tv CNN Newsroom With John Berman and Poppy Harlow CNN June 2, 2017 6:00am-7:01am PDT
y282uy ywty > we begin with breaking news. the jobs report out moments ago. headlines here. mixed results. when it comes to jobs added to the economy, the number is lower than expected. >> there is good news. the unemployment rate at the lowest level since may 2001. want to get right to cnn's chief business correspondent christine romans. glaring numbers both ways. >> let's look first at the unemployment rate. this is a level that most consider to be to be full employment. this is when you have a hard time finding workers. 4.3% the lowest since 2001. a time by the way we thought the economy was roaring on all fronts. but job growth this time this year seems to be slowing a bit
from where it was last year and the year before. let me say that again. job creation not as brisk right now from february to may as it was the year before and in 2015. 138,000 net new jobs for president trump to make his promise of 25 million jobs over ten years, he's going to have to see almost twice that. more than 200,000 jobs every single month. we know that april was revised lower and month before that was revised lower. let me show you where job gains are. manufacturing jobs down about 1,000. not a surprise there. mining and logging up 7,000. we dug into this number. about 400 coal mining jobs added. that's a real focus of this president. health care jobs, look at the comparison between mining and logging and health care. 24,000 new jobs in health care. every single month we see strong growth from hiring in hospitals, care facilities, a lot of growth in health care sector. that's where a lot of energy has been. 80 months in a row of private
sector job growth. >> so good top line number in terms of the jobs added. not as much as economists were expecting. the white house came out this week and said we have created a million private sector jobs. the president himself used those words himself. a million private sector jobs. that's not what the labor department shows, is it? >> the official statistics don't show a million private sector jobs. they show half of that. president advisers say he's pointing to adp which is private payroll service which i think surveys about 12,000 employers. very small survey. it's an estimate. and that shows 1.2 million private sector jobs. this bureau of labor statistics report does not even match that private sector forecast that we got this week from adp. i suspect what you'll see here, the president thinks he will use numbers that match that to tell that story. that's what he did yesterday. >> christine romans, thank you.
>> welcome. >> new this morning, former fbi director james comey will testify next week or will he? white house says they're okay with it. or are they? just a short while ago one of the president's top aides would not rule out the white house using executive privilege to try to keep comey from testifying. joe johns is live at the white house with more. what are we hearing? >> reporter: good morning, poppy. this is drama. the date is now set. next thursday, june 8th, for james comey to testify. the big question, what will he say? what won't he say? is there anything he can't say because there's a special council under way and drama surrounding the question of whether there might be some last-ditch effort by the administration, by the president, to keep comey from testifying at all by invoking something called the executive privilege and this is a privilege essentially designed to protect certain communications between high level government officials
including the president. so listen to presidential counselor kellyanne conway this morning on another network talking about the possibility of comey testifying next week. >> does he want former director comey to testify before congress? >> we'll be watching with the rest of the world when director comey testifies. last time he testified the fbi had to scurry to correct that testimony. he was off by hundreds of thousands in his count. his sworn testimony count of the number of e-mails that allegedly were sent to anthony weiner. he said there were hundreds of thousands. that was off. >> the president is not going to invoke -- >> the president will make that decision. >> reporter: it sounds like the decision has not been made. if the administration were to decide to invoke executive privilege, a number of problems with that. james comey is no longer an employee of the united states government. he was fired by the president of
the united states but a larger problem perhaps is the president of wask waiver. the president has talked and tweeted about his conversations with comey and he may have waived that privilege because as you know, if you talk about a conversation, you can't later claim that it was secret. >> joe johns at the white house. very notable. kellyanne conway given a chance to rule out executive privilege. she would not. at least not this morning. wait. there's more. new questions surrounding conflicting stories about jared kushner's meeting with a russian banker. cnn's diane gallagher live in washington with details on this. good morning. >> reporter: you know, it seems like jared kushner and this banker can't seem to get on the same page about why they actually met in the first place, which, a, doesn't look good, but b, it has a potential to be a serious problem in the future because according to a u.s. official the fbi is looking into those discrepancies.
a chairman of u.s. sanction russian bank and former spy with close ties to president vladimir putin. now, the white house says that kushner met with him in his official transition role. basically along the lines of foreign relations. the bank said that it was strictly business as in private business that kushner was not a representative of trump. so when exactly did this meeting take place? sometime in december but beyond that, it's pretty hazy. cnn has reported that the russian ambassador also had a secret meeting with kushner back in the first days of december. that's where our sources say the ambassador urged the president's son-in-law to meet with gorkov. a private jet flew from moscow to the states on december 13th though the "post" said they
couldn't confirm whether he was on that flight. on december 15th and 16th, putin was in japan. russian media said that gorkov would join him. kushner left this meeting out of his security forms and added them a day later when they were reported in the media. kushner agreed to speak with the senate intel committee about the russian investigation. one more thing, our matthew chance tried asking gorkov for clairification but just said no comment. >> diane gallagher in washington. let's discuss all of this with our panel. jackie is here along with lynn and matt. you heard the exchange with kellyanne conway on "good
morning america." two points, matt lewis to you, the white house is not ruling out or hasn't decided yet on executive privilege. what does that tell you? >> well, i think they're obviously very concerned about what james comey might have to say. i've sensed an attempt by the administration or by some surrogates of theirs to try to sort of impeach him and put him on trial. and that could be one strategy. another strategy would be to simply try to prevent him from testifying. you know, as was mentioned earlier, that's sort of tough to do. he doesn't -- he's no longer the fbi director. invoking executive privilege is a little more complicated perhaps. and on top of that, when president trump has talked about it and tweeted about him and so to now try to shutdown that conversation, which is a valid question, the american people have a right to know this
information, so i suspect that he probably will testify. >> to matt's point there, kellyanne didn't seem prepared for the executive privilege question and the answer was the president will have to decide. surprised she wouldn't rule it out. the more glaring thing to me is how ready she was to go after james comey. this is what matt lewis saw fir firsthand last night where people said things about james comey out loud and lipublicly t muddy the waters. what's the danger in that? >> let me take it and slice it -- take your last point first. the danger is, of course, it could backfire and you create sympathy for comey. where you have such a split decision on him going into this episode for remember we started this with democrats being mad at him for talking about what now some say is out of school on hillary clinton. here's the strategic issue i think that the white house is
facing. they're just not sure. they are throwing this out there. we may do this. we may do that. i think they just want to see where things are going if they learn more, if any of comey's friends drop hints about what he might say but if they invoke executive privilege, that could be a side show and fight and buy more time maybe to their advantage. >> jackie, i'm struck by the -- i didn't mean to cut you off. next thursday, 10:00 a.m., big day. >> during this show. which of course they pegged it to be on this show. >> clearly. >> it just seems to me when james comey does this, he's no longer an unanimous source. if james comey goes out and testifies under oath that the president tried to pressure him to stop the investigation into michael flynn, he's not an unanimous source. that's a big thing. there are big real questions that members of congress are going to have to face. >> this also isn't james comey's first rodeo when it comes to
standing up to an administration that's still in office. he did this during the bush administration with alberto gonzalez and that whole incident. he will be prepped for this. this could be very damaging to this white house. frankly, this whole decision to fire him as fbi director is coming back to bite them again. this wasn't thought through. if he was still an employee of the federal government, the president would have a lot more ground to stand on with using executive privilege. not to mention as joe johns said the president himself talked about this so much that he might not be able to use that anyway. but there are so many missteps leading up to this testimony. if they try to throw the executive privilege out, it will look like they have something to hide whether or not they do. this is another problem of this administration's own making and you're absolutely right. senators will have a lot of questions for him. you know, you have to imagine he's going to be prepared with some very compelling answers.
>> he may have some notes or memos that he can review. >> we're going to get back to russia in just a moment. i want to get your take on the reaction. the global reaction to the president pulling out of paris climate agreement. matt lewis, whether it's gary being asked four times if this white house thinks climate change is a hoax or epa administrator scott pruitt being asked, no one from the white house will answer that central question. why? >> well, i think it's a mistake. i think it may be because they don't know what donald trump really believes or maybe there's political considerations. maybe they want to pander to a certain part of the republican base that is not just skeptical but denying climate change. but, look, i really still think that you could be a firm believer in climate change and believe that it's a serious
problem and still oppose this deal just on the merits of it being a very bad deal. that's what they should be talking about in my opinion. i think they have a lot of ground to stand on there. >> it's different saying it's a bad deal or refusing to say climate change is not a hoax are two different things. it's notable for lack of an answer there. let's tie all of this together. jared kushner and ivanka trump not there yet because of jewish holidays and previously scheduled meetings, whatever you want. obviously they are known to have been pushing against this decision to remove the united states from the paris climate deal. what does this say about jared kushner? is russia seeping in whittling away at his influence inside the white house? >> i would take it issue by issue. this is one why ivanka and jared had unified front and, yes, it was a holiday yesterday so they kept -- they were in synagogue and then he went to the white house. the point here on that one is they don't have the influence on
all of the issues that if anyone thought they did, they don't. and to tie it together, i think this means that any time that trump can find ambiguity, he likes to live in that space. maybe i like climate change. maybe i don't. he thinks a strategic advantage not to say because he's pinned down. that's not place he likes to live. >> thank you very, very much. a lot going on this morning. if the white house does not try to block the testimony from james comey, what do you want to know? we're going to speak with someone who has been in hearings like this. and got to ask a lot of questions. >> and business backlash. the president pulls the plug on the paris climate deal. some of the biggest named ceos in the world saying he's wrong quitting his councils, you name it. in minutes we'll speak with sir richard branson. (dog) mmm. this new
beneful grain free is so healthy... oh! farm-raised chicken! that's good chicken. hm!? here come the accents. blueberries and pumpkin. wow. and spinach! that was my favorite bite so far. (avo) new beneful grain free. out with the grain, in with the farm-raised chicken. healthful. flavorful. beneful. of being there for my son's winning shot. that was it for me. that's why i'm quitting with nicorette. only nicorette mini has a patented fast dissolving formula. it starts to relieve sudden cravings fast. every great why needs a great how.
every great why we asked people to write down the things they love to do most on these balloons. travel with my daughter. roller derby. ♪ now give up half of 'em. do i have to? this is a tough financial choice we could face when we retire. but, if we start saving even just 1% more of our annual income... we could keep doing all the things we love. prudential. bring your challenges. we are six days and 41 minutes from what could be the most important testimony on capitol hill since watergate. who's counting? fbi director james comey expected to lay out his private conversations with president
trump. >> you supported the president during much of the campaign. thank you so much for being with us, sir. just moments ago kellyanne conway, senior adviser to president trump, she was on tv and she would not rule out the president using executive privilege to keep james comey from testifying. do you think there's a valid claim of privilege here? >> absolutely. i mean, i think one of the things that many people would love to hear for news purposes or just for the intrigue, those types of things, they would love to hear about the comey's interpretation and description of the private conversations that he had with the president of the united states. that makes news. as a former policy maker in washington, i don't think that that's necessarily good. it sets a dangerous precedent. it would be a he said, he said
type of thing. it's one side of the story. that doesn't help the process move forward. in that case, the president can and would rightfully exert executive privilege. >> a lot to unpack there. you say it would be one sided. right now, sir, is one sided. it is he said as in the president said because he's talked about their private conversations about multiple occasions on network news interviews and on twitter. so why does the president then have the right to do that but the fbi director should be blocked from doing so. >> because he's president of the united states. same thing happened -- >> that doesn't give him anymore authority to talk about it, does it? >> absolutely it does. it's the same thing that big thing discussing classified information with the russians. the president is the top intelligence officer in the country. he decides what can and cannot be shared.
the president has a tremendous amount of latitude. sure, in the future can tsomeon peel this and see what some are saying is a criminal case? sure. they can do that. in terms of, you know, the president is the head of the executive branch and he can protect those conversations if he deems they need to be protected. >> does the president have the right to ask the fbi director to stop an investigation? does the president have a right to do what some would construe as obstruct justice because that's what a lot of the he said/he said hinges on here, sir. >> the president does not have the right to obstruct justice. no president has the right to do that. that's a vitolation of the law. the president cannot go there. this is not going to be determined as to whether he obstructed justice is not going to be determined in a senate hearing with one witness testifying and those types of
things. i don't think we're close to having that type of a discussion about this president, this white house, or those types of actions. >> congressman, it sounds like you're saying that you believe that the testimony of the former fbi director is not relevant in determining if there was obstruction of justice. is that correct? is that what you're saying? >> no. again, what you're doing is you're twisting my words. >> i'm not. you just said -- you just said it's not important for people to hear comey's side of this. >> the fbi director's version of what happened clearly is relevant. whether a congressional hearing is the best or the most appropriate way for that information to move its way through the process i think is a whole different question. they've set up a special council in the department of justice that will get into the russia stuff and may get into this
stuff. probably will go back and look at hillary's e-mail server and those types of things as they go through. the most appropriate way to determine whether there was any violation of the law is to go through the justice department. i have been on capitol hill. congress is absolutely the worst place for that to happen. >> congressman, let me ask you this because we asked you at the beginning if you thought he had the right to invoke executive privilege. you are someone the white house will listen to. you advised them during the campaign and the administration as well. would you advise the president six days before the scheduled testimony of james comey to try to invoke executive privilege? >> i don't know what the president and james comey talked about. the president does -- he may have shared that with some of his closest advisers in the white house. they will then make the determination as to whether executive privilege is warranted or not. i don't know the content. i can't make that judgment or
provide him with a recommendation in that area. >> congressman, quickly back to one point you made before. of course the president has the right to do this. as president he can declassify anything at any moment. do you think it's right to the president to come out and talk about these private conversations and if he does invoke executive privilege try to block james comey from doing the same? is that something you would advise that the president continue to talk about publicly? >> i think again the president knows what was in these conversations. the context and those types of things. for a congressional hearing to go into that and try to delve that, they won't get the president to testify there. the most appropriate place for this type of discussion to do is behind the closed doors until there's a full evaluation of all of the events, all of the circumstances, is what they have put in place, and that is the
special counsel through the department of justice. >> it's not what i asked. what could argue that the president testified to the american public through these interviews and through twitter. we're out of time. congressman, we appreciate you being here. >> great. thank you. markets are booming on news that president trump pulled out of the paris climate agreement. ceos ripping into that decision. we'll talk to one of them next. sir richard branson. industry-leading softwarenew, to monitor drilling operations in real-time, so our engineers can solve problems with the most precise data at their fingertips. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.
and make cars appear out of thin air. find love anywhere. he's cute. and buy things from, well, everywhere. how? because our phones have evolved. so isn't it time our networks did too? introducing america's largest, most reliable 4g lte combined with the most wifi hotspots. it's a new kind of network. xfinity mobile. this morning world leaders slamming the president's decision to pull out of the paris climate agreement. they are also throwing cold water on the president's notion that the u.s. can renegotiate a better deal. >> in a joint statement, they say there's no room for negotiation. the french president went a step forward tweeting the president's slogan with a tweak.
frederik pleitgen joins us with more. >> there's criticism coming in from america's close allies like, canalike canada. they are deeply disappointed and angela merkel of germany saying the position of the united states is regrettable but she also said that no one would stop germany and europe from hanging onto their goals. and david cameron calling this a backward step. as you mentioned, there would be no plan b because there's no planet b. pouring cold water on notion that anything could be renegotiated and he said the following. let's listen in. >> i do respect this decision i do think it's a mistake.
both for the u.s. and for our planet. we all share the same responsibility. make our planet great again. >> the french president there switching into english. uncommon for a french leader to do that. so you do have a lot of international criticism and a lot coming from europe but then you also have it coming from the chinese right now as well. the chinese prime minister is actually in europe right now. he's meeting with eu leaders and they've made a point to say that they see eye to eye on the global challenges and put climate change at the top. you already have the chinese there trying to fill that void that the u.s. seems to be leaving especially in europe with that decision on the climate agreement. >> frederik pleitgen for us in london. markets around the world over the last 24 hours mostly up. wall street opened moments ago flat from wall street today although reacting more to jobs
numbers than anything else. >> investors are not reacting really to some of the biggest named ceos in the world slamming the president's decision to pull out of the agreement. disney's executive chief and musk quit the president's economic council. and leader of ge says disappointing and tim cook told employees that apple will not change how it is operating. climate change is real. we share responsibility to fight it. i want to reassure you that today's developments will have no impact on apple's efforts to protect the environment. our mission has always been to leave the world better than we found it. we would never waiver because future generations depend on us. let's hear from sir richard branson. thank you for being here.
this president says that we will create more jobs. is he right? >> sadly, he's completely wrong. hundreds of thousands of jobs could have been created in the clean energy sector if he had given his support and implemented policies to make that happen and the industries he's trying to protect, coal, they are dying industries so those people should move into cleaner industries much more pleasant industries to work in. that can create energy revolution that can help save the world and he sat that back yesterday. >> the president said he entered
into bad deals over the years. we don't want other countries to laugh at us anymore because of these bad deals. what do you make of that? >> i'm afraid the world is very sad with the way america is behaving at the moment. the most shameful time that i have ever seen. 193 countries supported this last time that happened was when the ozone layer was threatened and there was a meeting in canada and the whole world got together and they sorted that problem out. ozone layer is regrowing and people aren't suffering from unnecessary cancers. this is as important an occasion the agreement and hundreds went
to paris and argued it must be implemented. it just makes so many of us want to cry when for some bizarre reason the president of america decides to make such a catastrophic decision. >> you lead a group called the b team. these are businesses, big businesses, including some big manufacturing businesses, big emitters committed to reducing carbon in the atmosphere and emissions. do you think american and global businesses are actually going to change the way they operate and choose to pollute more because of this or are they going to stick to the paris agreement anyway? >> the b team has incredible leaders.
enormously interesting group of leaders. with one voice. almost all business leaders in the world know that we have a problem. know that we have to do something about it. i'm not just talking about people like myself that pollute the airline line. i'm talking about oil company leaders. all of us. we know we have a problem and we have to do something about it. it helps if you can have a government taking leadership setting the ground rules, trying to encourage clean energy by not taxing it. trying to disencourage dirty energy by taking off subsidies on it. and in that way, we can get to a world that is clean for our grandchildren in 2050 that does not pollute and does not mean we'll ruin the world if our climate change gets out of control and will not mean that we'll see sea levels rising. it's a win-win all around if 193
countries stick together. and it's a horrible loss what happened yesterday. i think that history will treat trump incredibly unkindly for the message that he sent to the world yesterday. it was a dreadful, dreadful day. >> your view is very clear on this. thank you very much for being with us. the president's views are also clear on this yesterday. we'll see what progresses over the next years i suppose. thanks so much. >> the white house not backing down in the travel ban fight. the administration taking this one to the supreme court. with type 2 diabetes
a lower a1c is a lot about choices. but it can be hard sometimes, 'cause different sides of you struggle with which ones to make. well, what if you kept making good ones? then? you could love your numbers. discover once-daily invokana®, a pill used along with diet and exercise to significantly lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. it's proven to lower a1c better than januvia®. invokana® works around the clock by sending some sugar out of your body through the process of urination. it's not for lowering systolic blood pressure or weight loss, but it may help with both. invokana® may cause dehydration, which could make you feel dizzy or weak when you stand up, so be sure to drink enough water. important side effects to know may include kidney problems, genital yeast infections, changes in urination, or potentially serious urinary tract infections.
as is risk of fracture, or increases in cholesterol or potassium. ketoacidosis is a serious condition, which can be life threatening. stop taking invokana® and call your doctor right away if you experience symptoms. or if you have an allergic reaction, with signs like rash, swelling, or difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take if you have severe liver or kidney problems or are on dialysis. taking with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the choice is yours. ♪ lower your blood sugar with invokana®. imagine loving your numbers. there's only one invokana®. ask your doctor about it by name.
case. it would block entry into the united states from six muslim majority countries. >> we get the latest. the court, will they take this up? >> well, that remains to be seen, guys. lawyers for the trump administration filed hundreds of pages with the u.s. supreme court late last night in the hopes of convincing the justices to allow the president to move forward with his travel ban and the key question for now is whether the administration can convince nine members of the court that the country faces more harm from a national security standpoint by not having the ban in effect. so far lower courts have kept the travel ban on hold. many using the president's own words to find the executive order violates the constitution on this idea that it was motivated by some sort of intent to disfavor muslims. the justice department says those courts got the law wrong
and you can't second-guess the president's motivations on this. >> thank you very much. we appreciate it. this morning police in portland are looking for this man. why? because he allegedly stole from one of the victims of the train stabbing incident last week. there he is in portland. he was carrying -- he was caught on video carrying ricky best's backpack off the train. best's wedding ring as well. police are asking him to turn himself in and bring the items back for the family. >> was this a shrewd political move to exit the paris deal? what do people who voted for donald trump also think about the fact that james comey will be testifying in front of the whole nation next thursday? stay with us.
whuuuuuat?rtgage offer from the bank today. you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free! free? yeah. could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. no. go to lendingtree.com for a new home loan or refinance. receive up to five free offers and choose the loan that's right for you. our average customer could lower their monthly bills by over three hundred dollars. go to lendingtree.com right now.
enamel is the strong, wof your tooth surface. the thing that's really important to dentists is to make sure that that enamel stays strong and resilient for a lifetime. the more that we can strengthen and re-harden that tooth surface, the whiter their patients' teeth are going to be. dentists are going to really want to recommend the new pronamel strong and bright. it helps to strengthen and re-harden the enamel. it also has stain lifting action. it's going to give their patients the protection that they need and the whiter teeth that they want. ♪
>> world leaders are condemn k the president's decision to exit the deal, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell calls it a blow to obama's war on coal. house speaker paul ryan called the accord a raw deal. >> joining us now, j.d., i want to talk about paris. let's start with moscow as it were right now and issues about russia and the investigation swirling around this white house. james comey testifies next week. six days from now. a lot of people looking at this as a key moment for the white house and this presidency. when i say a lot of people, does that include people in the middle of the country where you
are right now in columbus, ohio? >> yeah. i think the conversation about the russian investigation and the feelings that people have about that investigation very often overlap with how people feel about the media. i often find when folks talk about russia, they say there's a distrust of the media and feeling that the media is being unfair to president trump. it's really difficult to untangle those two sentiments. i will say that if we're talking about trump's base, we have to keep in mind two separate groups of voters. one group of voters is the really passionate core base of trump voters. probably 20% of the electorate. they're not going to abandon the president no matter what comey says. there are a lot of folks who voted for donald trump who still give him positive approval ratings but who opinion polling shows are actually pretty soft in their support. i see when i talk to folks like that the soft trump voters that comey, the investigation, the
constant drip, drip, drip, of conversation about russia and potential collusion does have a softening impact among the soft group of trump supporters. >> >> j.d., the president promised coal miners, you're going to go back to work. you were born in kentucky, grew up in ohio. you know these towns, you know these people. we've seen it on the ground. are these people en masse going to go back to work because the president pulled out of the paris climate agreement? >> well, no, because the paris climate agreement, of course, was nonbinding. and so, a lot of the commitments that the united states made, even if you think the united states shouldn't have made those commitments, they were effectively voluntary, so it's really tough to argue that pulling out of that accord is going to bring a lot of people back to work. what i find so amazing about this conversation is that when you talk to folks who are involved in the coal industry, folks who live in these areas, they're very realistic about the fact that a lot of those jobs
are not coming back, and i think that what that shows is that we really have to be asking ourselves, what's the next generation of american jobs, what are people going to be doing 10, 20, 30 years down the road. and it's so interesting to me how much of the national conversation is driven by can we bring coal miners back to work. >> yes. >> and when you talk to folks on the ground, they're actually a lot more realistic about what the economy's going to be looking like in a decade or two. >> yeah. >> it's such an interesting conversation, because look, how many coal miners are there, 50,000 to 70,000? >> there are 50,000 coal miners in america right now. >> and 115,000 people who work for jcpenney alone, j.d. vance. and if you listen to the president sometimes, you would think that the coal miner caucus, as it were, you know, is the most important, symbolic thing, you know, for the american economy. and it's not that we shouldn't try to save every job that we can, and it's not that every job's not important, but it almost seems that he's saying that certain americans are more important or more person than others. >> well, there's obviously a
very important symbolic role for coal. and if you talk to folks who work in the coal industry who had grandparents, parents who worked in the coal industry, it is really important. in some ways, it's almost associated with the geography of eastern kentucky or west virginia in a way that most industries aren't. but even still, even the fact that, even if you accept the fact that coal has this really large, symbolic power, which it does, you know, people on the ground, again, are pretty pessimistic about whether the coal economy is ever going to be able to employ hundreds of thousands of people in these regions. and so, what you see, when you see the conversation driven so much by whether these coal jobs are going to be coming back, it doesn't necessarily match up with the real cynicism that exists on the ground. and i think that if we really want to help these people -- and we should want to help these people. i mean, these are good, hard-working americans. but we have to be talking about what's next, what's the economy of the next 10 or 20 years going to be driven by, and how do we prepare people for those jobs and that type of work. >> and i think just from the
little bit of time i've spent talking to these folks in kentucky, ohio, and elsewhere, it is not just the 50,000 coal miners. it is, j.d., what coal mining represented, as the ability to work a 40, 50-hour workweek and provide for your family. so it touches a lot more people than just those that are directly employed. that said, when i was in beattiville not that long ago after the election, a woman named donna kumer came to me, and she said, the coal trucks are already out. she felt more hope then than she had felt since lyndon johnson declared the war on poverty in kentucky, right? is this president being disingenuous with these people, that their livelihood will completely turn around? >> yeah, well, i don't know if he's being disingenuous, obviously. i don't know what's in the president's mind. but i do think from just a basic economic and, frankly, political fact of life that the white house needs to keep in mind is these areas do have high
unemployment rates, low labor force participation rates. they do need good jobs, and unfortunately, they don't have those jobs right now. now, you can talk about the coal industry, and obviously, it does have this symbolic importance, but unless you can actually bring new jobs, better jobs, jobs outside of the coal industry to these areas, they're still going to really, really suffer. and i think consequently, while the president may not pay a political price tomorrow, if two years from now, if four years from now people are still looking around and saying, where are the jobs, how can i find good work, either in the coal industry or outside of it, then the president and the republican party, they're going to pay a political price because of it. >> j.d., we have got just a few seconds left. back to russia for one second. you talk about the need for shared facts in this country. when james comey testifies under oath and says things out loud, do you think those will be considered facts? >> well, i think they will for most people, but i do think that one of the biggest problems that this entire russia investigation has revealed in our country is
that we have really serious problems of institutional mistrust of the press, not from maybe a majority of the country, but certainly from a pretty large minority. and i think we have to deal with that. we have to recognize that a lot of what's coming out of the so-called mainstream media is mistrusted by a large segment of the country. we've got to deal with that problem. >> sure. >> because if we don't, then we are going to have two separate sets of facts that our political conversation operates under, and that's not healthy for anybody. >> no. james comey is not a reporter, doesn't work for any media operation, just to be clear. so, if he says it, it's not a media thing. but i get your point. >> i found the mistrust in beattiville, kentucky, but when i went and spent an hour with these folks and talked to them, and they didn't feel like they were being talked at by the media, you know, they opened up their doors and arms to us. so, maybe more conversations ahead. j.d. vance, thank you. >> absolutely. yesterday the president called out directly the people of youngstown, ohio. so what do they think about his move on climate? in just minutes, we'll speak
all right, good morning, everyone. i'm john berman. >> and i'm poppy harlow. we are now just six days away to the hour from what will go down in history as potentially unprecedented testimony, or are we? >> just a short while ago, one of the president's top aides would not rule out using executive privilege to keep -- well, the president using executive privilege, to keep the man that he fired, james comey, from testifying before the senate intelligence committee. let's get straight to joe johns at the white house, wha