Skip to main content

tv   MSNBC Live With Stephanie Ruhle  MSNBC  March 8, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PST

6:00 am
that could be -- literally could be the thing that unravelled everything. it might be a prediction. that's way off. have you ever seen me wrong? >> well, i mean, if i had, i would never admit it on tv. >> right. i'm not. >> because i'm scared. >> that does it for us this morning. chris jansing. >> the gathering stormy. i like that. i'm going to steal that from you mika brzezinski. happy international women's day. this morning, a new report that the president spoke to two key witnesses in the russia probe about their conversations with special counsel robert mueller. >> why is he disregarding the legal advice to go to such lengths at such a critical time as this investigation is intensifying? >> this as the white house attempts to weather another storm. revelations that the president's lawyer obtained a secret restraining order to silence stormy daniels. confusion in the west wing. the president's plan to sign a tariff on aluminum and steel
6:01 am
apparently now postponed after a day of meetings with senior advisers and a letter from 107 house republicans urging the president to focus his plan and not punish our allies. >> there are potential carveouts for mexico and canada based on national security. >> but an hour ago, president trump took to twitter to announce a meeting this afternoon on tariffs not already listed on the schedule. what is going on? and one step forward. activism turns into action as the florida house defies the nra, approving the gun and safety bill. >> i'm a father and i'm on a mission. i'm on a mission to ensure that i am the last dad to ever read a statement of this kind. >> much more on that. we begin today with reports the president ignored the advice of his own lawyers in an attempt to figure out what mueller asked some of his closest aides. at the same time, mueller
6:02 am
digging into alleged attempts to set up secret back channels between the trump administration and vladimir putin. i've got a great team to help me break it all down. before we go to them, let me explain what we're talking about. the big story this morning comes from "the new york times." it has detailed accounts of interactions between the president and two of his closest aides. in which trump asked about their conversations with robert mueller's investigators. go back to late january. when "the times" published this article saying mcgahn had threatened to quit. it's the kind of thing that goes to heart of whether the president may have tried to obstruct justice. according to "the times," trump was upset about about the article and ordered mcgahn to report. when they met face-to-face in the oval office, trump
6:03 am
reportedly told mcgahn he never told him to fire the special counsel. he insisted the president want him to call rosenstein and have mueller dismissed. the president reportedly said he remembered the conversation differently. as for reince priebus, that conversation happened in december. two months after the former chief of staff had met with mueller's team. according to "the times," i'm quoting here, mr. trump asked priebus how his interview has gone with the special counsel's investigators and whether they had been nice. that's according to two people familiar with the discussion. mr. priebus implied the investigators were courteous and professional, he shared no specifics and did not say what he told investigators. neither the president's lawyers or a spokesman for the special counsel would comment. why do these interactions matter? because while it's not illegal for the subject of an investigation to learn what information witnesses have shared, it's usually on it through lawyers and one reason
6:04 am
for that is that these kinds of conversations could make it seem like those involved are trying to coordinate their stories. and while all this is going on, we're learning about another part of mueller's investigation. one that speaks directly to potential collusion between trump's team and the russian government. "the washington post" says muler is focused on a meeting in the seychelles islands off the coast of africa just before trump's inauguration. that's where a russian official met with eric prince, an unofficial adviser to trump, in a meeting raarranged and attend by a businessman. mueller is broadly examining apparent efforts by the trump transition team to create a back channel for secret talks between the new administration and the kremlin. investigators now suspect that the seychelles meeting may have been one of the first efforts to establish such a line of communications. that's despite the fact eric prince told msnbc it was no big deal. here's how he described the
6:05 am
meeting. >> i was on a business meeting back in january. in the seychelles. i'd gone to see some guys from the middle east that i've done some business with before. they said there's this russian guy we worked doing some business with in the past and you should meet him. so i met him in a bar, chatted for 20 or 30 minutes, and that was that. >> what was the reason to meet him? >> the emiraty guys said it was someone they'd done business with before and it will be an interesting guy to know because we're both involved in the commodities and energies space. >> i want to bring in my panel, robert costa for "the washington post," also moderator of "washington week" on pbs. midwin charles is an attorney with midwin charles and associates. stanley pottinger, former assistant attorney general. his son is a member of the trump administration. julia ainsly is nbc's national security and justice reporter. robert, let me start the conversation with that talk between president trump and
6:06 am
mcgahn. he's saying he ordered him to fire mueller. which aspect of that is a bigger deal? >> they're both big deals. the president has been fighting this political war against the russian investigation for about a year. don mcgahn, the white house counsel, knows as an attorney, he cannot go out there and lie about interactions. so while the president may be trying to present his version of events in his way, don mcgahn cannot do that in the same way. we're seeing the tensions as all this pressure mounts. >> we mentioned trump talking to mueller's witnesses is not illegal but his lawyers have obviously warned him against it, right? >> right. as you laid out, it's really common for defense attorneys who are representing witnesses in the same case to all be talking to each other, trying to figure out what was said. the reason they do that is
6:07 am
because they have law degrees and they need to make sure there isn't a crossing of the line that would come into a coordination of their stories. so this case, when trump is sort of -- especially badgering people like he did in the mcgahn interaction they've laid out in their story at the "times," it seems like he's actually trying to coordinate or badger people to say something different than he would like them, then they did say before mueller's team. this is really a place where he's going beyond what his lawyers have of course told him not to do, to not discuss this business at the white house. and it shows that it's probably because he has a lot of inner turmoil and panic about what is being said about him. this is an ego thing and it's also a very much a big worry i think that he has especially about this obstruction case. >> it's hard to look at this almost in any otherway, midwin, but that he's rattled to say the least by all of this going on. so he goes to people who have
6:08 am
been talked to by robert mueller's investigators and says hey, what did you say to them, you know, trying to figure out exactly where all of this is going. how do you think bob mueller and his team look at those conversations, even if they aren't illegal? >> i think they look at them and start to add to other aspects and actions that trump has done that indicate this is someone who has something to hide. this is someone who doesn't want people to speak to robert mueller. and this is additional evidence towards a case of obstruction of justice. obstruction of justice is a very broad term in the sense where it can mean the fact that you want to end an investigation or it can mean the fact you want to influence what happened in an investigation. so it's a pretty broad thing. i have to tell you, one of the reasons why this is the most disturbing is because we do not want to go into an area of witness tampering. our justice system exists in a way and of course we can all agree it is flawed in many ways. we have to as a public have full
6:09 am
faith and credit in the decisions made in the justice system. one way we ensure that is we ensure when witnesses come to testify, that they do so openly and honestly and without any coercion, without any influence. so in order for us to have integrity in our system, that has to be one of the most critical things. the fact the president of the united states is going around and speaking to witnesses and hoping to sort of influence or nudge or find out what they say and make them uncomfortable is disturbing to say the least. there's an appearance of imp impropriety here. >> well, there's also sort of this power thing, right? at least legally, does it matter who and how much of a position of power you're in if you're trying to get information from a witness and it's hard to argue that anybody's in a higher position of power than the president of the united states, the leader of the free world. >> yes, one of the problems with
6:10 am
this is that you can't tell what part of it is donald trump in his personality and what part of it is actually a studied effort to try to influence an investigation. by that i mean this, as bob pointed out, he can find out everything that was asked of any of the people he talked to. mcgahn, reince priebus, anyone, by having his lawyers talk to their lawyer. that's permissible. you don't gain anything in terms of substance by asking yourself. you gain nothing. so what you have to ask therefore is, is he really rattled or really worried or really trying to influence it or is this donald trump being donald trump, which is hey, i'm president, i'm going to ask you directly. so part of it is trying to figure out his personality versus -- and the style he uses versus what could be -- >> i'm not sure you're so sure about that. >> i understand the distinction that he's making, but whether it's a question of is this donald trump or is he sort of
6:11 am
purposefully trying to influence the investigation, really, i'm not sure that it matters. because donald trump as we know him to be is someone who is, right now, skirting along the lines of the law. so i don't know whether his personality is really the issue here. the fact is, he has a personality that likes to skirt the rules and the laws. and that's prolow matic for us as a country. >> then you have the seychelles. it's one thing to have a meeting, it's another thing to say this was an attempt to set up a back channel communication. is that a crime? why would that matter? >> i'm remembering, chris, as having this debate about a year ago, when a lot of this news about a back channel came out and john kelly who was then dhs secretary came out and said, look, diplomacy happens through back channels all the time, but why this would present someone different is because it would be january 2017 right as this new administration is coming in and if there was anything they owed this government, the fact they're setting up a back
6:12 am
channel obviously looks incredibly nefarious. they're doing it in a different country. they're doing this through someone like george made nader e know robert mueller has spoken with several times. there are reasons why mueller would be interested in this particular back channel. i don't think we'll be surprised if we hear more talking points like we heard from john kelly last year from this administration saying look, it's okay for us to have these communications. we go through different officials all around the world. diplomacy doesn't always happen when it's the heads of state shaking hands in front of camera and that's understood. there's a lot about this particular meeting, where it took place, the timing and the players involved that obviously caught robert mueller's attention. >> hanging over all this, robert, is stormy daniels, who has been hinting she's going to publicly share her account of her intimate relationship that she said she had with the president. obviously the "access hollywood" tape didn't have a major impact. he was still elected president
6:13 am
of the united states. we're in a very different time now i think with the me too movement. where do things stand with this? and how do you see this fitting into the big picture of this administration? >> it's hard to predict the big picture. we are in a different minute than perhaps we were in the 2016 presidential campaign. all people, all women who have had experiences of any sort in the past deserve to have their voices heard. she may make her voice heard in the coming weeks or months. how that plays into the midterm elections or the president's 2020 re-election chances remains to be seen. >> it depens what comes out. are there pictures? are their communications? >> we're going to have to see. she is someone who has claimed -- as a reporter, i'm less interested in the relationship itself and the details of that and more interested in this payment. how is the payment made? who knew about the payment? why did it unfold in the way it did? >> sarah huckabee sanders not surprisingly did talk about this
6:14 am
yesterday. here's what she said. >> the president has denied the allegations against him and, again, this case has already been won in arbitration. anything beyond that, i refer you to outside counsel. >> is this, midwin, a case where follow the money, that where that $135,000 came from, why it was paid, could that be significant? >> absolutely, it's significant. i was here about a week ago talking about this and i had said perhaps there was no illegality here. but at the end of the day, i'm going to have to retract that and say the jury is still out. we do not have a lot of answers on this. on why the payment was made. the timing of it is incredibly suspicious. whether or not this violates federal election laws. >> can a lawyer even pay on behalf of a client -- he says he did it himself. is it okay to just pay $130,000 to someone like stormy daniels? >> well, okay meaning what okay? >> well, is it legal? >> is it legal?
6:15 am
yes, someone can be an agent for -- i can be an agent for you and i can -- >> but he'd have to be an agent for somebody. he says he paid it out of his own pocket. >> exactly. if he was paying it for himself, why did he pay it for himself without doing it on behalf of someone else? he him was not alleged to have had an affair with anybody as far as i know. so that would be the first question. are you really do it for yourself or doing it for someone else? and they'll get to the bottom of that. >> thank you to my panel. next this firestorm over the trump tariffs and why a tweet by the president just a short time ago is causing even more confusion over whether he will make a formal announcement as was expected today. but before we go, even if the white house isn't saying much about the stormy daniels legal battle, late-night comedians certainly are. >> we learned that cohen's payment to stormy daniels was reported as suspicious by his bank. i don't know why. the memo line of the check specifically said "not hush money for porn star." was a success for badda book. badda boom.
6:16 am
this year, we're taking it up a notch. so in this commercial we see two travelers at a comfort inn with a glow around them, so people watching will be like, "wow, maybe i'll glow too if i book direct at". who glows? just say, badda book. badda boom. nobody glows. he gets it. always the lowest price, guaranteed. book now at
6:17 am
how'd i get this yard? behind pete's great looking yard, is his secret weapon... the scotts turf builder program. all it takes is 4 feedings, with a scotts solution for every season. it's that easy. this is a scotts yard.
6:18 am
6:19 am
more confusion and contradictions this morning surrounding president trump's surprise announcement of sweeping steel and aluminum tariffs, something his white house trade adviser said just last night would happen this afternoon. but that announcement never got on the president's official schedule. and a senior administration official told nbc no, it's not happening today. but then just a short time ago, president trump tweeted and confused everyone even more. nbc's kelly o'donnell joins me
6:20 am
now from the white house. kelly, what's going on? >> well, chris, it would seem that a policy announcement, a time and a date, would be pretty, on its face, straight forward and easy to execute. but for this white house, there's been confusion. i got a flashback feeling this morning going back to last thursday when the president surprised his own team by announcing his intention to impose tariffs on steel and a aluminum imports coming into the country without the necessary background, policy support and legal review. then over the weekend, we saw there was a flood of people wanting to influence the president's final decision and even a commerce secretary saying he wasn't aware of the president intending to have any exceptions for certain countries. then we learned exceptions are, in fact, on the table. and you pointed it out, today we anticipated there would be an official signing ceremony of some sort when the official schedule came out, it wasn't there. again, different views from advisers telling us it's happening, it's not happening,
6:21 am
it's sort of a this kind of week at the white house. the president, who has been in many instances leading his own scheduling and communications shop, tweets this. looking forward to 3:30 p.m. meeting today at the white house. we have to protect and build our steel and aluminum industries while at the same time showing great flexibility and cooperation toward those that are real friends and treat us fairly on both trade and the military. >> so flexibility and cooperation, kelly, does that mean exemptions for mexico and canada? >> that's certainly how i hear it. at the same time, when you look at the president's words, by him putting it out first, meaning in his own voice on twitter it suggests exemptions might have been part of the plan all along, looking flexible, looking cooperati cooperative. that belies all the heat he has taken from other nations, the european union, friends of asia and around the world and lawmakers who said this was a bad idea to do it in a blanket fashion without careful consideration. so will we see exemptions and
6:22 am
how soon we will see them still remains to be seen. the president's intended to have some kind of event today. will it be ceremonial? will there be any bones to it? we just don't know. >> my panel. the director of progressive programming for sirius xm and was also the director of progressive media for the clinton campaign. michael steele, form are rnc. our guest, the former spokesperson to the mission to the u.n. i think the canadian prime minister spoke for a lot of people when he said we know from experience that we need to wait and see what this president will actually do. but surlena, is this nothing more than a little bit of a scheduling question or something bigger? >> i really don't know yet. i think we'll have to wait until 3:30 to find out. i think trying to implement policy via tweet has not turned out well for this president. i think it's concerning when you're talking about something that's going to impact our economy in such a substantial
6:23 am
way. i think it's very scary. and i think this sets a very dangerous precedent. it could be something much more serious later. something -- >> -- the tariffs are pretty serious, that they have tremendous financial implications. sources tell nbc news that after a meeting with senior advisers, the president decided he needs more time, he got a letter from 107 house republicans saying please don't do this. i mean, meantime, financial markets are sinking. people like justin trudeau wondering what the heck is going to happen next. you have all this uncertainty out there. does he not understand the implications of making statements like this? >> he doesn't care about the implication of making statements like this. why he makes them. >> that's why he says he likes chaos. >> he's admitted that. he knows that. he likes the chaos. he likes the disruntive nature of it all. he likes the disruptive nature of it all.
6:24 am
even though he's totally clueless as to the nuances of it. which is what you've come to expect the president to glean from those types of situations where yes, you hear the pros and the cons, but then you come in and you sort of put this bow on it that sort of ties it all together. this president doesn't do that. what i think he is probably surprised to some degree is the level of pushback. he kind of expects it from people overseas importing, yes, they're going to complain. here at home, where the level and degree of the response and the pushback, because republicans know two things, one, philosophically, this is not where we've been. we've not been in a protectionist, you know, let's start a trade war kind of setting. number two, the threat to the economy as a whole is at stake here. those tax cuts can get eaten up very quickly by increased prices for cars and washing mans and
6:25 am
those things that contain aluminum and steel. so there is trying to help the president understand the context of what his policy means once it's executed. >> that's part of it, hagar. according to his own administration's comments reports, some of his statements have been exaggerated. last year we had a trade deficit of almost $800 billion. bad policies and leaderships. according to the new york indianapolis too, the department of commerce reported an $810 billion deficit in goods in 2017 but a total trade deficit of $566 billion that includes trade surplus in services. does he just not understand not just the implications but the basic policy of what he's talking about? >> you know, i think, to michael's point, i don't think he cares. part of that has been predictable in all of his policies. he often makes these rash decisions. he often does policy by tweet. he doesn't seem to care for the normal protocol in government.
6:26 am
in fact, he seems to want to go against it. for example, the normal process for a decision this large would have been months long if not longer of internal deliberations, among government agencies, hearings on the hill and then dialogue with not just the private sector but then our key trading partners and certainly in the world trade organization. his entire goal is to disrupt all that. you know, i keep hearing this argument about national security. this is a matter of national security. free trade absolutely a matter of national security. one, our military equipment is just completely in shatters. and this will help that. and two, we have to go it along. that's actually the opposite of when you're going against matters of threats like national -- like north korea and iran and syria and things like that. you need a coalition of all your partners. >> according to "the washington post," one of the carveouts we could see would give canada and mexico a 30-day exemption from
6:27 am
these tariffs. the exemptions could be extended based on nafta negotiations. what do you make of of that proposal? >> we have to wait and see just as prime minister trudeau says i -- president trump during the campaign had always said he was against nafta. so, you know, i was actually surprised to see that he made this hint of a caveat. maybe it does show i guess someone is getting into his ear. certainly not gary cohen. >> what about, michael, gary cohn, does he have any influence on this, do you think? >> i don't think so. he's like the walking dead in the white house. the president's probably ticked off about it. i suspect that gary cohn's time left in the white house is really for formalities of closing out what he's working on, not so much advising the president on, you know, trade
6:28 am
policy and sort of getting the president to a particular space. now, that may happen to some degree. but i suspect gary cohen left for very principled reasons. >> yes, policy reasons. the argument on the other side is you made a promise to your base, this is allowing you to keep your promise. >> it's consistent with what donald trump's been saying for 30 years. i think the trouble is he's the president so he has to go through the appropriate channels to implement an important policy like this. >> an wewell, apparently he doe. thanks to all of you. there's been a big breakthrough, believe it or not, in florida's battle to rein in guns. passing new measures in response to the parkland's tragedy. there's one major element missing that's not going to sit well with protesting students. we'll have that next. check out this mcdonald's. linwood california where the "m" is turned upside down to become
6:29 am
a "w." in honor of today being international women's day. mcdonald's calls it a salute to extraordinary accomplishments of women everywhere. a few years ago, me and my wife was actually saving for a house. but one day we're sitting there and we decided that, something needed to be done about what was going on in our inner-city. instead of buying a house, we decided to form this youth league. these kids mean everything to me and i just want to make sure i give something positive to do. ♪ ♪ wow, that's amazing. that's a blessing right there. to know that someone out there cares and is passionate about what we're trying to do in our communities. you excited? yes. yeah, we're gonna to look good right? yup. awesome. alright come on, bring it in man. love these guys right here.
6:30 am
alright come on, bring it in man. your plaques are always there at the worst times.
6:31 am
constantly interrupting you with itching, burning and stinging. being this uncomfortable is unacceptable. i'm ready. tremfya® works differently for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. with tremfya®, you can get clearer and stay clearer. in fact, most patients who saw 90% clearer skin at 28 weeks... stayed clearer through 48 weeks. tremfya® works better than humira® at providing clearer skin and more patients were symptom free with tremfya®. tremfya® may lower your ability to fight infections, and may increase your risk of infections. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms such as fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. before starting tremfya®, tell your doctor if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. ask your doctor about tremfya®. tremfya®, because you deserve to stay clearer. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options for tremfya®. narrator: public education has been valued for centuries. man: the direction in which education starts a person
6:32 am
will determine their future in life. woman: the highest result of education is tolerance. woman: it's the road to equality and citizenship. man: education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world. narrator: brought to you by the california teachers association. woman: because we know quality public schools make a better california for all of us.
6:33 am
welcome back. time now for your morning primer. everything you need to know to start your day. we begin in syria where government forces have seized rebel-held territory, splitting the area just outside damascus in two. it comes as forces try to enter the area and they've been delayed due to a suspected chemical attack. secretary of state rex tillerson said today in africa that he sees, quote, potentially positive symbols from north korea but added we're a long way from negotiations. just one day before resigning as white house communications director, hope hicks indicated that one of her e-mail accounts may have been hacked. she reportedly said that during testimony last week before the house intelligence committee. more than 1 million people are without power this morning after parts of the northeast saw as much as 2 feet of snow. yesterday's nor'easter made travel nearly impossible in some parts of new jersey where on one highway alone more than 500 vehicles were reported stuck. one alabama student is dead, another injured after an
6:34 am
accidental shooting took place at a birmingham high school. authorities declined to say who fired the gun or the circumstances surrounding the incident. just that they had not been told of any argument or threat. three weeks after the deadly school shooting in parkland, florida lawmakers just passing an historic $400 million gun control bill. defying the nra, the republican-led florida house voted to approve the legislation after eight hours of fierce debate wednesday night. nbc's kerry sanders. what's in this bill and what's been the reaction there? >> what's interesting is this bill is one that has passed now and will become law in florida unless its vetoed by the governor. something that probably would not have happened had it not been for the loud voices that followed the tragedy here in parkland. as we take a look at the bill that passed. here are the specifics of the bill. it imposes a three-day waiting period on those who are
6:35 am
purchasing a rifle. it raises the minimum purchase to age 21. it had been 18. it bans bump stocks. it will arm some school employees. so teachers who have other jobs, other school staff, will be armed, assuming they go through the proper training. it also funds school security and expands mental health services. now, there are those who went to the school who gathered out at this memorial i'm standing in front of again last night looking at the names of those who died, those who feel a little bit about what they had lost, along with in tallahassee the father of one of the those victims, andrew pollack who lost his 14-year-old daughter, meadow. he was hugging those, he felt very secure in what happened here. as the students gathered out here with the memorial, they said there is still so much more that needs to be done, that this is just a first step. >> and, you know, this is a good start, but obviously this is not
6:36 am
what we want to accomplish. we want more. >> what exactly what you like? >> i don't think that anyone should be allowed to have an assault rifle, you know, even if you're older than 21. i don't think it's okay. i don't at all. >> one of the big challenges of course here has been how do you define an assault rifle. this was an ar-15-style weapon. but as this gun debate has raged across the country, the real challenge has been how do you define what an assault rifle is, when you say it's a slight change, then all of a sudden it's maybe not in that category but it can do the exact same thing. bottom line is the governor now has 15 days to sign the law. if he doesn't sign it and doesn't veto it, it becomes the law, chris. >> kerry, thank you. michael, you surprised something like this passed in florida? >> a little bit, a little bit. actually, very heartened by it. because it really speaks to what can happen when people really
6:37 am
put the push back on the legislators. >> i could not believe the number of people from other countries -- we should say obviously a lot of other countries don't understand what they call america's obsession with guns. they knew about these students. they listened to these students. they were impressed by these students. and they said to me how can people not listen to them? >> yes, and clearly the legislators did. the reason why, i think more so than anything else, is this involved a bunch of 17-year-olds and 18-year-olds who will be voting this fall. and have been able to galvanize the vote in the state in a way that shocked, quite honestly, a lot of the folks on the ground, particularly those in the party. >> did it shock rick scott enough to sign it? >> oh, i think he will. i think he'll eventually sign it. i think this pushback on the nra is the fascinating thing. look at what those students were able to do by raising the voice
6:38 am
the way they did. they got major corporations to begin to pull back their associations. yes, we're not going to have the perks or do this. we're not going to have the same kind of alignment with the nra. that is a new ground game here. watch it spread. watch it spread. because there are some good opportunities and optics coming out of florida for the movement nationwide. >> well, that's my question. obviously you're very plugged in to the progressive movement. >> this is not a progressive/conservative issue. >> this is not that anymore. but is there hope? is there a feeling for those who have been working on this issue for a long time that this is an opening, this is the start of something, not the end? >> well, we have legislation now. and so they've been successful -- >> but only in florida? >> it sets a precedent, right? because now we see that it does work to put pressure on corporations, to remove their support of the nra. it does work to go into the streets. it does work to go to the capital of the city.
6:39 am
the capital city and the state you live in and show up and fill space with thousands of people's bodies who are all saying the same message, you know, lie-in, die-ins. these kids have learned from previous generations and now they're implementing that to get the policy they want. i think this is a great moment. after new town, we didn't have the same movement. we did have a president who was saying at the state of the union address, many of those family members are now aligned with these students. to join this push. i think all of that momentum is going to push us in a direction that's more compassionate and less obsessed, as you said, with guns or at least the assault rifle. >> they're not letting it go. march 24th. the marches all around the country. thank you both. a brazen and reckless crime. that's what a top business official is describing the poisonings of a former russia spy in britain and his daughter. this morning, new developments
6:40 am
on how britain believes is behind that attack. first, march is women's history month and today is international women's day so i want to highlight our #onerightwoman. a pioneer of the civil rights movement. a woman who in march 1955 refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white passenger in montgome montgomery, alabama. claudest cole vin. he protest nine months before rosa parks was arrested before the same offense that led to a lawsuit that found montgomery's seg ra baited bus system unconstituti unconstitutional. - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
6:41 am
6:42 am
6:43 am
6:44 am
we've got new details in the investigation surrounding the poisoning of a former russian spy and his daughter in britain. the two have been in critical condition since sunday. now british police say they may know more about the mysterious substance behind that attack. nbc's keir simmons joins me live from london. keir, what do we know? what's new this morning? >> the police are saying here, scotland yard, they may know more. they're not telling us very much. they have revealed that this was a nerve agent. they're not saying what kind of nerve agent. there are reports that it is a rare example and the importance of that is that particularly a rare example might be easily traced to its source. so that is what british investigators are now doing. is trying to establish exactly where this came from.
6:45 am
the obvious suspect of course russia, because the target, with his daughter, of this attempted assassination, was a former russian spy who had collaborated with the british and then was handed over to the british in a spy swap including involving russian spies in the u.s. who were sent back to moscow. that is the inference that this was carried out by the russians. we don't know that for sure. what we do know is this was a powerful poison. the british police here continue to wear hazmat suits whilst investigating this and a police officer who was a first responder is still in the hospital, although we hear now, today, that he is improving and is sitting up in bed and talking. >> if this is, you know, such a kind of a rare thing that they -- it has sort of a signature, how long it might take them to trace it very specifically? >> you know, we really don't. and i can't answer that, chris, really, honestly, because we don't know. they're not telling us exactly
6:46 am
what kind of toxin, so we don't know whether they exactly established that yet. it's a really good question. here's why. it's because if this was the russians, that's a big if, we don't know that either, but if this was, then this kind of a tack is easily traceable to them. then you have to ask yourself why the russians and in particular why president putin would be prepared to see an attack like this carried out that might be traced back to them. there are people that i've been speaking to, particularly intelligence sources, who are talking about whether this is russia ratcheting up the heat, turning up the heat. ratcheting up the pressure. whether this is designed to try and spread chaos in the uk and cause more problems in the west. there are multiple potential explanations. with very few details at this stage. >> keir simmons, i'm sure we'll be talking to you in the days coming up. next, it's sanctuary city showdown. attorney general jeff sessions throwing an illegal book at california. is that going to put sessionings in better standing with the
6:47 am
president? i'm your phone, stuck down here between your seat and your console, playing a little hide-n-seek. cold... warmer... warmer... ah boiling. jackpot. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, you could be picking up these charges yourself. so get allstate, where agents help keep you protected from mayhem... me. mayhem is everywhere. are you in good hands?
6:48 am
with smart, revolutionary hhearing aid technology available right now, why does it take most of us 7 years -- when we know we have hearing loss -- -- to actually do something about it? will you continue to feel left out... to constantly ask people to repeat themselves... and to miss out on so much in life... for all that time? really? with the aarp hearing care program, provided by hearusa, why wait even 7 minutes? call right now. and receive the highest level of quality, care and value in the industry. which is why so many people have trusted us to get their lives back. because the time to enjoy virtually invisible hearing aids... to enjoy how they connect with your tv... to enjoy their extraordinary sound right now. discover hearing care beyond compare. attention aarp members. call hearusa today to find out how you can save an additional $500 off your next purchase of a pair of digital hearing aids. call us today.
6:49 am
afi sure had a lot on my mind. my 30-year marriage... 3-month old business... plus...what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i made a point to talk to my doctor. he told me about eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. not only does eliquis treat dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis had both... ...and that turned around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis
6:50 am
call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis right for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you. . a feud is escalating between the trump administration and the state of california. at a speech in sacramento, attorney general jeff sessions defended his decision to sue the
6:51 am
state over sanctuary city laws that protect undocumented immigrants. >> california, we have a problem. a series of actions and events has occurred here that directly and adversarily effect the work of our federal officers. how dear you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical open borders agenda. >> california's governor jerry brown took aim at session and the trump administration as a whole. >> with a jeff sessions said is simply not true and i call upon him to apologize to the people of california, to bringing the men dasty of washington to california. this is basically going to war against the state of california. the engine of the american economy. it's not wise, right and it will not stand. let's break it down with zer
6:52 am
lynna and michael. when somebody says how dare you endanger law enforcement, who's for endanger law enforcement? >> jeff sessions is trying to frame this as, you know, california seeking to protect citizens and other people who are related to citizens -- >> at the expense of -- even though they're undocumented at the expense of ordinary americans or trump's base. i think the framing of it is quite offensive to me. there are a number of different things that people should be concerned about in terms of their security, but there's no epidemic of undocumented people or people who are being protected by these sanctuary city laws that are committing crimes against ordinary americans. the framing of that is wildly offensive. >> and yet the decision was made to go to california and to make this fight very public in california. what's jeff sessions up to? >> it's to make it very public and it's to make it a pushback
6:53 am
on the governor to a certain extent, a little bit personal as well. the governor's been outspoken critic of the administration. i think this is that. i actually can see the merit in some of the arguments regarding sanctuary cities. i'm conflicted as someone who's very much behind the state's rights idea, the 10th amendment. i also get the reality of federal law and as part of that you have to adhere to what federal law says. for example, sb 54 that prohibits state and local officials from sharing information with immigration authorities, that's problematic. that's -- that's like, look, if you come across someone who you know to be here illegally could you at least alert us to that. >> that's a legitimate policy debate which is different than the attorney general saying about a governor and a state, you are endanger law enforcement without having -- >> to a certain extent you could make that case if you will not provide us with the information about people that you know to be here illegally.
6:54 am
you see how the circle is completed. i understand where the administration is coming from on this. now the way they do it, the high penitentiarily and the rettic not withstanding -- >> why pick on california? california's isn't the only state. >> california is the biggest -- is the biggest apple in the kbar relevant. you're going to pick on california and as california likes to brag -- >> with one of the more liberal governors. >> if california likes to brag we're the trend setter. if you want to stop a trend you go to the stors and that's what the administration is doing. >> if you're a victim of domestic violence, for example. you don't want to go to the police if you are undocumented. that's one of the reasons why it is dangerous for law enforcement to always share that information with i.c.e., because it actually deters people, suppresses the amount of people that are going to go and seek help for things
6:55 am
they need help with. >> thank you both. the trump tariffs may be unpopular both democrats and republicans, but that's not keeping one loyal trump supporter in congress from backing the trade barriers. congressman tom reed will be here to explain why he supports the tariffs. if i book direct at". who glows? just say, badda book. badda boom. book now at oh! there's one.a "the sea cow"" manatees in novelty ts? surprising. what's "come at me bro?" it's something you say to a friend. what's not surprising? how much money matt saved by switching to geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.
6:56 am
6:57 am
we see two travelers so at a comfort innal with a glow around them, so people watching will be like, "wow, maybe i'll glow too if i book direct at". who glows? just say, badda book. badda boom. book now at
6:58 am
you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. no matter what there's always good news some where and we think good news rules. you know the snow caused a lot
6:59 am
of headaches for the northeastern womens' basketball team in philly, it got so bad their bus got stuck on a hill. so yep, all the players and coaches got out in the middle of the storm and they did what fierce women do. they pushed that bus to level ground. watch it. come on, you can do it! ha! no injuries and they played in the quarter finals today at 2:30. i'm thinking of a word i don't know if i'm allowed to say on morning television. that wraps up this hour. coming up right now, more news with halle jackson. >> what's the word? >> bad -- on tv. >> you can say it. >> we have questions and answers. right now more answers than questions. a bunch of new fronts in the russia investigation, like for example, the report that
7:00 am
president trump has been pumping key witnesses for info. we have live here the reporter behind that story coming up in just a moment. what about a secret back channel between the washington and kremlin? i wish we had more answers than questions for you on that potential trouble for tariffs but not even the president's inner circle seems to know what's definitely next. let's just say this, my source calls this morning have been a little odd. the president has a 3:30 meeting is happening. what about a signing ceremony on these tariffs? is he having second thoughts? on international women's day a critical update on a story you have seen here. a new look at the crisis facing rohingya women in myanmar. how that's reshaping the legacy of a female leader. a top reporter you know is back. we have a jammed pack 60 minutes and i want to kick it off


1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on