Skip to main content

tv   The 11th Hour With Brian Williams  MSNBC  April 6, 2018 11:00pm-12:00am PDT

11:00 pm
trade ideas are getting slammed by a lot of republicans. the 11th hour with brian williams starts right now. which starts now. tonight, more damaging headlines for epa chief scott pruitt. news he spent millions on security and travel, but flew coach when it was on his own dime. plus, on a week that brought the first sentencing of prison time in the russia investigation and word of a forthcoming report from robert mueller, a look at the legal advice being offered up to donald trump. and from surprise policy documents to staff issues and a steep dive in the stock market, the wild week in this trump white house. "the 11th hour" on a friday night begins now. good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. i'm katy tur filling in for brian williams tonight. day 442 of the trump administration and the white house is facing mounting
11:01 pm
pressure to do something about epa administrator scott pruitt. he's been under fire for ethics issues and outsized spending, among those issues massive raises for two of his closest aides and a rental of a capitol hill condo tied to a lobbyist who represents energy clients. pruitt met with president trump today. originally to discuss his agency's recent efforts to roll back obama-era fuel efficiency standards for cars, but it seems the topic of his future was always on the agenda. the associated press reports that during his meeting with the president, pruitt laid out his case for why he should continue in his job. the a.p. also reports that pruitt spent millions of dollars for a 20-muslember full-time security detail three time the size of his predecessors. "the wall street journal" and "the new york times" say chief of staff john kelly has urged trump to fire pruitt but trump has been resistant. said he was doing a great job
11:02 pm
while being totally under siege. the white house backed that up at today's briefing. >> no one other than the president has the authority to hire and fire members of his cabinet. it's a decision that he'll make. right now i don't have any personnel announcements. the president feels that the administrator has done a good job at epa. he's restored it back to its original purpose of protecting the environment. it's gotten unnecessary regulations out of the way. we're continuing to review any of the concerns that we have. >> the white house is closing out this weekend with new and growing concerns about the future of the economy, markets took a tumble today. the selloff largely triggered by concerns about the president's latest threat to impose tariffs on an additional $100 billion in chinese imports. china had already vowed to strike back after the president made his first proposal for tariffs, and today beijing again promised retaliation.
11:03 pm
so are we starting a trade war? americans got mixed signals from the trump administration. >> i'm not saying there won't be a little pain. we may take a hit, and, you know what, ultimately we're going to be much stronger for it, but it's something we had to do. >> we're not running a trade war. nothing -- implemented. >> so what do you say to the people who are afraid if there is a countermeasure. >> stay with us. this is a growth oriented administration. >> we're in the period before the tariffs go on, we'll continue to have discussions, but there is the potential of a trade war. >> meanwhile, there were developments on the legal front for the president. it was reported that he is not a target but a subject in the russia probe. we learned mueller is taking a closer look at trump's business partners, including his personal attorney michael cohen, yes, that michael cohen, the one who paid a porn star $130,000 in hush money. we also heard the president speak for the first time about daniels and that payment.
11:04 pm
>> did you know about the $130,000 payment to stormy daniels? then why did michael cohen make it if there was no truth to the allegations? >> you'll have to ask michael cohen. michael's my attorney and you'll have to ask michael. >> do you know where he got the money to make that payment? >> no, i don't know. >> i'm sorry? [ inaudible question ] >> the president did not answer that last question. and as if this white house wasn't juggling enough, this was also the week the administration announced it was sending national guard troops to the u.s./mexican border. secretary of defense mattis has given the okay and they're expected to deploy starting tonight. here to talk with us is carol lee, nbc news national political report. white house correspondent for bloomberg. and with us from washington, matth
11:05 pm
matthew. welcome, everyone. beyond the fact that scott pruitt is doing what donald trump wants, rolling back regulations, why is the president content to keep him on board after all of the scandals we've been seeing in the last few months, especially the last week? >> well, a couple of things, he's not just doing what he wants in terms of regulations and other things. there is still a lot of support for pruitt among the president's base. second, this is not someone who would be on the president's list of cabinet officials that he may be okay with or kind of want to see go or not really feel strongly one way or the other. this is someone he likes and he's a little be defiant. he does not like, as you know better than anyone, to be told what to do, to feel pressure from the media, from his critics to do something, and he's -- so he's -- >> but he faced that. >> digging his heels a little bit. >> he faced that with dave price and other decisions he's made. >> tom price was not doing -- >> tom price, sorry. >> he wasn't getting the job done. >> dave price is the weather man
11:06 pm
at wnbc. sorry for that confusion. just take a look at the headlines on epa chief scott pruitt. he demanded a 24 hour a day security detail, spent millions on that travel with security as well. installed a $25,000 sound proof phone system in his oefs. proposed spending $70,000 to replace desks. one was apparently bulletproof. have no idea why you'd need that. flew first class at a cost of more than 100 grand, plus charter and military flights. explored hiring a private set at a cost of $100,000 a month. stay stayed -- to places like le diplomat in washington, a hot place to have dinner. asked subordinates to find housing, violating ethics rules. exiled internal critics of his spending and leadership to new jobs or demoted them. politico called him the cato
11:07 pm
kailyn of washington, d.c. for basically not leaving that $50 a night rental. this is a lot. the west wing staff is already turning on him. how does this make the president look right now? >> well, this is a president who campaigned on draining the swamp. this is very much swamp-like behavior. probably pruitt's biggest sin with the president is he went and did an interview on fox news and did not really represent himself very well. the president likes people who do well on tv. pruitt did not do very well. he did not look like he had full control over his agency or over the facts behind all of the various scandals he's faced over the last few weeks and it seems like every day there is a new story. today multiple stories targeting all the negative headlines. i talked to a white house official earlier this week and they said obviously the president doesn't like these headlines, but at the same time the president realizes it's going to be difficult for him to continue shuffling his cabinet.
11:08 pm
he's gotten rid of two cabinet secretaries who have three confirmation fights ahead of us. if he keeps getting rid of cabinet secretaries, he's going to have a very hard time filling those positions in a senate that is 51 republicans and 49 democrats. the so the president's hands are somewhat tied in this situation. he is hearing from his outside advisers, from his base. he said yesterday he was just in west virginia and the people in west virginia love scott pruitt. so that's probably what's driving him more than anything else, the fact that the base is on board with this guy. >> matthew, "the wall street journal" and "the new york times" both reporting that kelly, chief of staff john kelly, asked the president or told the president that scott pruitt needs to go. the president has rebuffed him, at least as of now. does john kelly have any influence in this white house? >> it looks like kelly's influence is really fading fast, and i think we're seeing that more all the time. we've seen the president's more emboldened put together the team that he said he wanted all along, getting rid of folks like
11:09 pm
rex tillerson and he's more comfortable making moves that a lot of people within this administration and within the republican party are pushing against. like these tariffs and this potential trade war with china. so i think you see a guy like john kelly, who came in and really brought order to this operation after reince priebus. donald trump doesn't like being told no, and i think maybe saying no a few too many times has really limited kelly's influence. on top of that, there are a few things this president enjoys more than undoing barack obama's agenda, and that's sort of what scott pruitt's been up to since day one. as much as these negative headlines pile up, pruitt's been doing what the president's wanted him to do, and like carol said, the president doesn't like folding to outside pressure. so i don't think negative headlines are going to hurt scott pruitt as much as they might have perhaps a few months ago when the president was less confident of just blazing his own path here.
11:10 pm
>> he might be the cabinet secretary responsible for undoing the majority of the obama legacy. the obama regulations. so he's got that going for him. turning to the mueller investigation. are we getting closer to the president sitting down with robert mueller? >> it sure seems like the negotiations or discussions, whatever you want to call them, between the president's legal team and robert mueller are getting somewhere and potentially could be coming to a conclusion at some point soon. the question is whether or not, you know, we know there are those among the president's advisers who think he should not under any circumstances whatsoever sit for an interview with robert mueller, but the president's shown he really wants to do that. so, you know, i think it's who wins that fight, we don't really know, but there are reports that he started to at least have some very initial preparations for what that might be like. >> is there anybody in the white house that is talking to the president right now, sitting him down and saying, hey, listen, you've got two things unfolding at the same time?
11:11 pm
you've got this mueller investigation, which is still ongoing. you're going to have to sit with mueller at some point or find a reason to say why you're not going to sit with mueller. you've also got this storm and daniels case unfolding that you're contributing to by answering a reporter's question about it. it had died down. now it's back in the news. is anyone telling him why it might be problematic for those two things to happen at the same time. >> we don't really -- it's hard to -- this is not a white house where you get the sense where there are people who sit the president down and tell him hard truths, that speak to him in those kind of very frank, candid ways. the number of people who do that seems to be diminishing by the day. however, you know, the clearly the president is well-aware that the stormy daniels and the mueller investigation issues are hanging over his presidency and are -- could be big problems for him. we don't know how he's going to in the end choose to handle that. >> there is also the stock
11:12 pm
market taking a big dive today. larry kudlow started on monday in this administration. it seems like from all we've seen of him that he's basically been camped out on the driveway at the white house just answering reporters' questions and trying to tamp down on what the president might be saying overnight or saying in interviews or tweeting about this escalation and this tariff war between china and the u.s. what is going to happen? is this just a lot of bluster and big talk from this president or are we going to end up enacting really steep tariffs against the other big power in the world? >> yeah, that's part of the reason larry kudlow was hired, because the president saw him on tv and thought he was doing a great job and decided to bring him into the white house. now his role seems to be going on a lot on tv from the white house north lawn and trying to calm the markets after the president tweets something or makes a statement or unveil ace
11:13 pm
policy which larry kudlow said he found out about shortly before the public, in terms of new tariffs, that could royal the markets and really lead to a trade war. he has a pretty large task on his hand trying to calm the markets when the president is really doing the opposite, really trying to stir up the markets. trying to stir up what looks like a trade war with the chinese, saying that trade wars are good and easy to win and showing that he has no fear in going tit for tat with china, despite the fact that china is taking us on and really pushing back very strongly against the u.s. and against the actions that we've taken. so i'm not sure that larry kudlow will be able to keep up this act for much longer, saying that just be calm, nothing's going to happen, you know, this is all about a negotiation. when the president doesn't seem to be wanting to negotiate, he wants to hit china very hard with very large tariffs. >> i love trying to wrap up a week like this for the 15 minutes for an "a" block on a newscast at the end of the week. we have already talked about
11:14 pm
scott pruitt. we've talked about robert mueller. stormy daniels. we're talking about tariffs and the stock market crashing. we haven't even gotten yet to what's happening down at the border, which dominated a good part of this week. news now that secretary mattis is going to send 4,000 troops to the border, matthew. >> that's right. it's easy to see how that sort of fell off the radar with everything else that's going on, but this sort of stems from the president's anger over not getting money in the omnibus to get that wall construction going, and we know his obsession with the border quite well. so he sees this as a way to try to tighten things down there without a wall, deploying large amounts of national guard troops, perhaps in response to some fox news reporting about border crossings, but, again, this is a way for him to say he is taking action on the issues that are most important to him and his base, even though his long promised solution, the wall, doesn't seem to really be
11:15 pm
coming together quite yet. >> matthew, big question, what's on the agenda next week? >> that's always a great question. i think they're eager to push a few legislative items along with the confirmations that were mentioned. the dodd/frank repeal is something they'd like to get done and v.a. choice legislation, but, look, you guys know as well as anyone that what the president tweets on monday morning and whoever gets fired or whoever gets indicted is going to set the tone a lot more than any specific plans the white house has. >> let's be honest, whatever the president tweets on sunday morning is going to start driving the news week. carol staying with us. thank you very much. appreciate it. and coming up on the mueller front, the advice being offered to donald trump from an informal legal team of friends on tv. and later, for a president who loves to tout market gains, there is no denying today was a rough day. "the 11th hour" just getting started on a friday night. my breath.
11:16 pm
it was the last song of the night. it felt like my heart was skipping beats. i went to the er. they said i had afib. afib? what's afib? i knew that meant i was at a greater risk of stroke. i needed answers. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®. to help keep me protected from a stroke. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. in a clinical study, over 96% of people taking xarelto® remained stroke-free. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. for afib patients well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily
11:17 pm
or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working, just like it should ♪
11:18 pm
11:19 pm
. this week, we saw the first sentencing in the russian rob. alex van der zwaan who worked with paul manafort and rick gates was sentenced to 30 days in prison and fined $30,000 for lying to investigators. we also learned from court documents a search warrant was issued tied to paul manafort as recently at march 9th. that makes the seventh search warrant against him. we also saw reports about the president's status as a subject in that investigation. trump and his legal team have been discussing the possibility of a sit-down with robert mueller, but this week we heard
11:20 pm
a chorus of opposition to such a move from key trump allies on tv. >> as a former u.s. attorney and somebody who would be sitting on the other side of that table, i said this all along, george, i said it here before, he should never walk into that room with robert mueller, because in the end one of the things that makes the president who he is is he's a salesman, and salesmen at times tend to be hyperbolic. >> now mueller wants to interview the president of the united states, who knows nothing, who has been a witness to nothing, who is not a target of the investigation. the president should not agree to an interview. the president should at the most answer written questions in a very limited area and she should never, ever be interviewed. >> there is a theory that this statement was made by bob mueller in an off-handed way so the rest of us would talk about it and the president would have a false sense of security and going into the interview. stay away from that, mr.
11:21 pm
president. that interview environment is extremely dangerous. if he's a subject and not yet a target and they want him to become a target, they're going to ask him questions, the answers to which will move him into that target category. >> back with me is carol lee. joining the conversation, julia ainsley, nbc news national security and justice reporter. and daniel goldman, former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. julie, i want to start with you. you're new to the table this block, at least from afar. how far along is the investigation? what's the sense that you're getting? >> well, katy, that's the question we're always asking every week. it seems to be there are a lot of different indicators. we were talking around the holidays about the fact that trump's legal team was talking to mueller's team about trying to get out of this kind of interview about doing written questions. we thought that meant they might be wrapping up. but we know from things like how
11:22 pm
vast these probes are going, like the sentencing of alexander van der zwaan, the manafort trial isn't beginning until later, these are all reminders of how many probes this investigation has. we know that mueller wants to look into the foreign business dealings of jared kushner, but it could be that something could be wrapped up more discreetly concerning the president and that is why the president might already be under preparations for an interview like cnn reported tonight. we also want to look at whether or not he is being prepared as sort of a just in case. i mean, we know that his advice that he has been given, is absolutely, mr. president, do not sit down with robert mueller, but it may have been that there are negotiations between the legal team of the president and robert mueller team that have already moved closer to an interview than we know, and perhaps those preparations are getting ready for a very real possibility, even though the president has been told that is not a place he wants to put himself in.
11:23 pm
>> carol, who is he listening to? the legal team who works with him behind closed doors, off camera or the unofficial legal team that talks to him on camera, mostly on fox news? >> you know, i think it depends on the moment, the day, what channel the tv is on. i just, you know, he also is of his own mind on this. we've seen he has a legal team. people, even all of those clips you saw where people say, do not do this interview. this interview is a trap. you shouldn't do this. we know the president has said he wants to do the interview. there is a growing sense that he feels like, you know, the idea that he can't do it is some sort of question in his abilities, that he can't handle robert mueller. so we see him kind of pushing back and saying he thinks he could do this and why shouldn't he do this? that is going to be the fight he has with his legal team. we don't know who is going to win out there. >> i want to question the characterization of an interview with robert mueller as some sort of trap. why would folks on television be
11:24 pm
screaming for him not to do it because robert mueller would trap him? if he walks in there and tells the truth, how could that possibly be a trap? >> well, that obviously wouldn't be a trap. there is a technical term, which is called a perjury trap, but that is only when you subpoena a witness to a grand jury for the sole purpose of getting them to lie. you have no investigative reason to have them in the grand jury. that's obviously not what we have here. there is no -- whether you talk about a voluntary interview or a grand jury subpoena, we're not talking at all, we're in the in perjury trap world. >> so they're misusing the term. >> they're completely misusing the term. there is nothing remotely close to a perjury trap here. there is an active investigation on multiple fronts that relates to donald trump. he's a subject. once you're a subject of an investigation, there can be no way there is a perjury trap. that's completely fallacious. what's interesting about this news that came out this week
11:25 pm
about the subject is -- and the fact that john dowd is no longer on the team is that trump is -- needs a very experienced and qualified white collar defense lawyer to parse what that means. the land of subject is vast. and you can be a subject that is much closer to a witness. you can be a subject that is much closer to a target. i think the president really needs someone who can understand that and parse that with mueller. >> are you saying he doesn't have that? so far, five top notch legal firms have turned him down. >> i don't think right now after john dowd has left and given that ty cobb is really representing the white house's interests in this investigation, my understanding is he does not have a very -- jay sekulow is more of a constitutional lawyer and my understanding is he does not have someone with a lot of white collar chops. >> let's talk a little bit about paul manafort. we're continuing, carol, to hear news about paul manafort.
11:26 pm
yet another search warrant for paul manafort. why is he still such a major focus or seem to be such a major focus for this investigation? julia? i'm sorry. i'm looking at the camera. >> i work a lot with carol. that's a compliment. paul manafort, of course continues to be a focus. it's funny, katy, thinking back to the fall, we saw paul manafort as the first person to be charged in this along with his partner rick gates. it's been a really long time where we tried to figure out why manafort hasn't agreed to cooperate in the same way rick gates has. we're assuming rick gates is cooperating because of his guilty plea, but it seems we're getting more information of why mueller is continuing to go after manafort and why he's continuing to generate these headlines, and a lot of this came this week when we heard about this person "a," this person who rick gates communicated with, who was a known russian intelligence officer, and who rick gates knew was a russian intelligence officer in 2016. so there are more dots that are
11:27 pm
being connected as this case goes on and it's more clear why manafort is so important to this case and why the argument from the white house that manafort was someone who just came in and out of this campaign and is not close to the president and really didn't have his hands in this, that argument is not standing up, as we're seeing how closely tied manafort was with the campaign and also the connections that go to russia and the lobbying efforts they did on behalf of pro-russian interests in ukraine. >> i find it interesting we hear about paul manafort a lot, rick gates a lot, we could describe as semiperipheral characters. we're not hearing the big names a lot. we're not really ever hearing about jared kushner in relation to the special counsel. we're not hearing about other close advisers that are currently alongside donald trump. we're not hearing about mike flynn any longer. we're also not hearing a lot
11:28 pm
about roger stone. we are hearing about him, but we're not hearing about robert mueller interview roger stone. so far he has not been interviewed. why could that be -- could that be bad news for stone? >> it could be and it couldn't be. the thing about this investigation, and that's, you know, frustrating for those of us who cover it and also make it very challenging is we just don't know a lot. there is a school of thought among legal experts that say if someone like roger stone has not yet been interviewed, that could be a sign there is potentially some trouble there. we know that jared kushner was interviewed very narrowly about michael flynn in december, right before michael flynn pleaded in december. as far as we know, he has not been set for a full interview. there are some legal experts who think that would be a flag if you were representing jared kushner, and elsewhere, you know, some of the big players who haven't been talked to. but we also know, you know, the special counsel hasn't talked to the vice president, for instance, who was involved in
11:29 pm
everything from the campaign, the transition in the white house and nobody thinks that that's a big flag that somehow mike pence is in some serious trouble. so i just think, you know, like so much of this we just don't really know. >> daniel, what do you think? >> well, i do think it's noteworthy because the way these investigations generally work is you go with the least culpable person first and you kind of work you way up to who the most culpable person is. we know from sam nunberg coming on this network and talking about the subpoena that he got and the questions he got that mueller is interested in roger stone. we also know there is -- from news reports that there is a lot about stone's connections to julian assange and wikileaks and the hacks. so the fact that he has not heard from mueller is noteworthy and it would indicate to me as a former prosecutor that there is enough smoke there that they're looking at him, and they're sort of building their case to see where it will go before they figure out whether they even want to interview him or whether
11:30 pm
they're just going to charge him. >> also, as far as we know, he hasn't interviewed michael cohen. >> that's right. that gets to be very complicated. a lot more coming out more recently about michael cohen, so that seems to be a more newly developed area of this investigation, which is really sprawling at this point. >> carol lee, julia ainsley, thank you very much and daniel goldman, appreciate it, guys. sorry for mixing up the names. it's a late friday night. >> thank you. coming up, the president says nobody's been tougher on russia than him, but do today's sanctions live up to that pledge? "the 11th hour" back after this.
11:31 pm
11:32 pm
racing isn't the only and with godaddy, i'm making my ideas real. with godaddy you can get a website to sell online.
11:33 pm
and it will look good. i made my own way. now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working just like it should ♪
11:34 pm
there are many things that i've done, and not only the 60 diplomats, germany did four, france did four, we did 60. there's nobody been tougher on russia. >> that was president trump on tuesday, reiterating his administration's tough stance on russia, and today they struck again. the treasury department imposed new sanctions on seven russian oligarchs, 17 russian officials and 12 russian companies. the list takes direct aim at russian president vladimir putin's inner circle, and is considered the strongest move yet by the u.s. among those included oleg deripaska, a known associate of former trump campaign manager
11:35 pm
paul manafort. also targeted alexander torshin, under investigation by the fbi amid allegations he may have funneled money into trump's campaign through the nra. senior administration officials said the sanctions were not a response to specific actions, but to hit back at the kremlin for, quote, ongoing and increasingly brazen patterns of behavior. the action freezes all u.s. assets, restricts travel and bans business with american companies and individuals. with us for more, michael mcfaul, former u.s. & to russia and msnbc international affairs analyst. "from cold war to hot peace" and american add sh ambassador in putin's russia. also with us, josh letterman. national security reporter for the associated press. gentlemen, thank you very much. michael, i feel like i ask you this all the time, but let's ask again. more sanctions yet again today. are they enough? >> well, first, thanks for mentioning the book. i appreciate that.
11:36 pm
>> one author to another, i know you always mention the book. >> i really appreciate that. are they enough? of course not. and let's be clear, sanctions always take a long time to have an effect in terms of changing another country's behavior. that was most certainly true with the sanctions that we put in place when i was in the obama administration on iran. it took years to have an effect, and those sanctions were much broader than this against a much smaller target, the country and the economy of iran compared to russia. but it was the right thing to do. i support the administration. there has to be a response. and this was an interesting list but a serious list that they put together and announced today. >> is vladimir putin going to feel this? not only the folks we mentioned, but his son-in-law is also on that list. >> well, vladimir putin's going to say that we are encircling
11:37 pm
him, we are escalating, we are trying to destroy russia, and so he's going to rally his base, his electoral base and the people around him to say that we've got to push back. so i really don't think these kinds of actions in the short term with vladimir putin will change his behavior. >> josh, let's talk about timing. the administration really dragged its feet initially on sanctions. congress passed them. the president was reluctant to sign that bill -- sign those sanctions and then he signed it. then the administration was reluctant to enact them. now we're seeing more and more in what feels like a much faster stream. why have things changed? >> well, i think this was a turning point, katy, in that the administration seems to have finally grasped that they're just getting creamed over this russia issue in the court of public opinion. they're losing republican lawmakers and that doing the bare minimum was not really going to cut it to deal with that. all of the previous steps that this administration had taken
11:38 pm
against russia seemed like forced responses to really specific russian actions. okay, congress said you have to sanction people. we'll sanction some people. okay, they allegedly poisoned an ex-spy in britain, we'll kick out some diplomats. where as this seems like something they didn't have to do but was a pretty concerted effort to show what administration officials describeed describeed as a reckless, brazen pattern of activity by russia was going to merit a response by the u.s. i think they're understanding they have to go beyond what they've done in the past if they want to put to bed this notion that president trump simply cannot stand up to moscow. >> josh, earlier in the week we heard that the president extended an offer to come to the white house -- an invitation to come to the white house to vladimir putin. are you hearing anything more on that? is it actually going to happen? >> well, we're hearing that it's certainly not off. despite the actions that were taken today, there is no end to the offer from president trump to have such a summit with
11:39 pm
president putin. still, the white house a possibility for the location for that. so you see this dual track. on the one hand, we're trying to show that we're tough on them through administration actions and on the other hand, on the leader-to-leader level, the president is still offering olive branches in the form of a potential meeting. refusing to actually criticize putin directly. you didn't hear the president talk at all about those sanctions today. i think that pretty notable. >>ener is also another piece to this puzzle, nat is two new administration officials, josh bolton coming in, michael, there is also mike pompeo moving from the cia over to the state department. eventually once he gets confirmed. what signal is that sending to russia and what could that mean for our policy going forward? >> well, both of those gentlemen have been tough on russia before, at least rhetorically with respect to ambassador bolton, somebody i've talked to
11:40 pm
and debated about russia before. and i think it will reaffirm the trump administration's policy towards russia and the conversation you were just having, this dual track, i would call it somewhat different. it's everybody's on one track and the president's on another. and so far that creates some space, and what's interesting to note, if you watch the kremlin media, kremlin-controlled media or media close to president putin, they also keep open that space. they say, we have the good czar, right? against the bad boys. the good czar, president trump, wants to do the right thing, the deep state is doing the wrong thing and they still want to keep open the idea that trump and putin could get together and try to reverse this very bad track that we're on right now. >> it's interesting to hear russia use some of the same rhetoric that it used here in the united states, that donald trump is the good person and everybody else is out to get him, this vast government
11:41 pm
conspiracy, this deep state to take down the president. ambassador michael mcfaul, josh letterman, guys, happy weekend. >> thanks, katy. >> thank you. coming up, are we in a trade war with china? no matter how you answer the question, it was bad news today for wall street. that's when "the 11th hour" continues.
11:42 pm
"i have antivirus, but my computer's still slow..." "that's not right..." "maybe if i reboot..." "what's with all the popups?" "why does it keep on crashing?" "this is taking forever." "i think it's time for the fixmestick." fixmestick is a plug-in virus removal device. it's the smart, simple, safe way to clean your computer yourself. with fixmestick you don't have to replace your computer. it helps you keep your files, and your privacy. fixmestick reboots your computer from a system on the stick, so that it can remove the malware that got past your antivirus software. it's the smart, simple way to clean an infected computer, with a whole lot going on inside the stick... [computers sound] "alright, this computer's powered down. "
11:43 pm
"let's reboot from the stick, and start scanning..." fixmestick contains 3 independent scanners, and connects to more in the cloud, for fast and effective detection of the latest threats. "i thought so - this one got around the antivirus software!" "not a problem." "we're on it." today's viruses sabotage the computers they infect, like a burglar who gets into your house, and deactivates your security system. once your computer is infected, it's far easier to clean it with an external device... that's what makes fixmestick so effective. "ok, i see spyware, trojans, keyloggers, and here it is, the rootkit!" the fixmestick is like having your own it department in the palm of your hand. and because it connects to the internet, it's always up to date. "coffee" we're going to need some more coffee down here... " "anyone," "coffee?" advanced technology in an external device has enabled people all over the world
11:44 pm
to get the upper hand against viruses and malware. try it for 30 days, and see for yourself why more than a million people trust fixmestick to keep their computer fast, clean, and safe." call us today or visit us online. u.s. stocks tumbled today on fears of an escalating trade war between the u.s. and china. the dow fell as much as 767 points before closing down 572 points. that sharp decline came after president trump threatened an additional $100 billion in tariffs on chinese imports. thursday night that happened. today, trump's own team tried to alleviate those concerns. >> now, we're not running a trade war. if you read this thing, you'll see, this is just a proposed idea, which will be vetted by ustr and then open for public
11:45 pm
comment. nothing's happened. nothing's been executed. >> while we're in the period before the tariffs go on, we'll continue to have discussions, but there is the potential of a trade war, and let me just be clear, it's not a trade war. the president wants reciprocal trade. >> is he willing to fight a trade war on this? >> we don't want it to come to that. the president wants us to move to a process of fairness, to free and fair and open trade, and that's what he's trying to do about it. >> here to talk it, lahnee chen. good to see you. >> good to be with you, katy. >> trump repeatedly tried to claim credit when the market was going up, does he deserve the blame when the market starts to fall? >> katy, this is a problem when you tether too much of your economic success because of the stock market. stock markets are going to go up and down. a lot of it doesn't have so much to do with policy.
11:46 pm
in this case we're seeing the market reacting to concerns about a potential trade war with china, but my advice to the president would be don't tether so much of your success on the economy or perceived success on the economy to a stock market because it is a very fickle thing. >> let's just take a look at donald trump trying to take credit for the stock market in tlech 2017, watch. >> our stock market has reached an all-time high today. all-time high think of it. >> i'm very proud of our stock market. what's happened since i became president. >> the stock market hit today 23,000. that's an all-time record high. so congratulations to everybody in our country. >> folks are certainly talking about it now. this escalating rhetoric at the
11:47 pm
moment, this idea that there could be a trade war between the u.s. and china. china's already talking about imposing some tariffs in some pretty key places, lahnee, red states, trump states, places that voted for trump. will they end up feeling it in their pockets come time for this -- these tariffs to be enacted and what is that going to do for donald trump in 2020? >> if the tariffs do end up getting enacted, the full extent of the tariffs that we are talking about, there will be an impact on consumers. the question is not if but when. the difficult part of this is really the timing of when consumers are actually going to feel it. and this is why traditionally, katy, republicans have been very much opposed to tariffs because they end up falling disproportionately, the effect of them falls on american consumers. you're going to see higher prices for regular goods that people buy at the local walmart or the local target. they're going to see higher prices overall and that's why we
11:48 pm
have traditionally disfavored tariffs. the question is, though, when those tariffs go into effect. i don't see it having an impact before the 2018 elections. but to your question of 2020, that's when people could feel the pinch of this and that would, indeed, be very bad news for the president. >> people look at the numbers and say, hey, we import a lot more from china so we can stand to levy a lot more tariffs against them and really hurt them where as they can only hurt us so much. explain why china might be able to absorb those tariffs in a way that the american economy just can't. >> well, there are a couple of reasons. i mean, first of all, we do still import a significant amount of china, and specifically what we're importing are the kinds of consumer goods that people rely on, people have become used to in terms of prices. the other issue is that china has a burgeoning tech economy. increasingly what they're seeing in china is the production of tech goods which we're consuming here in the united states. to the extent we place tariffs on incoming goods, all we're
11:49 pm
doing is hurting u.s. consumers. to a certain degree, i understand the president's argument, we've got to get tougher on china because they've been cheating when it comes to the rules of international trade for many years. i think everyone agrees with that. the question is, when do we have too much of a good thing? i think the problem with proposing $100 billion potentially in new tariffs is that it is far too much of a good thing in the sense that the chinese have the leverage to say, okay, fine, you want tariffs, we're going to impose tariffs, too, and ultimately that's going to mean higher prices for the american consumer. >> lahnee chen, thank you very much. coming up, facebook is working to regain your trust, but the relationship status is still complicated. "the 11th hour" back after this.
11:50 pm
11:51 pm
11:52 pm
facebook wants you to trust them again. the social media juggernaut says it's going to be more careful in the future to make sure your
11:53 pm
information is better protected. it also announced changes aimed at stopping more election meddling from russia ahead of this year's midterms. facebook says from now on any entity posting political issue ads will now need to be authorized. but do these changes go far enough? we get more from nbc news business correspondent jo ling kent. >> reporter: tonight, facebook's ceo mark zuckerberg promising to hire thousands of more people to verify political ads so users can see where they come from and who is paying for them. facebook also forcing users with big followings to verify their identities, saying they will make it a lot harder for anyone to do with the russians did during the 2016 election. >> i don't believe today's actions by facebook will completely stop what the russians did in 2016 and what they're planning on doing in 2018. that's a good step in the right direction. >> reporter: in an exclusive
11:54 pm
interview with savannah guthrie on "today," facebook's second in command sheryl sandberg apologized for the cambridge analytica scandal that exposed as many as 87 million users' information. >> we got multiple assurances from them that the data should have been deleted. >> reporter: sandberg says facebook is likely to find more problems. >> did you have an opt out button? don't use my profile data for advertising? >> we have different forms of opt out. we don't have an opt out at the highest level. that would be a paid product. >> reporter: football currently has no plans to offer that. apple's ceo tim cook disagrees with the way that apple makes money. >> we've never believed that these detailed profiles of people that have incredibly deep personal information, that is patched together from stefevera sources, should exist. >> reporter: next week, zuckerberg will testify on capitol hill. lawmakers will be demanding
11:55 pm
answers. >> our thanks to nbc news business correspondent jo ling kent. a quick break for us. right now, more 11th hour right after this.
11:56 pm
booking a flight at the last minute doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline. but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working, just like it should ♪
11:57 pm
11:58 pm
the last thing before we go tonight is about robert mueller. we talk about him all the time, but you don't really know that
11:59 pm
much about him, do you? at least the man behind the investigation. sunday night, our own nicolle wallace will host an in-depth look at robert mueller right here on msnbc and here is a preview. >> he will take this wherever it leads. i just wish that we could let him do his job. >> there could be a domino effect that leads to the end of this presidency and robert mueller's findings could be that first piece to fall. >> the way to best understand mueller's investigations is to look at it as buckets. there is a russia bucket, an obstruction bucket and a finance bucket. the bucket we know the most about is the obstruction one. these are questions about what the president has done since he came into office. why did he fire james comey? why did he ask for comey to end the flynn investigation? why has he demanded so much loyalty of the folks running the investigation? >> head linesers an in-depth look at robert mueller will air sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. that's it for our broadcast
12:00 am
tonight. thanks for being with us and good night from nbc headquarters in new york. >> good evening, everyone. >> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. tonight something different. you may have already seen some of the news-making sound bites from our sxwv with tim cook of apple who sat down with kara swisher and i at a town hall in chicago last week. tonight we bring you a full hour with the apple ceo. it was an illuminate tag discussion covering everything from and al's responsibility to workers to their approach to customer privacy to exactly what tim cook would do if he were in mark zuckerberg's shoes right now. revolution, apple changing the world starts right now. >> tim cook the leader of one of the most innovative and influential kchz our time. >> we've always infused humanity into our products. >> tonig


1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on