Skip to main content

tv   Deadline White House  MSNBC  June 21, 2017 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT

1:00 pm
now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00. big news into the investigation on the ongoing threat posed by russia, but first the president has a campaign style event in iowa. he is taking a victory lap after the republicans held to the seat in georgia. here is kellyanne conway responded on twitter last night to news of karen handel's victory. quote, thanks to everyone who breathlessly and snarkly proclaimed georgia six as a referendum on potus. you were right. laughing my ossoff. that was the senior most advisers to the president with snark of her own. we'll start with the hearing today that laid bear how determined russia remains to interfere in our election process and how little progress we're making in protecting ourselves. the fbi's assistant director of counterintelligence and the former homeland security secretary issues stark warnings
1:01 pm
to the house intel committees. >> in 2016 the russian government at the direction of vladimir putin himself orchestrated cyber attacks on our nation for the purpose of influencing our election. that is a fact plain and simple. >> hoping to regain its prior stature, russia has decided to try to weaken us and our allies. this was a -- my opinion a well planned, well coordinated, multifaceted attack on our election process and democracy. >> i think it was unprecedented the scale and the scope of what we saw. in retrospect it would be easy for me to say that i should have bought a sleeping bag and camped out in front of the dnc in late summer with the benefit of hindsight. >> russia will continue to pose an influence threat. >> i think we have to assume for all the reasons that have been discussed here that the russians will be back.
1:02 pm
>> let's turn to ken delaney and kelly o'donnell and jeremy bash, former chief counsel for the house intel committee. ken, you worn -- warned me of the import and i wonder if you were struck by the power of the words that russia attacked us plain and simple. >> i was particularly struck by the fact it was the top counterintelligence official from the fbi who was delivering the words. this is a man who works for donald trump. so now we have heard this kind of thing from former obama administration intelligence officials before, but what is the highest level delivery of this message that we have had from the trump administration. but what's ironic of course is that senior people in the white house from trump on down have not said similar things. another striking thing about this hearing is we heard from an election security expert who said absolutely, voting machines can be hacked and votes can be
1:03 pm
changed. and that very little has been done to prevent that from happening. now, there's some disagreement about that. you had state officials no, they don't think that's much of a risk. and that really pointed up kind of a gulf that you have between the states and the federal government on this issue. a lot of states are resisting federal intervention in the election process and this is a problem and a particular problem when you don't have any top down leadership from the trump administration saying hey, here's what we need to do to secure the next election. >> kelly o, i'm going to ask you to wear your hat as a white house correspondent and a person better sourced on capitol hill than anybody, if there's a growing gap now? we have a president whose press secretary confirmed that he never had spoken with the president about russia. jeff sessions confirmed in testimony last week he had never been briefed on russian hacking as our nation's attorney general, the nation's top cop. and james comey has testified to the fact that in his seven or
1:04 pm
eight interactions with president trump never once did the president ask him about the status of the investigation. if there is a widening gulf between how the white house sees russia in terms of their interest in meddling in the election and how democrats and republicans on the hill see russia. >> well, it's part of the reason this hearing even happened is to keep shining a light on issues that certainly lawmakers feel have gone unresolved and continue to pose a threat. i was struck by four words -- russia will be back. that to me was very jarring today. the recognition that in 2016 when the things were known, there was not a sense, a selective alarm bell going off. jeh johnson spoke of all the things he did as the then home land security secretary trying
1:05 pm
to get attention to this and how it has consumed the white house in many many respects. there's a sense is it real? there's a gap not only inside and around the white house, but publicly about the risk this is posing to democracy. if russia or other state actors can influence the environment of elections or the mechanics of elections that's a very big deal. at the trump white house even uttering the word russia tends to shut things down. they are trying to keep that in sort of a -- let me use the old al gore lock box in order to try to focus on the other things that they believe have been overshadowed by russia. so there's a political and a communication strategy for why they're doing that. a hearing -- the two hearings we saw today is part of kind of the counterweight where lawmakers say these are big issues. they're important issues. they require resources and resolve to tackle them. not only looking back, but for
1:06 pm
2018. we had a big election and a special election that got so much national attention with georgia 6, all of the lawmakers will be on the ballot in 2018. all kinds of elections around the country not that far away. and if these vulnerabilities continue to exist and if there is a way for any hackers to get into the mechanism, changing voter registrations, changing vote tallies that is very, very troubling. now today the official word we heard is that they do not believe or don't have evidence of having actually changed outcomes but that must be a target for those hackers to look for ways to do that. nicolle? >> jeremy bash, let me ask you to pick up on what kelly "o" just detailed. there's a detail and and a fear if they're not stopped if the response is sort of america's political morass, doesn't that embolden russian hackers or anyone else? i heard in today's testimony in
1:07 pm
pretty clear terms that that makes us weaker and then stronger. how can the people do their jobs who are tasked with protecting us do so, when we're divided among ourselves as to whether or not it's happening. >> yes, i couldn't agree more. the failure to acknowledge the threat undermines the role and responsibility of those who stand watch and guard to protect our country. if i were advising the white house i would say, look, embrace this finding that russia meddled. we have more irrefutable evidence as if any were needed, by embracing that finding you're not embracing a finding of collusion or embracing a finding of obstruction of justice. but somehow the president has not given his team even the ability, the permission to acknowledge that. it's almost as if he's worried if anyone looks too closely at the meddling issue they'll find other things that will be politically problematic for him. >> ken, in your private
1:08 pm
conversations with folks in the intel community and the national security apparatus, these are patriots, and these are people who served the country. not one party or the other. what their gravest fear about a hearing like today, landing on deaf ears at the white house? >> well, honestly, their greatest fear is we are unprotected against what they expect will be another round of even more serious russian attempts to interfere in the election to attack the democracy, to destabilize. i mean, a couple of different vectors here. one, we have done nothing to deter russian behavior in the national security sense. and then, two, we have done nothing to prevent the spread of fake news. there's no effort to work with the technology companies. to handle that situation. and then three, the election security, the stuff they talked about today. there are huge vulnerables. no federal effort on going to provide greater funding and greater security for the multiple state election systems
1:09 pm
that are incredibly vulnerable. that's the fear that it will happen again and we're not doing anything about it. >> kelly, i know that republicans feel like they got themselves on the right side of the russia question in the 98-2 vote for sanctions. i heard a lot of republican senators talking about their vote. do you see republicans getting a little more steel in their spine on the question of russia as they watch the trump white house sort of wrap itself around the politics of this? i mean, there are patriots in the republican party too who have for decades worried about russia's attempts to meddle in the democracies of its own neighbors. do you see more enthusiasm to get stronger on russia or do you see people sort of scuffling away from you in the hallways on the republican side? >> i think it's one area where they don't feel there's necessarily any blow back coming from the white house because senators in particular who have a long history with this, other lawmakers on the house side, who have a strong feeling about this can talk about russia as a
1:10 pm
national security issue with a certain bit of -- a sort of grounding here. it's not like the politics of health care which has a lot of other difficulties of negotiation to work with the white house for example. when it comes to national security issues i think they feel a bit more certain, they also have their own elections to be concerned about so this is a relevant issue for anyone who's holding elective office and for their individual states. one of the things we learned when i covered the case of the recount in 2000 and i was actually in the courtroom for some litigation about voting machines, we were also stunned in 2000 about the maintenance of voting machines, the money's that's not available. because states have so many other things to put their resources towards when it comes to the things that the state must pay for. so often, election systems don't get the attention that they need. at the same time, as ken was making the point, states don't necessarily want federal
1:11 pm
interference in their elections or an overlook of the federal government when states control that. so there are problems built into the system that make this difficult. it's expensive. it requires a level of expertise and public commitment. so when you're talking about just the russia piece you definitely hear senators feeling comfortable saying they have concerns about russia. they want to send a message to the white house about russia and things like sanctions are one mechanism they get to do that. >> kelly "o," thank you for taking time for us. and joining our panel today michael steele a former spokesman for boehner. and a russian expert in her own right and an msnbc contributor jonathan capehart. jeremy, i wanted to come back to you on this question of obviously not one of us has any of the security clearances anymore. but if you were to guess what's in the intelligence committee assessment of the current state of russia's attempts to
1:12 pm
ultimately have the capability of impacting our changing or altering the outcome of an election what would you guess russia's determination is to do that? >> highly capable, highly motivated, probably the best capability to conduct cyber attacks against voting systems of any nation state in the world. china would be up there as well, but i think russia would certainly have that motivation and that capability. and it was really interesting in jeh johnson's testimony on the house side he said he tried to get the states to acknowledge that they need to be part of critical infrastructure and they pushed back. they said we don't want to have a federal takeover of the elections. that's -- i understand the rationale for it view, but when we're up against nation states i think we have to realize that our democracy is vulnerable. and i think some of the state election systems have to come to the federal government and ask for the help that they need. >> bianna, you have covered -- i guess i'll call it congressional
1:13 pm
ambivalence about the questions of russia. i'm thinking of your interview with dana rohrabacher and others. are you surprised that testimony like today doesn't freeze everyone in their tracks? the picture that jeremy paints is terrifying. we know it's just one more event that pushes them toward actually implementing said plan. are you surprised there isn't more of an outcry to get everyone on the same page to protect against this? >> rohrabacher aside, we have talked to others who are just as outraged about russia's interference and they're feeling pressure because they have a republican president right now. they have constituents to answer to. they want to put this behind them. and focus more on health care and other issues. what they don't realize is that unless they come out and fully condemn and speak out and act the way they act to us behind closed doors this problem will not go away. you even see senator john mccain i haven't seen the health care bill, but i'm sure the russians
1:14 pm
have seen it. everything is conflated with russia. i think they're trying to protect this white house and hoping that this moves on. this story will not go away in large part because the president won't acknowledge it. >> i was thinking about you this morning, and about how exasperated democrats must be that this question about russia is not more of a political issue if you at least go by the outcome of the special elections that we have seen so far this year. what is it about how it's being communicated that doesn't make it more sort of urgent? i mean, i think it would be a good thing to have a political check on a republican white house. why can't democrats tell a story about how we need more house seats, it would put a check on a republican president. >> i think that is part of the story. and i'm sure some folks have done that, but look, democrats are very good about fighting each other more fiercely than fighting republicans. i mean, that's a big problem there too. >> we do that too.
1:15 pm
>> but the thing -- but i'm sure we'll talk about this later but the thing that republicans do that democrats must emulate especially for 2018 is when you have a nominee coalesce around that nominee and fight like hell to make sure that person is elected that what's happened with ms. handel in georgia 6 and the other three races. you know what's interesting, bianna, when i said that's right, when the fact that the president of the united states does not even talk about what russia did to our election, think about it. he ran on a platform that -- the key thing i'm going to build a wall to keep those people from coming over into the united states and invading the united states. and yet, people who are seeking the american dream and a better opportunity and yet, when a hostile government breaches the united states, the most sacred and solemn process of american democracy, he is mute and silent. until he says something those republicans on capitol hill who we talk to who are all aghast at
1:16 pm
what's happening won't have any incentive to say anything. but they need to. >> to be fair a lot of the americans don't view russia as necessarily a hostile country like they did in the '80s. we had a reset with the russians. >> but they -- we have to sneak in a commercial. when we come back, brand-new reporting of how close mike flynn got to the nation's most sensitive secrets even after the white house was warned about him. and new questions about the security access of other insiders including jared kushner. and back to the drawing board. after spending millions of dollars to make the special election in georgia a referendum on president trump, the party tries to regroup. we'll talk about what they need to do to turn trump's chaos into a political liability. we'll be right back. garfunkel (instrumental) is that good? yeah it's perfect. bees! bees!
1:17 pm
go! go! go! [ girl catching her breath } [ bees buzzing inside vehicle ] the all-new volkswagen atlas. with easy-access 3rd row. life's as big as you make it. finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the hotel you want. lock it in. tripadvisor.
1:18 pm
1:19 pm
1:20 pm
michael flynn, general flynn, is a wonderful man. i think he's been treated very, very unfairly by the media. as i call it the fake media in many cases. and i think it's really a sad thing that he was treated so badly. >> "the new york times" today reporting that mike flynn was briefed daily by the cia after white house officials warned he could be a target for blackmail. a source close to the current leadership explains that if he was the sitting national security adviser, he was in the middle of everything and it would fall to the white house to
1:21 pm
ask him to leave the room. jeremy bash, how would it have worked? we know from everyone's sworn testimony that sally yates warned the white house council's office and they were aware that flynn could be a target of blackmail by the russians. he continued to sit in for the president's briefing. and it sounds to me like the cia wants to make it abundantly clear it wouldn't have fallen to them regardless of the facts to kick anyone out of the president's briefing. >> that's right, nicolle. this story sounds like somebody in the white house trying to throw mike pompeo under the bus. in reality when yates warned the white house counsel and the white house counsel warned the president, he should have been fired on the spot. because really it's more than just about sitting in the presidents' daily brief we by the way it's not the cia giving the brief, but from all 16 agencies providing the
1:22 pm
information. mike pompeo is giving the testimony and they're giving out the information. if the president got this information from yates through the counsel he should have said that mike flynn, you can't be in this room, you can't be in this room. >> ken, this story caught my eye for some of the reasons and perhaps also because i talk to you too much and i read the flynn's novel and i wondered if this is part of the investigation. i think a 13 or 15 day period after which the white house counsel's office had been warned that flynn could be blackmailed by the russians, yet he continued to sit there in receipt of -- i mean the president gets briefed on -- i mean, there are things that really are eyes only intel that are only seen by the senior most echelons of the american government. so i wonder what you make of how this story fits into sort of where we are in the broader investigations and if you agree with jeremy's assessment that
1:23 pm
somebody is trying to throw the current cia director under the bus. >> well, i agree with jeremy in what that underscores it decide -- it's up to the president who gets the intelligence. if the president want to talk to somebody he's the ultimate authority on that. it's rally hard for -- really hard for others to say no, sir, you can't brief this person. and so as jeremy said once the white house had been alerted to these questions and concerns about flynn, there's really nothing that anyone else can do if they want to keep them in the room. it does show though that as we know from donald trump's alleged conversation with james comey that trump was doing everything he could to keep flynn in the mix even after he heard about these troubling, you know, issues that he allegedly lied to the vice president about his contacts with the russian ambassador. this will be a factor in mueller's investigation in obstruction of justice. what were the meetings, what was the relationship, why did this
1:24 pm
occur? >> michael steele i remember how sort of relieved most republicans i know were at the appointment of pompeo at the cia. >> extraordinarily impressive public servant. this is another incremental example, the fundamental fishiness about russia in that administration and that's not mike pompeo's fault and it's not their fault, it's the fault of the president of the united states. >> do you think pompeo's going to have to turn to some of his former colleagues on the hill to back stop him politically against a white house that seems sort of willing to throw anyone and everyone under the bus? >> i don't think he needs to. i think they'll have his back automatically. i think they'll have his back automatically. >> oh, you think the republicans in congress -- >> absolutely. they know him. they respect him. they like him. they will step up automatically because they know and respect and like him. you won't need to ask. >> how do you think he went in there and managed the fact that he took the job at a time when a
1:25 pm
republican president was in an open hot war with the intelligence community? >> i think he hoped that he was going to have the opportunity to make things better. i think a lot of people joined this administration hoping that they could make things better. and thus far a lot of those hopes have been frustrated. >> jonathan, what do you make of it? are you still willing to give quarter to the good and honorable people trying to make things better or do you think that the moral compass suggests that you have to walk out when you see things like a president on twitter attacking half his staff? >> this is the vice that i think honorable people like pompeo, general mattis, hr mcmaster, general kelly, these are people who are patriots, they took the job for patriotic reasons, for the right reasons. and now i'm sure some of them if not all of them see that if they were to leave who's coming in behind me. i am the only one that stands between the democracy that we have right now and what could fall apart. the idea that michael flynn was
1:26 pm
still in those meetings and he's the national security adviser -- correct me if i'm wrong, those people actually know more than the president. the president can ask all sorts of questions and they'll have the answers. but michael flynn -- >> but the fundamental point is that the people who are doing the jobs are doing them because they're trying to keep our country safe and the alternative is very is likely. >> bianna, i want to ask you about something today. congressman cummings sent a letter to reince priebus regarding jared kushner's security clearances. they have serious concerns after i'm guessing today's story about michael flynn, that other people entangled in the investigation should have their security clearances re-evaluated. obviously, jared kushner is someone who literally sits at the intersection of all of the national security agencies. we interviewed nikki haley. she said she's in regular contact with jared.
1:27 pm
the secretary of state is in contact with jared kushner. he's in the middle east right now. what would the consequences or the fallout be if someone like jared kushner -- i understand he gets his own intel briefing. if he were to have a serious sort of limit on what he can see i don't know how he functions in the job he has. >> with all due respect i don't think the president has to worry about that. because flynn -- jared kushner is his left hand. the two most depended guys of this president relied on, turned to on a daily basis are now in trouble obviously michael flynn is gone. jared kushner was very close with flynn as well. they really respected the loyalty that he gave to this president. obviously there are ties to russian businessmen and the russian ambassador is definitely something that should be questioned. but i don't think that this adviser is going to be going anywhere. i think jared kushner will stay where he is. >> you think he'll keep his clearances? >> he can keep on -- i don't see the president lets him go.
1:28 pm
>> that goes to the fundamental importance of what happened in georgia 6 yesterday. if republicans lose the house of republicans the flood gates are open. and it will be a subpoena, it will be a testimony in front of -- >> all right. hold that thought because up next, after losing the most expensive congressional race to a party with a president facing historically low poll numbers, democrats are doing a lot of soul searching today. >> i was disappointed. we should be disappointed. a loss is a loss. there are no moral victories. i think, you know, democrats will be taking it very close -- taking a close look at the results of these elections. my view it's important that we focus on the important bread and butter issues, kitchen table issues. ance music) (large boat honking) ♪ i'm living that yacht life life life life ♪ top speed fifty knots life ♪ on the caribbean seas ♪ it's a champagne and models potpourri ♪ on my yacht made of cuban mahogany ♪ gany, gany, gany
1:29 pm
♪ watch this 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. welcome to holiday inn! ♪ ♪
1:30 pm
whether for big meetings or little getaways, there are always smiles ahead at holiday inn. ready or not, here i come.ek.) ♪ anyone can dream. making it a reality is the hard part. northrop grumman command and control systems always let you see the complete picture. and we're looking for a few dreamers to join us.
1:31 pm
i think that the party could do more. i think that when people look at
1:32 pm
the democratic party nationally, they see that we still have some problems. that we're not doing in uf to look in the mirror. >> as we're focusing on the issues of russia, you know, mitch mcconnell who wasn't born yesterday understands that when the focus is over here don't pay attention to what i'm doing over here. >> democrats out on capitol hill this morning beginning their postmortem after georgia 6 went the other way for them. steve kornacki joins our table who has been up all night and at this board. we tried to spare you the board. but talk about what went right for karen handel and what went wrong for her democratic challenger. >> yeah. i mean, half of what happened last night i think is what people expected to happen. and that is you had a very engaged, very mobilized, very energized democratic base. they were out there in the early vote. they were out there organizing and they turned up in big numbers. i think what nobody had quite expected what i think is the big take away from this, is that republicans were equally as motivated and so what you ended up getting if you look at this
1:33 pm
result last night, karen handel versus jon ossoff in the district, you have a replay of trump versus clinton. if you're a republican, your big hope is hey, is this a model we can find a way to replicate in the other 434 districts in 2018? where there is a way to wake up republicans to sort of get them to rally around, to circle the wagons, to make the democratic candidate a symbol of the national democratic party. all of those things happened there. i think what you saw was those republicans who democrats thought they could switch over, the suburbanites, when it became a national referendum they didn't. >> did she run -- did she run as a -- someone who will help enact trump's agenda or someone whose values were more in line with the district? >> no. the trump name didn't come out. the anti-trump stuff is out
1:34 pm
there, we don't have to stoke it to the extent that democrats are fired up, they'll be fired to go against trump. we want to make the crossover republican voters comfortable by acting -- i want to work with the other party. that was the ossoff theme. the handel theme is not to be disavowing trump, not to be actively going against him, but not actively embracing him either. if there are republicans who are fired by trump they'll be fired up by trump, i don't want to alienate them. >> i love talking about democrats in disarray, but remember, this was a big win for speaker ryan. they brought in the resources they needed and they made it about the candidate and the district and they were successful. >> you said something at the break i won't make you repeat it, but what happens a at a staff level? when the democratic party tries to tell -- because i asked you this because this has happened to us. it's easy to talk truthfully about what happens when you lose. the republicans pulled this out, it was very, very close in a
1:35 pm
district, price won by 23 points not too long ago. >> every republican if you're a supporter of the president or no, has to realize if we lose the house in 2018 the floodgates are open. are -- there are a number of democrats working on articles of impeachment and if we don't hold the house, if we don't allocate the resources properly the last two years of the first term of president trump are going to be very, very ugly for anyone trying to enact a conservative agenda. >> and why wasn't that enough to motivate democrats to take the seat away? >> you know, look, correct me if i'm wrong, steve, but the georgia 6 seat was going to be a tough slog anyway for the democratic candidate. they came close. >> yeah. price won it -- >> let's be clear. when we say price won this by 23 points last year the republican candidate -- excuse me, the democratic name had no identity.
1:36 pm
he raised $0. and democrats looked at this -- i have to tell you the congressional race in south carolina 5 last november was closer than the one in georgia 6. there's a reason that the democrats threw 35 million bucks at georgia 6 and zero at south carolina 5. it is not because the congressional results last year, but because donald trump won its by a point. look, if he as a candidate could alienate republican leaning voters in the suburbs that month, imagine what six months of him as president could do. it's enough to spend 35 million bucks and it wasn't. >> why wasn't it? >> you showed a lot of naval gasing by -- gazing by democrats in the opening montage. >> there's the morning after, cut them some slack. >> yes, it's the morning after. but it's what democrats are expert at. this is a special election. this was not the 2018 november mid term elections and the long game -- i want democrats focus on the long game.
1:37 pm
michael steele just told you what the long game on. >> let me play you something and get you to respond to on the other side. this is a union leader in p.a. something he said that's stayed to me since i was reporting on democrats that voted for trump. let's watch. >> it almost felt like the democratic party wasn't speaking the message of the average working man through the campaign. >> are there any thoughts to what might have been if you had been able to get the union behind hillary clinton? has she come here and asked for it would that have made a difference? >> well, that was one of her downfalls. trump didn't make that sense. >> and scott still hasn't heard about losing the vote in p.a. >> what i democrats to do instead of moaning about the fact they lost georgia 6 figure out how to talk to that guy we just heard from. >> scott. >> scott. figure out how to talk to the scotts in wisconsin and in
1:38 pm
pennsylvania, and the other places where hillary clinton don't visit. and also places where democrats figure that they don't have a chance. democrats do have a chance. they have to ask for the vote. scott wanted their vote. they didn't ask for it. >> by talking to them, it's not about bad-mouthing the other side. it's what you can do for them and being authentic with them. >> right. >> i was going to do that. all of the naval gazing is about the message issue. we should talk about this or that better. i think the fundamental problem is that the modern democratic party doesn't have policies that appeal to the modern democrats. >> steve kornacki he always has the facts. >> this is more open to der spreation -- interpretation. >> how do you interpret it? >> i think there's a disconnect that comes out of d.c. and new york and popular culture which is focused on russia, which is focused on the idea of democratic norms, hey, he didn't
1:39 pm
properly staff this agency, there's a conflict of interest with the kushner company. i'm not saying that those are not issues that register in the places you're talking about. they do in the suburbs and with the college educated professionals and they do with the elite professional class in this country. i don't think they do with the voters that the democrats lost last year. as long as that's the themes that define the democratic message nationally i don't think you're speaking to those people. >> i know paul ryan is talking to congress about that saying don't focus on what's happening in washington, focus on what's happening in your states and hometowns. >> we have to take a quick break. when we come back we'll talk about the victory lap that the president's taking and more about what democrats can do to respond. think again.
1:40 pm
this is the new new york. we are building new airports all 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
1:41 pm
1:42 pm
i wanti did my ancestrydna and where i came from. and i couldn't wait to get my pie chart. the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. just to know this is what i'm made of, this is where my ancestors came from. and i absolutely want to know more about my native american heritage. it's opened up a whole new world for me. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. hi, everyone. we'll keep an eye on the
1:43 pm
president as he's probably wheels up momentarily for iowa. but i want to get back to steve kornacki's point. he had the audacity to tell a tableful of political and media elites that nobody cares about russia, but i had the same experience. i hit the road after the election. i went to wisconsin. i went to ohio. i went to florida. i went to pennsylvania. i went to counties that trump won that he flipped for the first time since reagan. and these -- i mean, i went back out the day after mike flynn resigned. oh, my god, do you care? no, we're glad that trump fired him. they don't care, do they? >> i think this is one of things that we misunderstand so much. a lot of times when we cover the trump administration we cover washington right now, and you hear in the press and from his opponents he said drain the swamp during the campaign. look at the lobbyists he's sort of entangled with or look at kushner. i'm not saying these aren't issue but he's making a mockery
1:44 pm
of drain the swamp. what that term drain the swamp is has nothing to with his entanglement with russia, it's whether the liberals are saying he's changing the culture of d.c. that tells them that something big, something different, something new is happening. and i believe that reads in those places as you know what, he's draining the swamp. >> and the truth is, he beat 16 republicans who had never -- well, maybe a couple of them, but they never would have blown up all of these norms. steve's right. to his voters, these are assets liabilities. >> people are voting on pocketbook issues. they feel economically insecure. no one feels as wealthy as they did in 2007 or 2008. so these other issues feel peripheral to what's going on in their lives, making money, educating their children, finding a job. living their lives. >> so what do democrats do? >> and yet we elected a billionaire.
1:45 pm
>> i think the better word is not peripheral, but immediate. when you are worried about where your next paycheck is going to come from, how you're going to get your kid's arm reset because it's been broken, how you'll meet the next cancer treatment, what the hell is happening in washington in terms of the russia investigation means nothing to you. you want to know what your -- what your member of congress, what your senator, what the democrats and republicans are proposing to help you immediately. now. and you know we can -- i think voters would feel more comfortable and be more worried about, you know, possible collusion with russia or russia's incursion into our political process if everything else were relatively secure. >> bianna, i want to get your thoughts on this, but i want to add that the white house reporter julie bike awith its. you have a piece out today about the president getting his groove back. heading out on the trail and we know how emotional he is about
1:46 pm
perceived wins and setbacks. this isn't a perceived win, the white house -- i started this show by reading kellyanne conway's tweet. she tweeted last night, i'm laughing my ossoff. not being gracious winners. they are taking this win in. >> absolutely. and i think that the president's really going to run with it at the rally this evening. it will be a really interesting snapshot of how he's feeling. if he's excited about politics right now. i'm really expecting a very enthusiastic feeling rally. he loves doing them, it's been a while. it's -- you know, we are starting to see him come back into his own by tweeting a bit more. doing more rallies. directly talking to voters more and more which is how he got elected in the first place and it's what he really likes the do and today really is perfect timing for this. >> julie, your other -- your colleague the other julie at the white house, julie pace once
1:47 pm
said on this show that trump has no inner monologue. no inner dialogue, just sky dialogue. i'm guessing we will see. there's no ambiguity about how good he feels about this win in georgia 6. i wonder if you think that you'll see him doing more of the things that he perceives to be assets. tweeting away at the media. letting it rip at a rally. going off script. do you see him doing more of that instead of less of that at a time when his white house is under a darkening cloud in terms of the russia investigation? >> well, it's really noticeable how much things have changed in just the past couple of weeks. going into the sort of the hundred day assessment, the president was doing all sorts of interviews with all sorts of media. was really out and about, talking quite a bit. tweeting quite a bit and then he went on his foreign trip and they really dialed back his accessibility to the media. his sort of public appearances in front of tv cameras and of course that happened right at
1:48 pm
about the time that the russia probes were heating up. we have endured a couple of weeks of a different type of white house behavior and with tonight's rally and other moves coming up i understand he'll be doing an interview soon. i think we'll see more of the original president trump from the first couple of weeks and months of his administration. >> bianna, i have mixed feelings about this. we have young sons, mine is into the superhero movies and i picture the incredible hulk and sarah palin said the political advisers feel shackled by us. i wonder if you think he's fighting an internal war and we hear story after story about him reaching out to corey lewandowski and chris christie, feeling like twitter is the direct line to his voters. do you think we're going to see him swerve back and be even more resistant to any of the people
1:49 pm
like an hr mcmaster or jim mattis who would like to see him swerve the other way? >> i don't think he can help it. we hear lawyers advising him not to tweet anymore, his job is in jeopardy. at the end of the day, he goes with his gut his to his credit it got him to where he is today. he likes to talk to the people another the rallies, talking about what he can do to help their lives as opposed to what they're hearing from the quote/unquote fake media. when he says why can't we get along with russia when you hear vladimir putin say similar things, why can't we get along with the united states, why can't we make the world a safer place and that's much easier to digest than going through the convoluted hearings the every single day. the president is at his best when he's speaking his mind and speaking to his voters. >> in his mind, being the key part of that. all right, thank you, julie, thank you for being with us. as more senators on both sides of the aisle speak out about the secrecy of the health care bill. we will soon get a look at
1:50 pm
what's in it. we go live to capitol hill next. when this bell rings... ...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. ♪ ♪ isaac hou has mastered gravity defying moves to amaze his audience. great show. here you go. now he's added a new routine. making depositing a check seem so effortless. easy to use chase technology, for whatever you're trying to master. isaac, are you ready? yeah. chase. so you can.
1:51 pm
before fibromyalgia, i was a doer. i was active. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. she also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. woman: for some, lyrica can significantly relieve fibromyalgia pain and improve function, so i feel better. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can be more active. ask your doctor about lyrica.
1:52 pm
i can be more active. "america" by simon and garfun [ snoring ]ental) [ deep sleep snoring ] the all-new volkswagen atlas. seats seven, sleeps six. life's as big as you make it.
1:53 pm
the energy conscious whopeople among usle? say small actions can add up to something... humongous. a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing. for the latest on the double top secret super-duper classified health care negotiations, nbc's kasie hunt joins me from capitol hill. what do we know. >> reporter: well, you summed it up very well, officially, we don't know much about what is in this bill t. clock is ticking downward.
1:54 pm
we do know senators are telling us they expect the draft to be built tomorrow morning at 9:30 in a special meeting. they had lunch today as they usually do. the topic was health care. it sounds from those they are talking to, they are creeping closer to an agreement. you are starting to have aides talk about how it could balance out. this policy vs. that policy. we are trying to achieve this particular end, while we're going to do it a little different way. basically the discussion is way down in the policy weeds and we are just waiting to get that kind of final product that we will actually be able to add and one of the things i find is unusual about this is i can't walk up to senators in the hallway and say, hey, are you voting yes or no or that? none of them are willing to say. that's what's so different. >> casey, what strikes me, none of them are saving the process, they are saving their political capital to defend the bill. have you found anywith unto defend the process? >> reporter: john cornyn, the number two, he has been
1:55 pm
defending the process, you will be surprised to learn. for the most part, bill cassidy is not defending the process. he's a senator from louisiana, a doctor. he is a person trying to get on board. so he knows more about the contours of this bill than a lot of other senators. instead, you have mike lee putting out a facebook video. everybody is frustrated to think they are taking over this. the question is once they put this out there, i think the fear has been the opposition will pile up so quickly for various reasons, that the whole thing would potentially collapse. i do think there will be a weekend to find out the sunday shows in other ways, whether or not that will be the case here. >> do you think we will get our first look tomorrow at this bill? >> reporter: we anticipate it will be probably pretty early in the morning. not that long after senators first get a look. look, mcconnell is very sensitive to the idea that his members don't like to find things out in the press before they find out from him. the house did a lot of that, you know, communicating through the press.
1:56 pm
so they're trying to avoid it. i think we should see it shortly early in the morning. >> we will squeeze in one more break. we'll be right back. i should take a closer look at geico... geico can help with way more than car insurance. boats, homes, motorcycles... even umbrella coverage. this guy's gonna wish he brought his umbrella. fire at will! how'd you know the guy's name is will? yeah? it's an expression, ya know? fire at will? you never heard of that? oh, there goes will! bye, will! that's not his name! take a closer look at geico. great savings. and a whole lot more. (i wanted him to eat healthy., so i feed jake purina cat chow naturals indoor, a nutritious formula with no artificial flavors. made specifically for indoor cats. purina cat chow. nutrition to build better lives.
1:57 pm
could be preventedrrent with the right steps. and take it from me, every step counts. a bayer aspirin regimen is one of those steps in helping prevent another stroke. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.
1:58 pm
ready or not, here i come.ek.) ♪ anyone can dream. making it a reality is the hard part. northrop grumman command and control systems always let you see the complete picture.
1:59 pm
and we're looking for a few dreamers to join us. . i want to give you the final seconds on this show to ask you if the result in georgia six if there was an impact in the legislative process the republicans are taking around the health care bill? >> no, i think it does, if karen handel had lost last night. >> that would have been the media signal. the republicans district losing with this looming in washington. i i think you would have had panic among republicans, republicans still don't know
2:00 pm
what to make of the political position they're in right now. but this hasn't brought them to a place they would have been. a loss last night would have. >> you have a president calling it heartless and mean. >> there are some expletives. >> thank you to all my panelists. >> that does it for this hour, i'm nicole wallace. "mtt daily" starts right now. >> are you upset about sport again? >> but alas, hey, it's more fun to show passion about that, than talking for a living. >> hug it out? fair enough. it is wednesday, it's the longest day of the year and democrats are isn'tly feeling it for sure. >> tonight the rules of engagement. >> a special thanks to the president of the united states of america. >> what happens when the base of both parties are fired up? >> we find common ground to move forward. plus

54 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on