tv MSNBC Live With Alex Witt MSNBC April 29, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PDT
i are jokie ining around on the commercial breaks. we're just about at 9:00 a.m. here in the east, 6:00 a.m. out west, a tale of two cities, both named washington. president trump rallies a supportive crowd in michigan with wide ranging and pointed remarks threatening a government shutdown and a sitting u.s. senator. back in the nation's capitol, comic relief for those not in the trump administration. the annual white house correspondents' dinner with the main speaker delivering searing remarks throughout. minority report. the democrats delivered news on russia you might not have heard about. we'll tell you why they are suggesting obstruction by the president. >> she goes around saying, "we will impeach him." "we will impeach him." >> the presidents raises the "i" word at his rally last night. how it might play out in the mid-term election. right to highlights from president trump's rally in michigan last night including a
new threat to congress over the u.s./mexico border wall. >> we have to have boards and we have to have them fast. we need security, we need the wall. we're going to have it wall. we come up again on september 2th. and if we don't get border security, we have no choice. we'll close down the country because we need border security. >> the president also reigniting his feud with red state democrat senator john tester over his comments over ousted va secretary pick ronny jackson. >> this is a high-quality individual like they would love in montana. and tester started throwing out things that he's heard. well, i know things about tester that i could say, too. and if i said them, he'd never be elected again. >> president trump also fighting back at critics eager to see him out of office and democrats sweep the mid-term elections.
>> we have to keep the house. because if you listen to maxine waters -- [ crowd booing ] -- she goes around seeing, "we will impeach him." we got to go out and fight like hell and we gotta win the house and we gotta win the senate. i think we're gonna do great in the senate and i think we're gonna do great in the house because the economy is so good. t"the new york times" this morning underscoring how worried republicans are behind the scenes of losing control of both the house and senate as a result of president trump. nbc white house correspondent kelly o'donnell has more on that, as well as fallout from the correspondents' dinner last night. kelly, quite a night. ooh, that comedy was searing. >> reporter: there's so much to talk about this morning, alex, because the president spoke for more than an hour and he hit so many different topics. you gave some of the good, i think notable comments right there, and he did it because he
wanted to counter program the white house correspondents' dinner. he has not attended in his two opportunities to do that and he also wanted to reach out to voters where he is popular in that part of michigan where that is a state he narrowly won but it was so critical to his overall victory. the president was also there on a bit of a victory lap on some of the more recent things. wanting to boast about his involvement in the north korea negotiations and the progress we're seeing there and talking about the economy, of course. so it was free-wheeling from the president and it was pretty searing from the comedy at the white house correspondents' dinner. >> reporter: president trump gleefully traded one washington for another saturday night. >> i'd much rather be in washington, michigan, than in washington, d.c. >> reporter: not only did he skip the tradition for a second straight year -- >> is this better than that phony washington white house correspondents' dinner? >> reporter: the president
performed a pretend trump. if he with at the d.c. dinner. >> i could be up there tonight smiling like i love where they're hitting you, shot after shot. and then i'm supposed to -- >> reporter: while the trump administration encouraged its own officials to attend the nearly century-old celebration of the first amendment, the president mocked the media before a trump-friendly crowd. >> these are very dishonest people. many of them. >> reporter: touting his role of bringing north korea into nuclear negotiations, the president responded to tv pundits. >> what do you think president trump had to do with it? i'll tell you what. like how about everything. >> reporter: the rally audience chanted, suggesting he deserves the peace prize. [ crowd chanting "nobel" ] >> nobel. i just want to get the job done.
>> reporter: talking up his handling of the economy the president boasted of his new celebrity endorser. >> in all fairness, kanye gets it. he gots it. >> reporter: back in washington, immedia comedian michelle wolf hit the president -- >> he's got loads of ideas. you got to love him for that. he wants to give teachers guns. and i support that. because then they can sell them for things they need. like supplies. >> reporter: and, of course, russia was a punch line. >> it is kind of crazy that the trump campaign was in contact with russia when the hillary campaign wasn't even in contact with michigan. >> reporter: of course, those are some of the clips from michelle wolf that are suitable for sunday morning tv. she's a professional comedian. she was reaching forward at times. some really tough hits on members of the administration, include i including sarah huckabee
sanders, press secretary, seated just a few feet from michelle wolf. also kellyanne conway in the audience. this event is always one where you get some punch lines that are meant to do a little bruising but not meant to really hurt. it is always a balance. there's always criticism about how it plays in the room, and beyond. certainly there is a lot of talk about did michelle go too far. michelle wolfe. or did she hit it right on the nose. >> i don't know. there were times i felt like c-span censors were going -- woo! there you go. all right. that's enough said. kelly, appreciate it. joining me now, staff writer for "the hill." and congressional reporter for "washington post" with a good sunday morning to the both of you. melanie, we heard the president at the top really escalating his attack against senator john tester of montana, threatening to reveal information that could harm his election. do you have any idea what he's referring to, and why this attack keeps going? what does the president gain? can we remind viewers that he won the state of montana by 20
points in 2016? >> right. look, i think what the president is trying to do here is make lemonade out of lemons. this nomination was a huge embarrassment for the white house. clearly ronny jackson was not properly vetted. he had to withdraw his nomination. and now trump is using the opportunity to try to come after tester. i don't know what he is referring to when he says he has damaging information on the senator, but he is certainly hoping that this could hurt him in the mid-term elections. and already we are seeing the national and republican committees sort of seize on this. they've put him on the top of their target list hoping to go after him and flip him. this is a state where trump won by 20 points so trump obviously is beloved in that state. but tester is going to have his work cut out for him. i just want to say though, i don't know if these attacks are going to work. keep in mind, republicans were also part of the reason why this nomination was stalled. it wasn't just democrats who are obstructing here but we'll just have to wait and see. >> sean, you horted threported
tester's republican counterpart, senator isaacson, defended that saying, "that's his right." so what is the consensus? is that it among republicans? >> well, not completely. if you look at the way the situation unfolded in washington, you are right that there were republicans who had concerns about this nomination, who had concerns more broadly about ronny jackson's qualifications. but for john tester, the real challenge right now is what we've been talking about. trump won his state by a very, very wide margin. and so what he's going to be relying upon this fall if he wants to win another term is not only democrats but he's going to have to win over centrist republicans. he's going to have to win over some conservative republicans. and to have the president out there saying some pretty critical things of senator tester, those things could end up in tv ads this fall that republicans run. i don't expect that they'll run ads pointing out that the president has said that he should resign and things of that
nature. so this is going to make it very, very difficult -- at least a lot more difficult than it was a few days ago for john tester to win conservative voters in a state that voted very, very conservatively in the presidential election. >> melanie, the president was also talking about mid-terms, projecting more confidence than really members of his own party who, according to a new report, are really concerned about the president down playing the threat of them losing the majority. how does that work in terms of mid-term strategy? >> well, i think there is an obvious disconnect between the president and the tough reality that's really facing republicans in the mid-term elections. part of that is because the president himself was told he was never going to win the presidency. his instincts and his confidence is really what paid off in the end. it seems like he's deploying the same strategy now. but the reality is, republicans are really facing a tough mid-term election. the democrats only need 23 seats to win back the house. historically the president's party loses by a lot.
the question is do they want the president to help with the mid-term elections, do they want him out there. i think in some districts, absolutely, people are embracing trump. they want him to come campaign for them. but in other areas, especially these more suburban, centrist, swing districts, they don't want the president there and he is seen as more of a liability. >> what about, sean, the statement about democrats possibly impeaching him? what's the message there from the president? >> the message there is to get the conservative base energized in you have to come out and vote this fall. the president is not on the ball ballot, so a lot of republicans worry the core supporters who voted for him in big numbers in 2016 are just not going to show up in november. this is a way of going to them and saying, the president's not on the ballot -- but, if you give democrats the keys to the car, if you let them control the levers of power in washington, they're going to go after this president. they're going to try to use their power to hold perhaps an endless string ever hearings. and they're bringing up the prospect of impeachment.
and indeed, some democrats who are running in these congressional races are talking about the possibility of impeachment. what this is is a concerted strategy bit republican party to energize the conservative base voters who might otherwise say, the president's not on the ballot, i don't know if i'm going to come out this fall. the republicans' goal is to say we need these voters to come out and vote for the republican candidates. okay, let's get to the dinner itself. i want your reaction. let's play part of comedian michelle wolf. here's where she's roasting sarah huckabee sanders. >> i actually really like sarah. i think she's really resourceful. like she burns facts and uses that ash that create a perfect smokey eye. like maybe she's born with it. maybe it's lies. >> do you think, melanie, conventional wisdom wise, did michelle wolfe go too far at all here? >> look, i think whatever you think about sarah huckabee sanders, you have to give her credit for being able to sit there and take some of those
attacks. >> i agree, yeah. >> i think some of them may have gone a little too far. maybe when it comes to her looks. i think there is a reference to her being a softball coach. the way it played in the room talking to people who were there last night, people felt uncomfortable, at the didn't like it, it didn't make them feel good. other people certainly can argue that she signed up for this, this is part of the game. everyone was attacked there. but at the end of the night this is supposed to be a celebration about the president and if people were not feeling like this advanced the cause of journalism, you do have to question whether she went a little too far. >> i have to say, michelle wolfe also went after kellyanne conway who was sitting down among the crowd at the table. so it is easier to sort of hide. sarah huckabee sanders was right up there, so every eye in the room went right to her. she looked really pretty last night, maybe the best i've ever seen her. so good for her in that regard. the headline with you, sean, michelle wolf eviscerates sarah huckabee sanders at white house
correspondents' dinner. fair? fair characterization, you think? >> well, if you look at the substance of the jokes that she made, she certainly did target the press secretary. look at the reaction more broadly today, it has been very, very polarizing. it is interesting, some of these speeches when you look at them, some of these routines over the years have had more tension than others. a few years ago stephen colbert's routine when george w. bush was president also got a lot of attention, got a lot of criticism from some people. clearly bush was not happy about that. i think we're going to see this conversation continue in the coming days. it doesn't look like this is something that's going to sort of fade into the background. it was a very polarizing routine and the country at large is also very, very polarized over this white house, over this administration and this president. and it seems like this conversation's going to continue nationally. >> you know one thing we are doing? we are talking about michelle wolf. certainly has put her on the
map. that's one thing. melanie, sean, thank you so much. using technology to put words in someone else's mouth. a bit later, what a shocking new book reveals about the future of fake news and the impact it could have on future elections. but as it grew bigger and bigger, it took a whole lot more. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. everything. and that 2% cash back adds up to thousands of dollars each year... so i can keep growing my business in big leaps! what's in your wallet?
better than rav4. better than rogue. an adventure that starts with a subaru forester will always leave you smiling. get 0% apr financing on the 2018 subaru forester. show me the billboard music awards. the billboard music awards knows how to party. [ cheering ] what up, dog? show me top artist. unbelieveable. i've got my whole family up here. look at my dad looking all sharp. with just the sound of your voice,
you know? i guarantee you, i'm tougher on russia. nobody thought. the only collusion is the democrats colluded with the russians and the democrats colluded with lots of other people. take a look at the intelligence agencies. president trump there at a rally in anylast night once again claiming victory after the house gop report cleared him and his campaign of collusion with russia. let's bring in democratic congressman mike quigley of illinois, member of the house intelligence committee. congressman, welcome back to the broadcast. good sunday morning to you. i want your reaction to what the president said here. >> it's always good for a laugh. it is extraordinary. i guess what i'd say to the president is, let's release the transcripts of this year-long investigation that the house has undertaken before the republicans tanked it and worked with the white house to obstruct the investigation. if he's so confident about that and he has nothing to worry about, then let the republicans release those transcripts. we'll learn of at least 11 trump
associates communicating with the russians on an ongoing basis. this is just the report that you release when you tank the investigation from the beginning, when the republicans worked in concert with the white house to obstruct the investigation from day one when chairman nunez went to the white house on his midnight run. >> did you say 11 administration officials or campaign officials that were communicating regularly with russia? 11? >> yeah. after they shut down the investigation, the house republicans, what did we learn? that mr. gates and mr. manafort in the weeks leading up to the campaign were communicating with russians linked to their military intelligence apparatus. this added to the night that we already knew about before. let's remember the trump tower meeting where the president's
son said to the russians, when told they had dirt on hillary clinton, if that's what it is, "we love it." they were disappointed that there wasn't more and that they were willing to go and communicate on an ongoing basis. so that's 11 people. they didn't find collusion because they weren't looking for it, because their purpose at the beginning was to defend the president politically and legally. and they got their way so far. so this week we continue the investigation on the democratic side on our own. we had a key witness in to talk about cambridge analytica's corrupt intent to be involved obtaining facebook data from millions of americans to help sway the election. >> does any of what you have seen within those transcripts, or anything you have heard since then with the democratic interviews, connect to the president directly? >> well, the thing about these investigations, like all of them, they all begin on the
periphery. right? and then they, with cooperating witnesses and indictments, and the more they cooperate the more we get to the center, the closer we get to the white house. i think the point is, we're getting really close. the question is, now that we have several people cooperating, will mr. cohen be part of that. it's part of a pattern. there's no way of knowing exactly how far that investigation goes. but i think it is absolutely critical that we don't halt the investigation, that we don't fire mr. mueller or mr. rosenstein as the president has attempted to do several times. i'm not out there talking impeachment like the president, of all people. i think it is fair to talk to the middle. let this investigation take its course. let's find out exactly what happened. the worst thing that could happen is to go to one extreme or another. and what the republicans did in shutting down the investigation when there was so much more to learn was only their attempt to
aid the president. >> congressman, is there evidence that the president was aware of these 11 that you speak of and their contacts with russia? was he aware of them communicating with russia? >> look, i'll just use one example. if you read mr. bannon's book, he said himself that it's very hard to imagine that his son didn't have this meeting at trump tower with russians. you need dirt. and then go directly up to his father and talk about it. he said he thought he brought those people up to meet the candidate. i don't know if that took place, but it is very hard to imagine with the people we're talking about -- mr. cohen, general flynn, and so many others -- that the president wasn't aware. but i'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if he allows us to let this investigation go forward. if he allows mr. mueller and mr. rosenstein to do their work.
if he has nothing to fear, quit acting like you're guilty. let us find out. let the american people find out exactly what took place. >> to your point about that trump tower meeting, i want to play for you what the president said about the russian lawyer specifically at the heart of that meeting? she told my colleague, richard engel, that she's an informant for the russian government. here's what the president said about that last night. >> you heard about the lawyer? for a year, a woman lawyer, she was like, oh, i know nothing, know nothing. now all of a sudden she supposedly is involved with the government. you know why? if she did that. because putin and the group said, you know, this trump is killing us. why don't you say that you're involved with government so that we can go and make their life in the united states even more chaotic. >> what did you hear in that explanation, congressman? >> it's hard to tell because it is extraordinarily confusing. let's remember this meeting took
place long before the election. but only a few weeks after george papadopoulos was told by the russians. this is now almost two years ago. mr. papadopoulos was told by the russians that they had e-mails that they had illegally obtained. we haven't even questioned mr. papadopoulos in the house investigation. what are they afraid of finding out? clearly the russians' intent was to attack our democratic process. but just as clearly, the trump campaign sought this information, obtained this information, and attempted to work with the russians to attack our democratic process. does that rise to the criminal level of a conspiracy? again, that's for mr. mueller to decide. what are they afraid of? let him finish his work. >> the democrats singled out -- rather, the president singled out maxine waters, a democrat from california, who is one of many who have openly called for
his impeachment. will the democrats take action if they sweep the mid-terms? >> look, i think this has an impact on the elections. i think the american public understands exactly what's taken place. since this investigation was shut down, we've learned of the president's attorney talking about pardoning some of these people who have been indicted, people who are cooperating? what was the intent of that? to try to throttle the investigation? i trust the american public to understand what the white house is doing, obstructing this investigation. >> let's turn to the growing calls for epa administrator scott pruitt to step down. i'm reading the wednesday report, he called him morally bankrupt, he epitomizes the swamp. should he still have a job? what's the most egregious thing that he's done? what warrants his firing? >> i think the blanket denial and blaming his staff for
everything that went wrong. look, if you didn't know what was going on, then you're incompetent. if you knew what was going on, you're corrupt. perhaps what's most upsetting for me is, under questioning in my committee by myself, mr. mulvaney said he disagreed with what took place in mr. pruitt's office and he was going to investigate. he wasn't going to protect anyone. and later in the week, we find out that literally in his own words, mr. mulvaney was talking about selling policy to the highest bidder. at the same time the jackson nomination moves forward, the swamp isn't being drained. it is being flooded. it is not just mr. pruitt. it is mr. zinke. it is mr. mnuchin. it is the whole cast of characters mr. trump has put in place. he's got to clean this up and you don't do it by adding someone like mr. jackson to the mix. meantime, the pruitt mess that's
taking place helps blind the american public to the fact that this is an epa administrator who is attempting to gut the clean air and the clean water act, who refuses to acknowledge that climate change exists, and refused my request to debate him on this issue. he never should have been there in the first place. >> i will say, sometimes it is extraordinary, given statements from the epa administrator himself to think about the positions he's in. but having said that, democratic congressman mike quigley of illinois, it is very good to see you. thank you. >> good morning. thank you. an interview between robert mueller and the president is back on the table, but does it even matter at this point? that's next.
delivery should look like this. handcrafted layers of clean food you can give your kids. tomatoes. even the picky ones. panera. food as it should be. now delivered. >> tech: so you think this chip is nothing to worry about? well at safelite, we know sooner or later every chip will crack. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com.
they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing. i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ south l.a. is very medically underserved. when the old hospital closed people in the community lived with untreated health problems for years. so, with the county's help we built a new hospital from the ground up and having citi as an early investor worked as a signal to others to invest. with citi's help we built a wonderful maternity ward and we were able to purchase an mri machine. we've made it possible for the people who live here
to lead healthier lives and that's invaluable. ♪ new evidence this morning from democrats on the house intelligence committee alleges obstruction of justice by the president. the minority report released friday says testimony from fired acting fbi director andrew mccabe described veiled threats against former fbi director james comey. intel committee ranking member adam schiff questioned mccabe asking mccabe if the threats were along the lines of, i, the president have been very loyal to you. i want you to lift the cloud unless i might be less loyal to you. mccabe replied, "that's
correct." that's t joining me, former prosecutor cynthia oxley. let's get into it. can you see a case in the democrats' report for obstruction of justice? >> here is the thing. comey -- not comey. mccabe is not a credible witness. the department of justice has found that he lied under oath to them when they were asking him questions about leaks. and so to the extent any case relies on mccabe's testimony, it is not going to go forward. now, there is a little nugget in that report which is important. that the conversation is with comey and there are conversations where not only mccabe was listening in but also the general counsel. so that nugget about the obstruction, which mccabe revealed, is important and can be added to the general report. but just any testimony that requires mccabe is probably not going forward and is just a distraction. >> that's interesting. you are right, absolutely, james
baker, fbi jem counsgeneral cou on a lot of these calls and listening in. during another exchange, here's what schiff asked, quote, if the director didn't lift the cloud of the russia investigation that the president would take action against you? mccabe replied, that's correct. that was my concern and as i understand it, that was director comey's concern as well. but again, to your point -- the more you get from mccabe, despite the fact that he has been found to lie under oath, is it the kind of thing like just collectively you have mccabe, the summarization of everything he's saying, then perhaps corroboration from james comey. can that allow this to move it forward? >> i just don't think it will. i think it is a distraction. i think the central focus of the case will be the obstruction with comey. i think because there is this battle between trump and mccabe and the department of justice has said mccabe lied to them several times, under oath and not under oath, i just think it
is a rabbit trail that will not be followed. there's plenty of other things that are more central to the issue of obstruction and more central to the issue if the russians and -- they obviously did -- but how the russians interfear int interfered with our election and whether there was collusion and a conspiracy to affect our la elections with the trump campaign. that will stay the center of our focus. >> okay. let's look at another potential avenue. the house intelligence report refusing to go into the mystery phone call that donald trump jr. received to set out that june 2016 trump tower meeting. why do you think this is still significant? >> i think it is really important and here's why -- because trump has said he knew nothing about that meeting. there's always been a question about that. because don jr. set up the meeting on a monday in june. and then on tuesday, president trump, then candidate trump, went on the stump after he won a primary and went on and on about
we're about to have interesting information about hillary clinton -- can't wait to do it, blah blah blah. and then the meeting happened on a friday. they didn't get any dirt. and on monday it was a big "never mind." so the question is, what did trump know? and we've always wondered about that. now we come to find out that after don junior set up the meeting, he got this mystery phone call. and it was from a blocked number. we know that trump used a phone that had a blocked number at that time. you would think if you were an investigator what you would be doing is subpoenaing the phone records and finding out who was that phone call from. but the republicans chose not to do that -- because they didn't really want to know who that phone call was from. so one thing we know for sure out of this great mystery that we can all pontificate on, is that mueller has those phone records. so he knows if trump made -- there's no way the mueller team has not subpoenaed the phone records. so again, we're going to have to wait for mueller and he is the competent investigator. the republicans obviously did
not want to know the answer. but it is still coming out. >> well, i like your answer, cynthia. thanks so much. look forward to seeing you again. coming up next -- the threat of impeachment. how will it shape president trump's mid-term fight for control of congress? managing blood sugar is not a marathon. it's a series of smart choices. and when you replace one meal or snack a day with glucerna made with carbsteady to help minimize blood sugar spikes you can really feel it. glucerna. everyday progress. so, my portfolio did pretthat's great.year.
but the market was up nearly twice as much. that's a tough pill to swallow. exactly. so i started trading. but with everything out there, how do you know what to buy? well, i think my friend victor has just the thing for you. check this out, td ameritrade makes it easier to find the investments that might be right for you. like our etf comparison tool it lets you see how etfs measure up to one another. analyst ratings and past performance... nice. td ameritrade also offers access to coaches and a full education curriculum to help you improve your skills. that is cool. and if you still have any questions you can always chat with us on facebook or call our experienced service team, 24/7. yep. just because you're doing it yourself doesn't mean you're on your own. that's great. you're still up. alright. you're still up. if i knew you were gonna run the table i wouldn't have invited you over. call (866) 295-0917. act now to take advantage of commission-free trades for 90 days, plus get up to an $800 cash bonus when you open and fund a new account. ♪
fthere's flonase sensimist.tchy and watery near pollen. it relieves all your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. janice, mom told me you bought a house. okay. [ buttons clicking ] [ camera shutter clicks ] so, now that you have a house, you can use homequote explorer. quiet. i'm blasting my quads. janice, look. i'm in a meeting.
-janice, look. -[ chuckles ] -look, look. -i'm looking. it's easy. you just answer some simple questions online, and you get coverage options to choose from. you're ruining my workout. cycling is my passion. president trump adding new fuel to the debate over impeachment talks and the potential impact on this year's mid-term elections at his rally last night. the president raidsed the issue to encourage republican voter
turnout. >> we have to keep the house because if you listen to maxine waters -- [ crowd booing ] -- she goes around saying, "we will impeach lihim." "we will impeach him." we gotta go out and we gotta fight like hell and we got to win the house and win the senate. kristin tate, opinion contributor for "the hill." adrian, the democrats have been divided on this issue of impeachment talks at this stage, partly because the republicans might use it to rally their own voter turnout. do you think democrats should agree to stop calling for impeachment? >> well, alex, what i think is really important here is that we let the mueller investigation play out. frankly, one of my concerns as a democratic strategist is if democrats do take back the house which looks very likely that
will happen in november, that democrats will suddenly go into impeachment proceedings when there is not enough evidence there. look, it makes sense for him to use it as a rallying point. again, there may be evidence at some point in the near future that points to the need for impeachment. but we've got to let the mueller investigation play out first. >> kristin, do you agree with adrian? is it risky for republicans to use the threat of impeachment to rally voters or do you think it is risky? >> i think trump said this to fire up his own base. right now trump supporters are a little bit demobilized because they're disappointed that the border wall has not been funded and built. but, yeah, democrats are going to talk about impeachment. they've become the party of no and the party of obstruction. but as a practical matter, i really don't think impeachment should be a big concern for trump. even if the democrats take back the house. the republicans will hold on to the senate and in order to impeach trump, the democrats would need approval from two-thirds of the senate. not going to happen.
any impeachment efforts by the left are really just a political opportunity for the far left, people like maxine waters and nancy pelosi, to make a political statement. that's all this is. >> well, when it comes to impeachment though, adrian, look at quinnipiac university, a new poll is out there saying that if democrats regain control of the house, you got 71% of democratic voters would want them to start the impeachment proceedings. so how do you think that should factor in to the strategies in the mid-terms here? >> that's part of the problem, alex, is that there is so much pressure from the base, from the democratic base, from the left, to move forward on impeachment proceedings. again, we may have grounds for impeachment. we will see. but we've got to let the mueller investigation play out and let these investigative committees in congress do their job. i think at this point any talk of impeachment is too speculative and that's, again, to kristin's point, that's what donald trump uses to fire up his base and he uses it very effectively. we cannot politicize if impeachment actually happens, we cannot politicize this. that's of course what's already
starting to happen. >> republicans are trailing democrats by eight points in the generic ballot according to quinnipiac. there is a growing number of resignations. we have some pretty tough strategic choices to make, one of them being the president's role in the mid-term race. "the new york times" is reporting congressional and party leaders and even some trump aides are concerned that the president's boundless self-assurance about politics will cause him to ignore or undermine their mid-term strategy. hey big how big of a threat do you see that being? >> i think right now the left is really mobilized and angry. so of course democrats are going to do well in the mid-term elections. i mean the party out of power always does well. but, look. again, what we've been talking about with this impeachment stuff -- the democrats haven't really offered any solutions. they haven't gin voters any reason to actually get off the couch and go to the polls other than resist trump. as for republicans, i think that they would be best to focus on
what trump has accomplished which of course is leading the tax reform efforts, which has been great. average americans are saving money. >> kristin, can i ask the question -- >> he's popular. >> -- he's popular, sure. this article says california, arizona and nevada. mr. trump the way he communicates, his proclivity to be a loose cannon could be trouble some for those races. the requequestion is, should he out there on the trump? >> in certain states he's not as popular, sure and he shouldn't go to those states and maybe certain candidates shouldn't align with him. but if other states he's wildly popular like in michigan where he was last night. among republicans, trump has an 85% approval rating right now. so many candidates would do well to align themselves with trump. but again, you got to take it state by state. of course certain states like utah don't like him as much. so there should be a little bit of a divide there, of course. >> adrian, the president is
certainly going after senator john tester of montana over his accusations against dr. ronny jackson. listen to what he said about all this at last night's rally. >> tester started throwing out things that he's heard. well, i know things about tester that i could say, too. and if i said 'em, he'd never be elected again. >> what's your reaction to that? >> i mean first of all, i think he is picking on the wrong guy here. john tester is very smart to be urging caution with ronny jackson. so again, john tester is from a red state so using this tactic i don't think by trump is very effective. and again, this is just going back to third grade bullying antics. like, "i know something about your friend, i'm going to say something." it is really ridiculous to see him do that. but again he fires up his base. it is very -- again, it is like watching a guy on a playground try to bully other kids. >> i can just ask you, kristin,
your take on that? not from a political standpoint, but just from a tasteful standpoint. when you hear the president speak like that. what do you think? >> we elected trump because he is a fighter. what john tester did was despicable. he threw out allegations against ronny jackson and made no effort to see if those accusations were actually true. now we have the white house and secret service coming out saying that they can't prove that any of these allegations are true. now there are genuine concerns about ronny jackson and those concerns should be expressed. for example, he's never had experience running a big government organization. but the allegations that tester threw out, again, they are not proven, and what he did was bad. and trump is calling him out on that. again, in montana, trump won that state by 20 points. so tester could be politically hurt by this. >> i'm just curious, has the president ever done that, kristin? has the president ever called out somebody and put out allegations that weren't true on a global stage? just asking.
okay, re okay, we're laughing. let's go to the annual white house correspondents' dinner. the performance of michelle wolwolf is getting mixed reviews. here's what she said with kellyanne conway. >> you guys got to stop putting kellyanne on your shows. all she does is lie. it is like that old saying -- if a tree falls if the woods, how do we get kellyanne under that tree? i'm not suggesting she gets hurt. just stuck. >> okay. did she go too far? i'll let you answer first, adrian. >> i think she did. that's the point, alex, i'm sure you've attended many white house correspondents dinners. that's the point of the comedians, to be edgy and provocative in their comments. but i think she did go a little too far. you have to straddle being tasteful and also being funny but i do think in this case michelle wolf went a little too far. >> kristin. >> yeah.
one of the big reasons donald trump won the election is that the american people no longer trust the media. the media has become flagrant in their seething hatred of donald trump -- >> wait, wait. can i just ask you what you thought of michelle wolf? did she go too far? she's a comedian. she's not the media. >> i mean i think it was too far. it was mean-spirited. the white house correspondents' dinner used to be fun because the left and the right would take playful jabs at each other. it was all in good fun. last night was just nasty and full of hatred. it wasn't fun anymore. i think trump made the right decision by not going to the white house correspondents' dinner. it sent a message. what is a white house correspondents' dinner without the president. >> ladies, i'm going to say thank you and in the last five seconds my audio dropped out so if you said something super provocative, it's yours and you're going to own it. next, frightening video technology to create fake news that's alarming lawmakers. how this clip of former president obama is all the evidence you need.
president use the term fake news against news he doesn't like. my next guest says you are not going to be able to trust things you see with your own eyes. the author is joining me right now. nathan, this is a little frightening, i got to say, having looked through it and you give one example in here where someone could say -- make a computer -- a picture of donald trump, for example, receiving a cash bribe from vladimir putin with some kind of smirk on his face. this technology, is it already here, is it pervasive? can anyone get it? >> it's coming. this is only a few years away, alex. we're talking about technology that will literally compromise your belief in what you actually see. you heard is said before that seeing is believing, in reality, this technology is going to make it easy to fabricate video but also audio clips that, you know,
essentially will make us question everything we see. adobe, this is the company that did photo shop, which of course, means you can edit any photo in any way you want, is working on technology that will allow you to edit audio in the same way. in fact, at this point they need less than ten minutes of audio sample of your voice to be able to fabricate you and make it sound like you said something you never said. that's bad news for people like you, unfortunately. there's plenty more than ten minutes of your voice on the internet. >> i want to give folks an example here. we'll play a few seconds of video. this is president obama. this is demonstrating the software used syncing up one piece of audio with one piece of video. >> to help families refinance their homes, to invest in things like high tech manufacturing, clean energy and the infrastructure that creates good new jobs, not to mention the job training that helps folks earn
new skills to fill those jobs. >> so this is pretty much putting words in someone's mouth. it shows them saying something they did not say, but how far do you think -- is there an edge? how far does this manipulation style go? >> i talked to an artificial intelligence professor at the university of wyoming for this book and he said that within a few years technology will advance to the point where reality will look just the same as anything that's fabricated in the sense that you really will not be able to tell the difference. his quote was indistinguishable from reality. it's not there yet. we're talking about the early stages. that is just a very small sample of what's coming. we have to have critical thinking, understanding, you can't necessarily believe what you see any more just like you can't trust a photo that someone sends to you. >> nathan, if videos like this are put out there, is there a way to say foreignicly analyze them and look and see, that's
fake. will that technology out there that people can access that too? what are we going to do, spend all our time trying to validate what we see and hear? >> it's incumbent upon the technology companies, facebook and google and others to develop these a.i. systems that will essentially be counterfeit detectors. they are already working on this. you'll run the video through the technology and instantaneously it will be able to identify whether it's real or fake. this is like a pendulum, it'll swing back and forth. 'ends of the day they'll get better and get better at faking these things. >> senator mark warner is one of the lawmakers advocating for some sort of regulation on all of this. can this be done before the next election? will leave that out there. good to talk with you. it's a frightening book. thank you for your time with us. >> thank you, alex. as you heard earlier, president trump talked about maxine waters at last night's
hey, want thedone.est internet? and now, xfinity mobile is included. you can get up to five lines. you can save 400 bucks or more a year, which you can spend on a funk-tastic music video. ♪ dance party boom. ♪ simple. easy. awesome. come see how you can save $400 or more a year with xfinity mobile. plus, ask how to keep your current phone. visit your local xfinity store today. that's a wrap of this hour. i'm alex witt. stay where you are. it's time for "a.m. joy" with my friend joy reid. >> is this better than that phony washington white house correspondents dinner? is this more