tv Meet the Press MSNBC June 4, 2017 11:00am-12:01pm PDT
this sunday, terror in london. a van mows down pedestrians on london bridge and then the three occupants stab customers at nearby bars and restaurants. >> i see people running and screaming. people were injured. it's been the worst day of my entire life. >> seven people are killed. dozens more wounded. prime minister theresa may responds this morning. >> we believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face. >> we'll have the latest. plus, the u.s. pulls out of the paris climate change accord. president trump says the agreement helps other countries at the expense of the u.s. economy. >> i was elected to represent the citizens of pittsburgh, not paris. >> the reaction is swift. >> it's an extraordinary
abdication of american leadership. it is a shameful moment for the united states. and the biggest moment yet in the russia investigation. former fbi director james comey will testify before congress after being fired while investigating possible links between russian election hacking and the trump campaign. >> as with any counter intelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed. >> our guests this morning, former secretary of state john kerry and epa administrator scott pruitt. joining me for inside an analysis are hugh hewitt, host of the sail he will radio network, stephanie cutter, michael gerson, columnist for the "washington post" and heather mcghee, president of the progressive group demos. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press." good sunday morning.
look, there is quite a few police here. she said i think it's normal. and then we heard the sirens and saw the people. we were like, no, this isn't right. >> british prime minister theresa may responded this morning. >> we cannot and must not pretend that things can continue as they are. there is to be frank far too much tolerance of extremism in our country. so we need to become far mo more robust in identifying it and stamping it out. >> some very tough talk there from the prime minister. we get the latest from richard engel who is on the ground in london. richard, we heard there a very defiant prime minister. what do we know this morning? >> well, she needs to be defiant. this country has seen three terrorist attacks in the last three months. the latest one took place just after 10:00 last night, taking place behind me. a white van came barrelling down
london bridge, going onto the curb, coming off the curb, chasing people down, mowing people down. then the van came to a stop. the three men jumped out carrying knives and they started slashing, stabbing people who were at bars and restaurants. to their credit, a lot of people tried to resist. they were throwing bottles at the attackers, using chairs to barricade the doors. it's impressive considering the attackers were wearing what looked like suicide vests. they turned out to be fakes. police arrived very quickly on the scene. they say within eight minutes of getting the call, they were here and shot the three attackers dead. >> we are not very far removed from the attack in manchester. in fact, tonight ariana grande is having the memorial concert there in support of the victims of the manchester attack. but this morning the prime minister said, richard, that she thought it was a copycat, that
there wasn't a connection. is that good news or bad news? >> well, it's a little bit of both. it's good news that there's not one big cell. the manchester attack was more sophisticated than this. it used a very advanced bomb. there was some fear that a bomb maker could still object the loose. the bad news is these attacks keep happening, so the extremi t extremists are able to draw from a fairly large pool of willing attackers in this country. theresa may said that not only have there been these three terrorist attacks in the last three months but there were also five thwarted attacks. five attacks, three that got through, that's not a good record. i think that's why you're seeing theresa may talking very tough. there is a concern we might not be at the end of this. this is the holy month of ramadan. isis called for its supporters to carry out attacks during ramadan. isis madthe me cl last year during ramadan. and there were a lot of people who took up that call. you had the orlando attack. you had an attack at the istanbul airport, the daka cafe. this could be a long muslim holy month.
>> richard in london, thank you very much. by the way, we're five days removed, five days away from the u.k. snap elections. joining me now is our nbc news national security analyst michael lichter. obviously, you ran the counter-terrorism center for us. one of the interesting things that the prime minister said is it's time to stop denying them safe space. she is talking about safe space in the digital environment. that's what they brought up first, not people going back and forth to syria. >> i think she's right. she sees that people are not necessarily just going to syria and training, they're staying in london and manchester and getting that engagement. she made this a priority at the g7 conference on digital policing, saying there needed to be much greater activity from the technology companies in silicon valley and participating with governments to identify what had become digital safe havens and disrupting them. >> let's get down to what
viewers are concerned about and, frankly, what many of us are. why is this a bigger problem for the uk than the united states? >> we're not immune to it. we have a lot of antibodies set that the uk does not have. the uk muslim population has more of an extremism problem. they're more isolated. there is less engagement with nonmuslims, they're less economically well off. we don't have those same demographic factors in the united states. so the fbi does look at investigations all across the country. there are risks like this. obviously we have cars. we have knives. we have guns. >> right. >> so we have the risks. but we never had the same degree, same volume, same speed of radicalization that the uk, belgium and the french have had. >> one of the things the president tweeted this morning, he tweeted a lot this morning, but one of the things he tweeted was we need to be smart, vigilant and tough.
we need the courts to give back our rights. we need the travel ban as an extra level of safety. is the concern about this in this country having to do with folks coming into this country or american citizens? >> i have to say, the travel ban is like the old line if, you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. we have a risk. that travel ban is a hammer looking for a nail. we have a domestic issue. we have to address that domestic issue. cases like this, that travel ban has nothing to do with it. yeah, we have to screen people carefully. we have to look at them. simultaneously, we do have to look at the digital landscape and the safe havens overseas and that immigration ban would do nothing on those fronts. >> one thing she wants to do, prime minister mayget the western economies together to put this pressuron silicon valley. we have a first amendment in this count. the uk does not. there are limits to what the united states could do if she really wants facebook or whoever to essentially police these groups. >> this is going to be a very
tough one. she knows the uk alone doesn't have the market authority to regulate these technologies. but that's why she's trying to use the g7. you're right. whether it's end to end encryption or requiring reporting from the technology companies, we have legal constitutional limitations that other nations don't have, and that may make it harder for the u.s. administration to get perfectly in line with what theresa may wants. >> all right, sorry to see you on a sunday more than like this. >> you, too. >> the growing russia investigation and the u.s. withdrawal from the paris climate agreement this thursday, former fbi director james comey who president trump says he fired for reasons that included "this russia thing" testifies before the intelligence committee. later in the broadcast, i'll be joined by my newest colleague megyn kelly who interviewed putin on friday. this past thursday, president trump announced the u.s. was pulling out of the paris climate accord. joining me now, someone who's perfectly situated to address
all of this morning's major stories, former secretary of state john kerry. mr. secretary, welcome back to "meet the press," sir. >> good morning, chuck. thank you. >> i have to start with london. you heard michael lichter. you heard a little bit of what the prime minister theresa may said. i want to focus on that specific phrase she used, mr. secretary. that extremism, tolerance of extremism has been too -- for too long, too much tolerance of this extremism in the uk. is she right? >> well, that's a judgement she's going have to make about their own relationship with the muslim community and great britain. as michael just said, they've had a longstanding problem with respect to greater levels of alienation, a harder time assimilating into the broader british society. a lack of similar opportunity. so there are a lot of ingredients. and i'm going to leave it to her
and to them to sort that out, particularly five days before an election. let me just say that obviously every american feels as if we were attacked also. it wasn't anybody in america today who doesn't reach out and express our sorrow and solidarity with the british people. but the fact is that if people want to kill themselves, this is really hard for law enforcement. and i know from my own law enforcement days how hard people work and how significant the intelligence gathering and coordination component of this is. but if someone is ready to just go out and meet a fuselage of law enforcement bullets and die, you can take people with you. and what we really need to do is focus more, i believe, not on a travel ban as michael said. travel ban will be cannon fodder to the recruiters.
it's the worst thing we can do. but we do need to do -- we do extraordinary screening but a great deal more effort has to go into the building of community, the reaching out and working with these entities, with these sectors of society so that there is not as significant a gap as there is in many parts of the world, by the way, not just in britain, all over the world there is too much distance between government and the people. >> do you think -- look, she's calling for much more pressure to be put on the digital companies, silicon valley whether it's, you know, a what's app messaging service, facebook, there's a lot of tools that these groups are able to use. >> but i think it's a mistake -- >> do you think silicon valley does have a greater responsibility here than they're taking? >> silicon valley has major responsibility and most -- i
mean, almost every company is engaged in dialogue with the government. we worked closely with them over the years i was serving as secretary. but, look, dash put out a message. they can put it out on the internet. they can put it out in many different ways saying to people during ramadan you should attack people with cars, knives, and guns. now, if you turn around and just blame that message exclusively on the internet, we are making an enormous mistake. and if we reach too far without being sensitive to our own values, we give them an extraordinary victory. so there is a balance here. the bottom line is that in too many places and too many parts of the world, you've g a large gap between governce and people. and between the opportunities those people have -- we talked about this after paris. >> right. >> we talked about this after belgium. this is the same problem of people living in isolation and not feeling as if they have a
sufficient stake in society in their world that life is worth living. and if you want to take your own life, you can take other lives with you. >> mr. secretary, i want to move to the paris deal. you were involved. that's why we invited you on the show. i want to go back -- >> i hope that's not the only reason. >> i understand. i want to go into the way back machine here, the financial times back when you were negotiating this. here was what was said. "some experts have argued while mr. obama is making a case for a deal, there is no guarantee that its successor, assuming it is a republican climate change skeptic, would not walk away from a paris climate change agreement. mr. kerry dismissed those concerns by arguing that the republicans had eliminated themselves from contention in the general election because of their approach during the campaign on issues such as
climate change. do you now regret not making this treaty ratified in the united states senate, forcing it to be codified here? >> no. really i'm not. it wouldn't have happened. that's very simple. let's be reastic about it. the president made an executive reement because th wast that we could do. and we presumed that common sense, that basic economics, that science would ultimately prevail. i don't think anybody could have predicted that we would have seen a story like we saw in the "new york times" today about how the republican party has traveled lock, stock and barrel into the hands of the koch brothers and special interests where they're prepared to stand up and deny science and deny facts. what does donald trump know that rex tillerson, the former ceo of exxonmobil, doesn't know? what does the ceo of apple, google, general electric, companies all across america who urged the president not to pull out, what does donald trump know
that president xi, who runs an enormous economy, or president macron or angela merkel or theresa may doesn't know? his whole staff can't tell you whether or not he believes the climate change is a hoax. i will say to you if you truly understand the science, if you have done your due diligence and homework, there is no way you cannot conclude that there's an urgency to doing something and you would not pull out of paris. >> i take you at your word on that on this urgency issue. obviously you have aroadblock of a good chunk of americans who do not believe this urgency -- and you just laid out a case they've been misled. what could you -- >> majority of americans -- >> i understand. >> the majority of americans support climate change and staying in paris.
>> i know. but as you understand, there is a political divide. and the president does feel politically secure with his base that they're comfortable with this decision. it tells me that your message hasn't penetrated essentially red america. why? >> well, because there's an anger and a frustration in a lot of parts of america by average folks who have felt like they're getting screwed by the government and by life over the course of the last years. if you look at what's happened with respect to the economic crisis of 2008 and '09 and look at our tax structure and you look at the favors that are done for powerful interests and you look at the average person working harder and not getting ahead, there's every reason for people to be very angry and very disposed to put first, above all, their economic situation. so i'm not surprised. there's no surprise to me that you can camouflage as they are in a phoney economic argument that has no relationship to the reality of what is happening in the marketplace. last year because of paris, more
money was spent on alternative renewable and sustainable development research and implementation than on fossil fuels. and when donald trump says to the world, well, we're going to negotiate a better deal, i mean, you know, he's going to go out and find a better deal? that's like -- i mean that's like o.j. simpson saying he's going to find the real killer. everybody knows he isn't going to do that because he doesn't believe in it. because if he did believe in it, you wouldn't pull out of paris. america has unilaterally seeded global leadership on this issue which for years even republican presidents george h.w. bush, you know, pushed in this direction. >> let me go back to tone and messaging again. again, look, we're having -- there's the facts and figures that demand attention. there's no doubt about it. but at the end of the day, you know this is cultural and this becomes something different as you just very well described.
but you also said this decision was, quote, a decision acted with stupidity and self-destructiveness and ignorance. the reason i highlight those words is that many people in red america hear that and they think, geez, they think i'm stupid. do you think the messaging needs to change in how you talk about this and how you create a sense of urgency with this chunk of america that isn't listening to you? >> yes, no question about it. there has to be far more focus on the economic message. i think if you look at red america, about 2.6 million to 3 million jobs that are existing in america today in a fast growing sector of our economy and of those 50% of people are in red states that donald trump won. so because of this decision, american leadership in those sectors is now going to be put at risk. we could lose some of our ability to be able to grow those jobs. and, in fact, lose out on the
largest market of the future. the biggest market in the world in the future is going to be trillions of dollars spent in the sector of energy. and if the united states is isolated itself now standing only with syria and with nick -- nicaragua and nicaragua wanted to do more. i think we do have to do a better job pointing out to people how this is part of the economic future. we also have to -- you know, donald trump says he represents the forgotten man. what about the forgotten children in america who are hospitalized in the summer because of the quality of air with the environmentally induced asthma? what about the forgotten farmer who is suffering from crop dislocation, from drought, from water -- i mean all kinds of problems. wha -- what about the forgotten
citizens of new orleans? we have to talk to the same forgotten people in america and make a better argument to them about how exactly their lives are negatively affected. >> secretary kerry, busy morning. i appreciate you coming on and sharing views on this extraordinary sunday. thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> when we come back, we're going to hear from the trump administration on the decision to pull out of the paris agreement. scott pruitt joins me next. break through your allergies. try new flonase sensimist allergy relief instead of allergy pills. it delivers a gentle mist experience
welcome back, donald trump was keeping a promise he made during the campaign. as you heard from john kerry, not everyone was hap that he did that. epa administrator scott pruitt was with the president on thursday when he made the announcement at the white house. he joins me now.
welcome to "meet the press". >> good morning. >> why did 200 other countries sign this agreement and why do you think the united states should have gotten out of it? >> engagement internationally on
these issues, chuck, is very, very important. and the united states has shown a history of engagement. as you know in the late 1990s, the administration entered into the kyoto protocol and from 2000-2014 this country saw reduction in co-2 emissions, 18%, through leadership and innovation technology. having that discussion internationally, we're part of the treaty ratified in 1992. this goes back almost two decades. >> we pulled out of kyoto. >> we did in 2001. but the framework is still something we're a part of. >> so are you advocating now that essentially even though we pulled out of the paris agreement, it's still going to govern some goals here? >> paris is a bad deal for this country. the president made clear on friday we're going to have a america first strategy with respect to the environment and international agreements. but he also said that engagement, discussion, international discussion and dialogue around co-2 emissions is something we should continue. i think what is important here
is that we're a pre-1994 levels today with respect to our co-2 footprint. the time we exited kyoto, we reduced emissions by over 18% in this country. >> so kyoto is a success? i'm confused because we pulled out of kyoto. >> they didn't prompt the 18% reduction. it was american innovation and technology that prompted the reductions in co-2. that's where the focus should be as far as discussions. >> there seemed to be an implication during your back and forth with the white house press corps that the rest of the world wanted the united states in it to slow down the united states. do you believe that? >> i think the paris agreement very much so put us in an economic disadvantage. >> i understand. do you believe that was intentional, that was the intention? the re
the. >> the rest of the world applauded what we did in paris. we have to go back -- >> why would they applaud it? >> because they put us at economic disadvantage. >> you think the globe, these countries got together to slow down the united states economically? >> why did china and india not have to take any steps until 2030? why did india condition the co-2 upon receiving aid in the agreement? we were going to take steps front loading our cost when the rest of the world waited to reduce their co-2 footprint. that's the reason they put us at an economic disadvantage internationally. here's the deal. we have led, as i've indicated, this effort since 2000 with reductions in our co2 today.int and e-1994 lels not because of paris, not because of kyoto, but beuse of american ingenuity and innovation. >> i'm struck. you truly believe at manof these countries signed on to paris and were trying to get the united states to sign on it for economic reasons? >> if you look at the criticism that was led against paris when signed in 2015, there was as
much criticism on the environmental left as there was on right. >> sure. some thought it should have gone further. >> i'll tell you why. they were upset. in fact, james hanson, the former nasa scientists, as you know, called paris a fake and a fraud. the general counsel of the sierra club said critical things of the agreement. the reason they said those things, chuck, is because the rest of the world, china and india in particular, largest polluters on the planet, didn't have to take any steps until after 2030 and the united states frontloaded the cost through things like the clean power plan, other rules here domestically that contracted our economy. it's been estimated, as you know, it's been estimated by the heritage study that it would cause a contraction of $2.5 trillion of gross domestic product over ten years. >> that made up a lot of negative assumptions. you wanted to make assumption that's didn't anticipate job growth in other industries like solar, like the innovation would
that facility to generate electricity. we need solids stored on site to draw down upon for threats to our grid. fuel diversity, stability, consistency is key to the manufacturing base. it's also key to keeping costs low. our price per kilowatt is far less than what it is in germany, far less than what it is in europe, and we need to keep that approach. >> one other argument you made against this deal is that you thought that it should have been ratified. it should have been debated in the public. it should have been sent to the united states senate. you know who had the power to do that? your administration had the power to do that. you could have changed the deal. you could have gone to the united states senate and done what you said should have been done, have a full-throated debate with the american people. you chose not to do that why? >> the decision not to send it to the senate was made by the former administration. >> i know. but you could have changed things. you could have done it. >> it's clear that the demerits, the efficacy in environmental
outcomes was a bad deal for this country. the president said he's going to put america first in trade, he's going to put america first in national security and border security, he's going to put america first in contracting the reach of washington, d.c. and he's going to put america
first with respect to the environment and international agreements. i think what is being missed in all this the president said on friday paris we're getting out of because it represents a bad deal. the targets said about it previous administration, 26% to 28% reductions -- >> not in the agreement. >> but that 26% to 28% reduction, you're wrong. the 26% to 28% reduction in the agreement, the former administration, all the rules that they enacted, every rule as part of the climate action agenda still fell 40% short of those targets. you said they could be reduced. in the agreement there are provisions that say they have to be revisited every five years. you know what it also said?
they can only be ratcheted up. why did russia set the targets in a baseline of 1990? so they could keep admitting. why did india condition their targets on trillions of dollars? >> this is a political decision in this respect. >> not a political decision. it was a right for this country, chuck. this was -- this is a decision right for this country from a jobs perspective and economy perspective and environmental perspective. >> this is not wanting to be involved in a multilateral agreement. >> that is not accurate. >> would there have been more openness in this deal? >>he president said very clearly on friday that he is op and actually wants to engage in discussion with respect to international agreements on co-2 reduction. not paris. paris represents a bad decision for this country. >> do you believe that co-2 is the primary cause? >> co-2 contributes to climate change. methane is more potent. it's a cause of many. it's a cause like methane and water vapor and the rest. >> scott pruitt, i'm going to leave
it there because i know you have to run. thank you for coming on.
>> thank you. >> back in a moment with much more on the three big stories we're following this morning, the terror attack in london, climate agreement and james comey's testimony that comes up this week on the russia investigation. hillary clinton provided a lot of reasons why she believes she lost the 2016 election. but there is one reason that people were waiting for but never heard. >> i take responsibility for every decision i made. but that's not why i lost. ...it starts a chain reaction... ...that's heard throughout the connected business world. at&t network security helps protect business, from the largest financial markets to the smallest transactions, by sensing cyber-attacks in near real time and automatically deploying countermeasures. keeping the world of business connected and protected. that's the power of and. 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. tidy cats lightweight with glade clean blossoms. our newestdor fighting scent! gives you the power of choice plus... the power of pleasant. exclusively in lightweight! every home, every cat, there's a tidy cats for that. new biwhat are we gonna do?ys... how about we pump more into promotions? ♪ nah. what else? what if we hire more sales reps? ♪ nah. what else? what if we digitize the whole supply chain? so people can customize their bike before they buy it. that worked better than expected. i'll dial it back. yeah, dial it back. just a little. live business, powered by sap. when you run live, you run simple.
hansome scrambled eggs andt i pancakes. for? lilly: we got a craving! go, go, go!! crashing cravings in the crave van! jack's gonna crash your crave! jack: hey, guys. try my jumbo breakfast platter with sausage or bacon, plus 8 mini pancakes, eggs and a hash brown for just $2.99. handballer 2: $2.99? how 'bout we play you for it. handballers: oooooooh. jack vo: you crave it, we serve it. try my $2.99 jumbo breakfast platter. crave van! welcome welcome back, my panel is here.
stephanie cutter, hugh hewitt, heather mcghee. president trump is tweeting a lot this morning. whatever the united states can do to help out london and uk, we'll be there. we're with you, god bless. some critical tweets as well. seven dead and 48 wounded. and mayor of london says there is no reason to be alarmed. he did say that but not in that context. he talked about increased police protection for what that's worth. and finally, we need to be smart, vigilant and tough. we need the courts to give back our rights. we need the travel ban for an extra level of safety. hugh hewitt, you are a -- somebody that worked at the justice department. you know about legal arguments. this is in front of the supreme court. should he have tweeted the phrase travel ban? >> yes. i think he is actually raising the ante in terms of getting the court to move more quickly on the disposition.
he is fairly confident as i am that the fourth circuit court decision is wrong. the first tweet is the tweet i like. there is an alliance within the alliance and attack on one of those five, we always bemoan and in the world.y attack anywhere but new zealand, australia, canada, uk and u.s. are the five alliances. he should stick to the high road on this. nothing else. >> he already attacked the mayor of london, stephanie. >> he has. i mean, never before in our history have we seen a president of the united states confirming something ahead of his own national security council, forwarding things that are printed on drudge about a terror attack and one of our dearest alliances in london. so number one. number two, he's politicizing it by attacking the mayor of london, the mayor of london saying no reason for alarm. he's trying to calm his citizens. and the president is making -- essentially making fun of that. then he's politicizing it by bringing up the travel ban.
forget the legal argument. what does it in the supreme court by saying the ban is a ban even though they're arguing that it's not a ban. politicizing a moment of a terror attack has never been done by a president of the united states. >> michael, i want to get to the second part of this and it's what theresa may said and something that we touched on. there is too much tolerance of the extremism in the uk and then she put it on silicon valley. they need a little bit more help there. that's going to create tricky conversations. >> i completely agree with that. this is a case where -- i'm sorry. i'm sorry. >> that's all right. >> heather. jump in here. we're going to have the civil liberties conversation. they're going to have it in the u.k. we have a first amendment, they don't. they can do things we can't do. >> that's right. i think this is a question of context, balance and approach. we have been so fortunate. mean, i live in new york city
i would never have believed about how safe that i feel even today after september 11th. this is a moment for the people of the uk where they're experiencing heightened sense of fragility walking into bars and concerts and crossing the street on the bridge. and yet at the same time i know that people in the communities of color in this country are also seeing that the president and the right wing are ignoring domestic extremism here in the united states, whether or not it's the young man who was a person who was in the military who was killed by a white supremacist or the veteran who stepped in, obviously, in portland, oregon. so i think that there is a broad conversation to have about administration that is tolerating right-wing extremism and hate as well as obviously the continued threat of a war that we're continuing to not prosecute well overseas. >> michael. >> i think being tough on terrorism means very different
things. it means going after sources of intelligence. but it means engaging the muslim community in a way that actually encourages their cooperation in this. there is no way to do the war on terror while you're alienating that community. i think that that's what donald trump has risked in america. >> all right. i want to shift to the paris agreement here. i know tre is a partisan divide. why is there a partisan -- why are we the only western untry, hugh, where the conservative movement in this country is more skeptical of climate change than the conservative movements in canada, the uk, france and germany. >> i am not skeptical of climate change. i think secretary kerry was right on. you nailed him on it. this did not go to the senate. the montreal protocol and secretary shultz likes to point out was a key and effective anticipation of the necessary global movement. i was submitted to the senate. it was ratified 83-0 in 1988. when president obama chose not
to go to the senate, it was an emission against interest and secretary kerry's contemptuous dismi dismissiveness of the science. >> you're dismissing actually the majority of republican voters. >> i agree. that. >> they do want to see action on climate change. the real partisan divide is the republican politicians who have been paid by fossil fuel industry to absolutely deny what for this country is the single biggest opportunity to generate we wealth in the 21st century. we invented solar in this country. now we're at risk of seeing china be the one to give its people tens of millions of green jobs. >> both sides have some problems here. there are some who claim that this voluntary relatively modest treaty is going to destroy the economy, like donald trump, and some that will save the world. neither of those is true. we have a reality where we have a certain amount of coal and natural gas in the ground. we can't take out 80% of it or
50% of natural gas, and the only that works is when you have a cost-effective altertive the only way that happens is when you have technological innovation. and that's where people can agree. >> i think solar will soon be the cheapest source of electricity on the planet. we are hampering ourselves from what could be the biggest opportunity to address inequality, create millions of jobs for the next generation that is looking out at this job climate and not seeing any other opportunity of green jobs. >> i talked to al gore and john kerry. you heard john kerry. i talked to al gore. al gore, while upset about the decision to get out of paris, is optimistic that the coalition of democratic governors and mayors and ceos of america are essentially going to do paris without the federal government. john kerry is much more pessimistic. who is right? >> that's what i was going to address to hugh's comment that you mentioned that kerry was dismissive to rule of law conservatives. well, there are a lot of rule of law conservatives who didn't want to get out of the paris agreement. you're making a process argument. you don't like the way we got
into it. so you're taking us out of it. that argument doesn't hold up. so why penalize the country -- >> the constitution is never a process argument. the constitution is a fundamental deal. >> but you're penalizing the country because of that argument. i'm not done. as a result, there are mayors and governors and heads of major manufacturers and oil companies, many of whom are republicans who want to stay in the agreement because they see what it means for our economy and our competitiveness. >> i get that. >> and that is what -- >> it has to be a -- >> that's what al gore is getting at. this is going to happen, anyway. the country is going to continue to move forward and developing the technologies and meeting our targets regardless of what donald trump does and says. he's advocated his leadership. we have not advocated america's leadership.
>> you can never get to consensus via contempt. 75 years ago this week was the battle of midway. it's a turning point. i want to connect the two stories. this country cannot effectively prosecute the war on terror if half the discussions begin with contempt of conservatives and people that have a different point of view. at the end of the second battle, churchill said this is not the beginning of the end this is the end of the beginning. we have to get to the beginning. >> we're talking about the planet right now and the future. >> but conservatives disagree with what donald trump did. >> i'm going to pause it here. i promise you we will pick it up but i have bills to pay. back in a moment. i also have the newest member of the nbc family megyn kelly who just sat down with russia president vladimir putin. (vo) when i brought jake home,
this clean was like pow! everything well? my teeth are glowing. they are so white. step 1 cleans. step 2 whitens. crest [hd]. 6x cleaning*, 6x whitening*á i would switch to crest [hd] over what i was using before. welcome back. perhaps you heard that megyn kelly joined nbc news. well, she has and on welcome back. perhaps you heard that megyn kelly joined nbc news. well, she has and on friday she interviewed vladimir putin in st. petersburg, russia. the full interview will air tonight on the debut of "sunday ght withyn kelly." she joins me now from new york. welcomofcially.
>> thank you. >> welcome to sunday mornings. and welcome to sundays in general. look, you had a fascinating conversation with him within the time that he's flirting on and off about whether russians were involved or not. it was sort of a fascinating 48 hours that you spent with him. >> absolutely right. an in our time together, he changed his position yet again, chuck, on who was responsible for the hacking of our election. all along it had been it's not us or i don't know what you're talking about. i haven't heard anything about this. then it changed to maybe it was patriotic russian hackers who might have had nothing to do with, and then in our sit-down, it went into it was the americans and a new conspiracy theory was floated which you'll hear tonight on the show. but i got the chance to ask him about a range of subjects.
then we got into the specifics about this interference about our election. i asked him about jared kushner and i asked him specifically about somebody else very much in the news, and that is president trump's now fired national security adviser, general michael flynn. listen. >> he came over here for a dinner, a photo of which has been widely circulated in the american media. at was the nature of your relationship with him? >> translator: you and i, you and i personally have a much closer relationship than i had with mr. flynn. you and i met yesterday evening. you and i have been working together all day today and now we're meeting again. when i came to the event for our company and sat down at the table, next to me there was a gentleman sitting on one side. i made my speech. then we talked about some other stuff and i got up and left. and then afterwards i was told, you know that was an american gentleman. he was involved in some things.
he used to be in the security services. that's it. i didn't even really talk to him. that's the extent of my acquaintance with mr. flynn. >> the laugh there, megyn, that's something else. but he also kept referencing your family on and off and some people interpreted that in different ways. how did you interpret that? >> some people thought he was making a veiled threat because he mentioned my daughter yeardley and mentioned that i had three kids. i did not take it that way at all because what the viewers didn't know is that the day before we sat down, both of us at his economic forum and for our one on one interview, and he and i had spent a good hour gether along wh prime minister of india and exanged all sorts of information about ourselves and families. he talked openly about his
family and it was off the record. i won't get into it, but he talked lovingly about his family. i talked lovingly about mine. i took that has a reference to a shared experience the two of us had the day before. and off camera he had been very kelly airs tonight. when we come back, end game and the one thing we didn't hear from hillary clinton. >> coming up, "meet the press" end game and post game. by boeing, working to build something better. across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov p3 planters nuts, jerky and whaseeds.at? i like a variety in my protein. totally, that's why i have this uh trail mix.
wow minty. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein. 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.
. >> "mess the press end game" is > back now with end game. former fbi director is set to testify on the russia investigation. his testimony may join the rare historic moments when the whole country starts to watch. think watergate hearings in 1973. the iran contra hearing and of course anita hill at the clarns thomas hearing in 1991. it feels that big of a moment. what do you expect to hear from james comey? >> if people talk about what the president's manner and impression he leaves, this is a case where the president's manner and approach has alienated someone powerful. little marco is different from the director of the fbi. we have a situation where he has
an ongoing criminal investigation and has an offended sense of dignity really in this manner that is going to come back and haunt the president. >> take him at his word, stephanie. he seems to be offended that somehow this takes away from his victory. it motivates him. >> and has managed to threaten comey along the way saying i hope there are no audiotapes of our conversations. so i think that this testimony will be the most watch ed testimony, at least in my lifetime. and i think comey does have the credibility to lay off his case and hear it for the first time coming out of his mouthho he potentially wrote in those memos and it has the potential to shake the downry. >> you had marches across the country on saturday that was about a fundament question of democracy. because you can get so lost in
the weeds of connection between russia and the trump administration. but stepping back, what is the right wing's approach to democracy. the same people who can be okay with election interference or try to minimize it or try to save it and also with voter suppression. are we a country of we the people or are we a country where it's okay to wink and nod and do whatever you can to grab power. that's what i think a lot of the people are feeling about the way that very powerful people see democracy right now. >> will president trump realize the biggest mistake in his presidency is firing jim comey. >> no. it might be not firing him on the first day. i'm going to watch thursday with the consistency with the declaration that there had been no interference with his investigation. >> i have heard a lot of people misinterpret that answer.
he was answering a question about the justice department. he was not asked about -- >> no, no it's not possible. >> it's possible that's how he will gish his conversation with note taking but that will be tricky waters for him. i will also look to see tonight that putin goes after the 2% rise that donald trump demanded of nato. more than anything else, that is not consistent with the russian interference. i want to remind people, that is what drives putin the most crazy is that donald trump is demanding a 2% rise in nato. that's counter intuitive to the russia school. >> stephanie, you have worked for a long time on and off with the clin tons. it seems as if she gets criticized when she doesn't speak her mind. she spoke her mind and a lot of people were upset she is in the weeds too much about certain factors and not enough self-reflection. where is she? where is her head? >> well, i think there is a lot
of reflection and some self-reflection. you know, what i find ironic about all of this is that she's being asked what happened during the election, what do you think the reasons are and she's answering them. so nothing that she is saying is being disagreed with. she's actually right. the press did treat her e-mails like a national emergency. the press did treat her differently than donald trump. she admits there were some mistakes made. but one of the biggest contributing factors to her loss is what comey did with those memos. none of that is disputed. >> we will hear a lot about that as another angle of the thursday testimony. i'm out of time. i approach you watching. we'll be back next week because if it is sunday, it is "meet the press." >> see end goal and post game sponsored by boeing on the "meet the press" facebook page. this friday.
harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni. ♪ everything your family touches sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. because no one kills germs better than clorox.