yeah. i don't know that that would be controversial. euro this story. it was totally fascinating. -- you wrote this story. it was totally fascinating. might be interesting to hear from you because you know about that earlier campaign. jenna, you wrote this story, totally fascinating, listing all of donald trump campaign pledges that you could divine, discern, or find. what motivated you to do that and with it out from you, having done it? jenna: that's a great question. i'm questioning why i did it because it took a solid week to get it done. right after the election, i had written a column back in january, some months and months ago, listing all of donald trump's campaign promises at
that point. and at that point, there were 87 of them. in the election, that list took on a life of its own online, . people were circulating it, talking about it. they wanted to see all of his promises in one place, so i set about updating the list. it took forever. he has promised so, so many things on the campaign trail. i went back to everything on his website to speeches, policy speeches he gave, tweets he sent, and the number that we finally settled on was 282 big promises he has made. john: that's a big number. [laughter] mark: jenna, which ones do you think he's going to try to fulfill first? jenna: there's a few on there that are a little bit more fun. he said he would never participate in a bicycle race, so i think that is the most likely one to come true. mark: he cannot fill that one until he is out of office.
at any moment, he could participate in a bicycle race. jenna: that is true. he has said that immigration, jobs, and health care are going to be his first big things that he's going to do. and a lot of things he promised to do on day one, the minute he gets in office, getting rid of a lot of executive orders that president obama put into place. so i'm guessing that will really be the first thing we will see happen. it is doable. it is something he can do on the first day or within a few days. mark: jennifer epstein, we get all this focus on personnel because of the personalities involved in naming the cabinet and the comings and goings of trump tower. what is your sense of how much policy work or legislative planning is going on? jennifer: i think that is still kind of at a nascent stage. i think this is very much still sitting about figure out who the people are and the planning for who the people are should reflect what the general
overview of policy direction is, . i think that is what the debate is about in terms of talking about something like the secretary of state that danforth -- back and forth that has been going on. i think that speaks to donald trump's struggle to figure out exactly how he views the world or how his worldview can translate into being president. john: ok, jenna johnson, jennifer epstein, we like you so much, we won't let you leave. we'll come back and talk to use a more after these words from our sponsors. ♪
jenna johnson is in d.c. jenna johnson, what is your sense of secretary of state position now? jenna: that is a great question. from everything we gather, mitt romney is really the leading choice at this point. but donald has been meeting with other people, considering other people, including david petraeus, bob corker, who is also up at trump tower this week. tonight is the big night. he and mitt romney are having dinner together. i guess we will see what happens after that. these two have a very long, storied history the fact that they are sitting down to dinner is a major step for both of them. we will see what happens after that. mark: jennifer epstein, the national security jobs have gotten so much attention but some of the big economic positions are coming. let us say hypothetically that a statement nation -- steve
a democrat who worked at goldman sachs and wilbur ross, a long time, very wealthy financier, let us say they were named to treasury and commerce. what do you think the reaction amongst trump supporters would be to those two picks? jennifer: there would probably be divided reactions. some trump's supporters have been very clear throughout the campaign that they kind of support whatever position the president-elect takes. if he thinks this is the best person, then that is the best person. for somebody who is a real economic populist and said he is going to drain the swap and get rid of the people from the big banks and from all strata, that this could be an upsetting thing. it will certainly be upsetting to the left, who probably would not be happy with any picks donald trump would have for these jobs. rid of the people from the big banks and from all strata, that this could be an upsetting thing. but certainly, all this talk on the democratic side that somebody who worked at goldman sachs 15 years ago, could they get a top job in treasury? somebody like him would get reluctance from them.
john: we are going to have jill stein only show a little later. there is a lot of question about the role the clinton campaign is playing. mark elias wrote that piece on medium. today, they leaned in a little bit with him on the question of pursuing a court order to make sure the hand recounts happen in wisconsin. what do you think the campaign you covered for so long, what you think is really going on in terms of how the clinton people feel about these recounts? jennifer: they don't seem to think they will ultimately change the results of the whole election and that would certainly be a pretty big thing to happen. john: the margins are very low. jennifer: especially in pennsylvania, 70,000 votes. it is probably insurmountable. and without winning all three of those states nothing would , change for the overall results. but they are trying to lean into
this idea of the integrity of the vote, that that is what they believe in. i think someone like mark elias is thinking about future elections. john: i want to go back to the weekend and the candidate you covered, donald trump, and his twitter outbursts about millions of people voting illegally in what was basically a tantrum around the question provoked by these recounts. there is basically no one who thinks this will change the outcome. so what is going on in trump's head when he decides to get on twitter and engage in that kind of tantrum? is it a diversionary tactic or can he not control himself? jenna: that's a great question. i wish i could be in his head as he was making the decision to send that week because it is
-- it really does not seem to help him in a knee way, -- in any way, shape or form. he cannot handle being questioned or attacked. if he feels like he has been punched in any way, shape, or form, he is going to punch back. if he feels like he has lost or hasn't quite won as much as he should have won, he's going to defend himself. that is exactly what we're seeing. it was not enough to win the electoral vote. he wanted to win the popular vote, too. and he wants to come up with some sort of answer to explain why he did not win the popular vote. i think that is exactly what we saw happen this weekend. mark: jennifer, the president-elect has to think about his obstacles, who is standing in his way of achieving what you want to achieve. are democrats are doing anything now that you think is presenting
-- are democrats doing anything now that you think are presenting a palm or challenge? jennifer: they have not -- problem or challenge. they are digging into the ethics of mr. trump's business interests and how this fits into government or what the government does, and the thing that is probably the confirmation hearing. i think that is probably the confirmation hearing for jeff sessions, it will be very hard-fought. the tomink maybe even price hhs could be a little bit controversial. but then again, democrats can only do so much and speak out and it depends on how many of them want to give the president-elect what he wants out of courtesy, which i think some all do, and how many want to make a stand from the very beginning, but they are going to stand up to every civil thing trump does it -- every single thing trump does. mark: jenna johnson, jennifer epstein, thank you for joining
mark: welcome back. just a few blogs with in our new york studios, donald trump has been holding administrative job interviews inside his giant golden tower. here to decide the pending nominations, the very forthcoming jason miller. welcome back. jason: good to be with you. mark: do you know who the secretary of state pick is going
to be? jason: the president-elect is continuing to work on the process. he's chatting with well-qualified, well talented individuals and we will be excited about the pic whenever he announces that. mark: speculate widely. who do you think he will pick? jason: obviously, there are a number of folks that have gone through. he is having dinner this evening with governor romney. you would have to throw former new york city mayor rudy giuliani is in the mix. other folks you chatted with as well. mark: jason, your training time year. we know who is on the list, with all due respect. [laughter] one of your colleagues raises this notion that perhaps he cannot handle classified information for some period of time, which would make this problematic. do you know anything about that? jason: petraeus would be a great nominee for this position. but he would be a great addition to the administration. even if he does not come formally inside the administration, you have seen the obama administration has
brought him in to consult on different matters. he was at the white house a couple of months ago. he is a well-respected mind and experience later. i think you could see him potentially playing a role in different capacities. john: one subject a lot of people is focused on its potential conflicts of interest for the president-elect. richard painter, the chief ethics counsel for george w. bush and norman eiseman said the other day that is donald trump does not get rid of his entire business holdings, liquidated, putting it in the blind trust, he is violating the constitution of the united states and if he is not willing to do that, the electoral college could reject him. what is the transition's view about that bipartisan claim by a republican and credit ethics lawyer -- by republican and democratic ethics lawyers? jason: one of the things you need to keep in mind and i think
voters recognize that one of the most successful businessman in our country has ever seen is part of the reason we want someone who is not a politician, someone who has been a success in a number of different fronts and set a different businesses that have taken off and on what. yes, there is a transition period where he is moving from being a full-time businessman to a full-time president of the united states. obviously, he is working with a team of lawyers and accountants and getting anything transitioned over. to be thel be ready full-time president of the united states by the time of the integration. how long does the process take? they are still working through that. i don't have a specific timeline for you, but that is where the focus is. john: we have one article in the constitution that says the president of the united states cannot accept money from abroad in the constitution. so his posture currently, is there some way he could maintain his foreign holdings and still be president of the united states? jason: the posture is, he knows what the job is. he has been elected to be president of the united states and that is what he is preparing for. so whatever ultimate arrangement
they come to with the business holdings, we'll make sure we are on constitutional grounds. and there will not be any issues going forward. i have full confidence in that and that is what we are aiming for. john: the hotel in washington has a contract with general service administration, and that it's pretty straightforward. the contract has lingered in it -- the contract has language in it that says "no elected officials of the government of the united states shall be a member of this lease." that is the old lease that he signed says. he'll be an elected official. he will be in violation of his lease and face another conflict of interest the day he become president. jason: that might not necessarily be the case. i spoke with my general counsel today and they are working through all of us. john: because of what? the contract doesn't say that? jason: i'm not our general counsel so i will leave legal interpretation to them. but again, our full goal is to make sure the president-elect is incomplete constitutional sound
footing by the time he takes office. that is what they are working toward. by the time he takes office, we are not worried it will be an issue. mark: jason, these trips mr. trump is taking starting in ohio, i guess the vice president-elect will go on some of them. what is the format of them? will they look like some of his rallies? jason: it will be an opportunity for the president-elect and vice president-elect to say thank you to the american voters are giving them this opportunity to serve the american people, but i think the other thing you will see the president elect talking about what he's going to be doing for the american people and that is really what the main focus is. we have gone through this long campaign. everybody talked about, when is this going to end, when only going to move the country in the right direction? that is what this is about, to continue laying out the day one agenda items whether it is executive orders or legislative issues we can tackle. this is another opportunity to rally support for some of these
-- start rallying support for some of these legislative items we think will be quite popular. mark: the president-elect seems to disagree with mitch mcconnell about whether burning an american flag is protected speech. do you know if yes or from anyone today who has told him this is not a good thing to -- if he has heard from anyone today who has told them this is not a good thing to pursue? jason: this should be illegal, it is completely ridiculous. and you know who actually agrees with the president-elect would be hillary clinton. we know in 2005, introduced legislation that would make flagburning punishable by a to $100,000 fine and upwards of a year in prison. this is something i think most americans oppose flagburning. john: there's obviously a difference of opinion among a lot of americans on this question. there is a court ruling that is right now in effect, a 5-4 decision that has flagburning is protected speech.
we donald trump suggested in that tree today is one of the punishments you would like to suggest is stripping people of their citizenship. what are we supposed to make of it when the present suggest that someone who would violate a law that is now protected constitutionally, even if it were, he would strip people of their citizenship? this is for doing something that is constitution-protected speech. what should you make of that? jason: he is very passionate about this issue. this is a big he feels very strongly about, the flag. john fund that we are supposed to take that seriously, the notion that he thinks someone who is doing something that is constitutionally protected speech right now should have their citizenship revoked? we are supposed to take that seriously as an actual proposal? jason: i think the fact that he is raising this as an issue and we are having a debate over it is a good thing as far as, you know -- john: he has proposed a punishment.
again, are we supposed to take that seriously or not? jason: he made his opinion very clear. he thinks there should be illegal, a very strong punishment for an offense like this. again, we are talking about the american flag, where men and women have find i -- john: you are saying we should take him seriously. this is not just an expression of his passion. he is proposing the notion that people should have their citizenship stripped if they partake in a currently constitutionally protected at. -- protected acts. you are saying that is a proposal? we should treat it as such? jason: i would let the president-elect's words speak for themselves. he takes this very seriously, and quite frankly, i think most americans would agree that this is completely out of bounds to burn an american flag and there should be some punishment for it. even hillary clinton would agree with that. mark: jason miller, i confess, i am slightly frustrated, but we are delighted you came on. [laughter] mark: thank you, jason miller. when we come back, we will switch. it is no longer miller time, it is stein time.
♪ john: confirmation from donald gwen chao will be the pick for signature trepidation. we will have green party presidential nominee jill stein, who has kicked up a raging ruckus in the political world over the past week by filing for ballot recount following discrepancies that use paper ballots versus those used where electronic voting to place. she also plans a recount in michigan tomorrow and has raised money from 140,000 donors for this effort. dr. stein joining us from
boston. good to have you with us. paul ryan, speaker of the house, said your recount effort is a ridiculous fundraising stunt that is a quote. how do you respond to the speaker of the house? jill: what are you afraid of? the american people have a right to vote, and a transparent process and to be assured that , especially in wisconsin where these voting machines are being used, that are no lung or use in california because they are so prone to error and tampering, they are being eliminated in maryland and virginia, we should have quality voting systems in all of our states, and the american people deserve to have confidence in our votes, especially coming out of this very divisive and bitter election. let's have the assurance that our votes are being counted securely improperly. john: there is an election -- there is not an election lawyer right now has been
involved in recounts in the past two thinks that there is not any way this will change the end cap -- the outcome. is this mainly an academic exercise? this technology does not work or does work, to restore faith in the system or find places there are holes in the system or is this an effort to overturn the outcome of election? jill: this is not an effort to overturn the outcome of the election. this is not to help one candidate or her another. we had already declared we would do a recount and michigan before the winner was declared. so this is not about who won. it is about the process and ensuring the american people at a time of record cynicism and disappointment in our political system that we can be confident in our vote, and it is not just an academic question. let me say that we have seen plenty of trouble with voting machines when we have actually looked. we have not often looked, but during the recount in ohio,
90,000 votes that did not get counted in toledo, and the only reason we found out about that was because the people of toledo in the communities of color felt they were getting short shrift. they brought a legal case. and sure enough -- 90,000 of their vote had not been counted because the machine was not properly calibrated so it was a little bit turned and not capable of seeing that their votes were voted on. these questions have been raised for long enough. there are other red flags here , which is that you had extremely razor thin margins in these three states. we were using voting equipment that is a suspect in one way or another, or there were other red flags like in michigan, where there was a skyhigh number of blank votes, 80,000 blank votes. that is much higher than any other prior election. so there are warning signs here.
also the fact that the outcome was the opposite of what had been anticipated. those factors, taken together, is why those three states were identified as areas that were most likely to find problems. -- that we are most likely to find problems. what we really want is a voting system where we don't have to show that there was some real, you know, major problem in order to have built in transparency and accountability in the system. we said, going forward, we should have, for one thing, we should not be using faulty , perilous voting machines that have been proven to be error-prone and friendly to tampering. and we should have audits. mark: i appreciate your commitment to the behind confidence in the system, to making sure the machines operate safely. i have watched a ton of your interviews over the last few days and i am completely off a
bye this. how will recount in these three states achieve your goal of restoring people's confidence in the system? how cannot possibly be the result? jill: there are many concerns about the system. you are right. this is a first step and a time critical step. mark: just tell me over the next few weeks, as this plays out, tell me the results he would -- that you would want to see that would restore peoples faith incrementally in the system? jill: we would see the system is working flawlessly and i would be great. -- and that would be really great. based on the prior performance of these machines, i don't expect that. on the other hand, i don't expect enough that we bill overturn the results of the election. but the question has been raised. all i did was put out a press release and open up a webpage where people could donate. 140,000 donors at an average contribution of $45.
it is no secret that there is widespread cynicism and disappointment in our system and i think what we are seeing here is a groundswell to say that we the people can do better -- anchor: dr. stein, we have got to go. really appreciate you coming on. think you so much. we will be right back. thank you so much. we will be right back. ♪
♪ it is almost 10:00 a.m. in singapore, 1:00 p.m. in sydney, and 9:00 p.m. in new york. i am rishaad salamat. >> i am haidi lun. this is "bloomberg markets: asia." ♪ >> oil hovers near a two week low amid deep divisions in opec. iran has no intention of cutting production. rishaad: goldman sachs seeing a 30% chance of a deal. executive isanking
donald trump's pick. >> if president park is forced out, investors want to know who is in charge. asian markets back on track, particularly japan, the topix snapping that winning streak yesterday, but gains again today on the back of a strong session on wall street overnight. rishaad: we are having a look at the action. juliette: most asian markets are weakness, andle the shanghai composite load today, down .8%. the won trading higher against the dollar, the kospi