tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC April 30, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
their nuclear program. i want to ask if you have made up your mind to pull out of that deal, and if you do pull out of that deal, do you think -- are you worried that sends the wrong message to north korea as you seek to enter nuclear talks with kim jong-un? >> no, i think it sends the right message. you know, in seven years that deal will have expired and iran is free to go ahead and create nuclear weapons. that's not acceptable. seven years is tomorrow. that's not acceptable. so, no. if anything, it's proven right. what israel has done today with the news conference and prime minister netanyahu just gave a very -- i don't know if everybody's seen it but i got to see a little bit of it. that is just not an acceptable situation. i've been saying that's happening. they're not sitting back idly. they're setting off missiles which they say are for television purposes. i don't think so. so we'll see what happens. i'm not telling you what i'm doing but a lot of people think they know.
and on or before the 12th we'll make a decision. that doesn't mean we won't negotiate a real agreement. this is an agreement that wasn't approved by too many people, and it is a horrible agreement for the united states, including the fact, mr. president, that we gave iran $150 billion, and $1.8 billion in cash. nigeria would like some of that. $1.8 billion in cash. and $150 billion. you know what we got? we got nothing. we got nothing. so that doesn't mean i wouldn't negotiate a new agreement. we'll see what happens. but i think, if anything, what's happening today and what's happened over the last little while, and what we've learned has really shown that i've been 100% right. >> and president buhari, i want to ask you, you're the first leader from sub-saharan africa to visit president trump at the white house. could you address his report comments earlier this year when
he used vulgar language to describe african nations? >> well, i'm very careful with what the press says about other than myself. i'm not sure about, you know, the validity or whether that allege against the president was true or not. so the best thing for me is to keep quiet. >> we didn't discuss it. and you do have some countries that are in very bad shape and very tough places to live in. but we didn't discuss it because the president knows me and he knows where i'm coming from. and i appreciate that. we did not discuss it. mr. president, you can ask a questi question. >> that lady is already up. yes. >> thank you, mr. president. my name is julianna. mr. president trump, i would like to know, nigeria is in dire
need of the kind of aircraft to tackle the problem back home. will you be kind enough to release at least two before 2020 to enable the country to tackle the situation in the country? and how soon will you be visiting nigeria? >> well, i would like to visit nigeria. i'd like very much to visit nigeria. it's an amazing country and in certain ways, i hear from the standpoint of the beauty of a country, there's no country more beautiful. so i would like to. and the first part of your question, i couldn't hear what you were saying. go ahead. >> the helicopters. >> oh, helicopters. oh, oh. we love helicopters. he likes them more than i do. he likes buying helicopters. but he is -- and they're buying a lot of helicopters. >> we want to know how soon you will be releasing them to country. >> soon. yes, very soon. we're getting them approved. part of the problem was you weren't allowed to buy helicopters in our country and now you are.
i worked that out so that now you can buy the helicopters that you want. they weren't allowed to buy the helicopters in our countries for various reasons which frankly weren't good reasons. they get them now very quickly and they are the best helicopters in the word. we make the best military equipment in the world and our friends can now buy that equipment. mr. president? >> thank you very much. >> did you have a question for the president? >> president trump, my question is to president trump. >> thank you. >> the fight against corruption is one of the major achievements that the nigerian government has presented to the world. the records show that united states of america is one of the major destination countries of illicit funds and assets from nigeria. to what extent did you discuss the need to transport funds back to nigeria to a fund critical for infrastructure, to cut down funding for terrorism, and also
to reduce immigration from nigeria to your country. >> we've discussed both of those topics at length during the last period of time. in terms of corruption, nigeria has a reputation, as you understand very well, for very massive corruption. i also know that the president has been able to cut that down very substantially. we talked about it. he is working on it, and they have made a lot of progress. i think they will continue to make a lot of progress. we have a lot of people in this country and, frankly, the country itself that invests in nigeria, so cutting down on that corruption element and a corrupt element is very important to us. and the president will be able to do that. >> president buhari? to president buhari, the united states -- did you discuss the need for the u.s. to increase the import of crude oil from
nigeria? >> no. i can't tell the united states what to do. we have good market for our crude oil elsewhere. but the progress made by united states in technology is largely essential for economy. i hope they will allow us to use technology for our chemicals vis-a-vis getting from shale. >> i think more than anything what we discussed today was our agricultural products going into nigeria, which nigeria wants. but we have certain barriers that don't allow that to happen. so for the good of our farmers, u.s. farmers, and for the good of nigeria, and all of africa, it is very important that we are able to sell our great agricultural products in to nigeria.
and that will happen. and we're going to be working on that right away. thank you all very much. thank you, everybody. thank you. >> what about the dmz, sir? >> steve kornacki here in new york for katy tur. 11:00 out west and 2:00 p.m. in washington where you are watching those scenes. they're just wrapping up a joint news conference with the president of nigeria. actually, the president again speaking. >> we are also talking about the possibility of the dmz. peace house, freedom house. there's something that i thought was intriguing. i think that some people maybe don't like the look of that, and some people like it very much. i threw it out today as an idea. i also told president moon and through president moon we connected with north korea. there's something that i like about it because you're there. you're actually there. where if things work out, there
is a great celebration to be had. on the site. not in a third party country. so we are looking at the possibility of doing it. and that location we're also looking at various other countries, including singapore. i will say this, good news, everybody wants us. it has the chance to be a big event. the united states -- i was talking to john bolton about this a little while ago. the united states has never been closer to potentially having something happen with respect to the korean peninsula that can get rid of the nuclear weapons, can create so many good things, so many positive things, and peace and safety for the world. so we'll see what happens. i often say, who knows? who knows? maybe a lot of things change. but kim jong-un, who has been very open and very straightforward so far -- i can only say, again, so far. but he's talking about getting rid of the site which was their
big site. he's talking about no research, no launching of ballistic missiles. no nuclear testing. and he has lived up to that for a long period of time. longer period of time than anybody has seen. so we are looking at that as a potential site, yes. i think it would be very interesting. i think it would be a great celebration. if it works out well. and if it doesn't work out well, that's the way it goes. >> are you still confident the summit will happen? is there anything that -- >> oh, yeah, i think the summit's going to happen. they very much want it. i think the summit will happen. personally, i think it is going to be a success, but we'll see. i will say this, if it's not a success, if it's not a success -- got to get rid of the nuclear weapons -- if it's not a success, i will respectfully leave. thank you, everybody. thank you. >> now the president, donald trump, and his counterpart from
nigeria, their joint press conference has concluded, the president taking an extra question or two on the impending summit the u.s. and north korea have scheduled. the president making news on other fronts as well, including iran, including the subject at hand there, the relationship between the united states and nigeria. let's get right to it here. nbc's andrea mitchell joins us from washington. nbc's hallie jackson is live in the rose garden with are that just took place. jake sherman, senior writer for politico joins us. so does eugene scott, political reporter for "the washington post." thanks to all of you for being with us. andrea, start with you on what we heard from the president at the very end there. he was talking about a potential location for this summit with north korea. he had toyed with the tonight of what's called the peace house there on the border between north and south korea. he had toyed with that on twitter. he talked about it here. he said he's still confident that this summit's going to take place. he said the united states has never been closer to a deal that
would take nuclear weapons off the korean peninsula. but he did say he would be prepared to walk away if need be. what did you make of what he had to say there? >> first of all, in response to a question about where -- because he tweeted out about the peace house which is at the dmz. and that was in contrast to what many of his advisors have been suggesting is that they don't want it there. they would like it in a third country. but he was talking about the look of it and how exciting it would be have to it there. then said even talking to john bolton about that and the fact is that if they decided not to have it there, they were also looking at singapore or another third country. he was suggesting that everybody wants them to be there, sweden we know has been talked to about it because sweden is representing -- has been for many, many years -- representing the u.s. it north korea where we do not have any kind of caonsulr or diplomatic relations. he said again, he would walk away from it but again praised kim jong-un for a test site which many have said is discredited and collapsed, which
is not a great concession, and for not having nuclear tests when many exterritoriperts are that he's already accomplished what he needs to accomplish, which is create a nuclear program that's adequate to be a deterrent as far as he's concerned. so that remains to be seen. i also want to give hallie a chance because she's got great reporting from inside the white house on all of this. then weigh in, if i have a chance, on what he said about eye rand and bebe netanyahu's comments that iran has been cheating. >> prime minister of israel, benjamin netanyahu, made a statement about iran just before this. president responded. hallie, reporting from the rose garden, what are you hearing. >> i love what andrea mitchell said. listen, as far as the north korean situation here, what i think you heard reading between the lines is that singapore, based on the president's own comments, appears to be the front-runner for the site of these talks between kim jong-un and donald trump. i will tell you that we have
been reporting for days that singapore was among the top choices, but i think the president solidified that that is likely where his administration is looking at. at least right now, given that he brought it up several times. he clearly wants it to be on the dmz. i think that what you obviously heard from him. it's what we've been hearing privately from advisors who have concerns. again the president alluded to that. what message that would send, what optics that would be if this in fact did not go successfully and did not go well. the president seemed optimistic. sounds like, this thing's going to happen. doesn't seem like the president's giving it a lot of wiggle room. think we should all be packing our bags for the next few yewee looking into maybe early june from the president and others within the administration regarding these talks. i think when you link it to what andrea is going to talk about in a second which is the iran nuclear deal, for one of the first times you've heard the president talk about what kind of signal or message it would send if he yanks the u.s. out of
the iranian nuclear deal as he is expected to do. even as he is just now trying to negotiate a deal with north korea. is that mixed messaging? is that the wrong kind of signal to send? the president says i think it is the right signal, it is the right message. two other quick headlines. one, he talk about the big story happening along the border which we have been covering on this network having to do with that migrant caravan. the president not addressing the human faces, the human side of that, the people who are fleeing gang violence, for example, fleeing threats of persecution from places like honduras who are looking for asylum, looking for a safe haven. instead, he did as he did saturday night, rale against what he believes is a weakened, broken immigration system suggesting congress has to pick up the ball. then a question to the nigerian president about the "s-hole countries" remark the president reportedly said about some african nations, the president and white house denying he ever said that. the president buhari said he
would keep quiet. the president jumped in and said, no, we didn't talk about it. i'm paraphrasing saying, yes, some places in africa are struggling. but then he moved on. >> it was just minutes before this appearance between the president of the united states and president of nigeria where the prime minister of israel made a present oigs ation on wh says is iran flouting the nuclear deal. >> these files conclusively prove that iran is brazenly lying when it says it never had a nuclear weapons program. the files prove that. but here's what happened next. iran was faced with mounting pressure in 2003. you remember that. that was following the gulf war. so it was forced to shelf project ahmad. but it didn't shelf its nuclear
ambitions. so iran devised a man to do two things -- first, two preserve the nuclear know-how from project ahmad, and second, to further develop its nuclear weapons related capabilities. >> andrea, netanyahu is sitting there saying iran is flouting the terms of this deal. united states should pull out of this. is what trump has been saying. is there daylight here at all between what the trump administration is thinking and netanyahu and his folks are thinking in israel? >> there's no daylight really between netanyahu and the president, although the president said that he would be open to a different or a new deal, and that is what both macron and merkel were arguing last week. continue it, expand it, expand it to include missiles and iran's misbehavior. what is unclear from netanyahu's statement -- i need to go over it more closely. he is arguing that iran always had a nuclear weapons program
before this iran nuclear deal was agreed to in 2015 and signed in 2016. the u.s. intelligence would not argue with that. what the u.s. intelligence and what the iranian -- what the u.n. inspectors would argue is that they have not had a nuclear program since the signing of that nuclear deal, that they have been in compliance. and that is what we have to drill down on what netanyahu was saying. is he saying they were still -- of course they still preserve the knowledge. there is no way to destroy knowledge. so far i have not seen the smoking gun, does he have proof. i want to go back and reread what he says because it backed up to the president's news conference. is he saying that they are still cheating? that's not been established by either u.s. intelligence, israeli intelligence in fact, those we have spoken to, or u.n. inspectors. >> last week the news was the french president making an appeal to the congress of the united states to stand by that iran deal. the president today didn't seem
too eager to do that. what is the mood, both the republican and democratic side on capitol hill, when it comes to the future of this iran deal? >> republicans have wanted this scrapped since it was signed. they didn't want the president to sign it, president obama that is, to sign it in the first place. what you are seeing at the white house and frankly what you see in tel aviv today is a pretty close reflection for where many members of congress are and frankly, as we kind of approach the deadline to pull out of this, netanyahu did a great political thing for the president in that he set the ground work, he laid the groundwork for president trump to be able to pull out of this deal. though andrea is right, there is no indication. and i watched that presentation that netanyahu made. there is no indication that they believe they still have a weapons program. so that's not entirely clear. but almost uniformly on capitol hill, republicans would be extraordinarily happy to scrap this deal and either start over again or reimpose sanctions. before this deal was signed they had sanctioned votes on iran almost every week it seemed like. so a very sympathetic audience for the president on capitol
hill. >> jake, is this a pure party line divide? this is the legacy of the obama administration, our last democratic president. i know when this deal went through there was some hesitation from some democrats. >> there will be some but i think a lot of people, given the distance, will agree basically what the israeli intelligence folks think about this deal, which on the hole it is working and on the whole it does give the u.s. a window into the iranian nuclear program. i imagine now democrats will be lockstep behind the agreement. though on this issue, congress is somewhat irrelevant. because as you remember, the vote to pass or approve of this deal was largely perfunctory and congress didn't ratify it as it would a normal treaty. >> this was just a couple months
ago the president's comments about those "s-hole countries." what did you make of that dynamic between the two leaders with that as the backdrop for it? >> i thought there were two important points that i took away from it. if i heard correctly, it appeared president buhari started off saying he doesn't always put a lot of confidence in reports that come from the media. i think that speaks to perhaps his own relationship with the press in his country and a larger conversation about the impact that president trump's relationship with the american press could be having on global leaders and their interactions with their press. it was also very interesting hearing trump suggest that he would perhaps be interested in visiting nigeria. i think he went on to say that he had heard it was one of the most beautiful countries. so he -- that's quite a pivot from what he allegedly said a few months ago that got him so much criticism from people who thought his comments were insensitive and inaccurate. >> interesting to juxtapose
memories of the flare-up with that scene in the rose garden. thank you all for joining us on a very busy afternoon. now to our national security experts, jeremy bash, former chief of staff at cia and defense department. joe cerencione. isaac stone fish from the center of u.s.-china relations. starting with you, jeremy. what we just heard from netanyahu, the israeli prime minister, with a we heard from trump in this press conference. what do you make of it? >> we've known for a long time iran had a nuclear weapons program before 2003. they shut the program down. we've known that for about ten years so that's not new information. the question is did prime minister netanyahu show in the files that his israeli intelligence very impressive got from tehran, did he show new evidence that post the iran deal that the iranian regime has been engaged in weaponization. i didn't see it. what i saw was that the individual who ran iran's
nuclear weapons program before is still employed by the government. he's still engaged in dual-use technology development and basically they've not destroyed the files and know-how they once had so they can restart the program. but i don't see a smoking gun that shows the iranian deal has been violated. >> this was about 20 minutes before the trump press conference we just showed. the timing. the intended audience. the strategy behind this from a netanyahu perspective? >> well, this is clearly an effort to nudge not just the united states, who i think they believe is on their side on this issue, but in fact the other major world powers, including the europeans and probably the russians and the chinese, that in fact iran is not living up to the spirit of the deal, that they are engaged in nefarious activities all around the world, that they're building ballistic missile program. and iran's claiming that they have not had a real nuclear weapons program, that that was a lie. they are really trying to push those players to join the united states and israel in opposing
the existence of the deal and getting out of the deal. >> joe, this is your area. this distinction between what iran was doing before versus what it may or may not be doing since this deal was sealed. what is your sense of that? >> is there an emoji for a nothing burger? because i think people on social media all over the world are looking for one right now. nothing new here at all. jeremy's absolutely right. we've known all this for many, many years. the iaea knows this. u.s. intelligence agencies know this. it is the opinion of the u.s. intelligence agencies, consensus view, that iran did have a nuclear weapons program, but it abandoned that program in 2003 and has not reconstituted any kind of structured program. even if you thought that what bebe said was correct, this is an argument for staying in the iran deal. this is an argument for keeping the inspects going, for collecting all of the evidence that mr. netanyahu says he has,
and for then using the inspection process to go investigate all these activities. unfortunately, what he seems to be arguing and what trump seems to be agreeing to is that we're going to turn off our eyes an ears on may 12th, we're going to violate the deal, we're going to pull out of the agreement, we're going to loosen all the restrictions on iran and let them proceed in any way they see fit. it seems counterintuitive even if you believe mr. netanyahu's arguments. >> isaac, the other big issue here today obviously is north korea. that came up here as well. president making a couple of arguments there. at one point he seemed to connect -- he was asked about this -- he seemed to connect the status of the iran deal and potential of the united states to pull out of that to the north korean negotiations. he with a basically asked how could north korea -- how could anybody over there trust the integrity of the deal if you're going to pull the united states out of another deal that it signed. he said actually i think that would make the case stronger. what effect do you think that would have if the united states were to pull out of this deal? >> i think the north koreans are
very sophisticated at dividing what trump says publicly and the private messages they are getting from the white house and other people in the administration. the north koreans themselves are very, very good at saying all sorts of outrageous statements as a negotiating tactic, then privately having a very, very different perspective. so i don't actually think the moves on the iran deal have much of an effect. i think what has a much bigger effect is bolton's comments yesterday where he compared this to libya. i think that's going to be very worrying to a lot of north koreans to understand what happened after the libya deal and understand how gadhafi after giving up his particular weapons programs died in a ditch after being deposed. >> you think that could move north korea's calculation. >> i think that has a much bigger effect than anything about the iran deal. that's something bolton who's been a very, very harsh critic of any engagement with north korea was slyly saying what he wants to make a point with north korea. >> thank you all for joining us. i appreciate all the insight from you guys. we're going quick, i know that
and appreciate that. this just in -- more news. stormy daniels is suing the president for defamation. we'll have details on that next. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up! - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life. so we know how to cover almost we've anything.st everything even "close claws." [driver] so, we took your shortcut, which was a bad idea. [cougar growling] [passenger] what are you doing? [driver] i can't believe that worked. i dropped the keys.
>> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. with safelite's exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. ( ♪ ) it's the details that make the difference. only botox® cosmetic is fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. it's a quick 10 minute treatment given by a doctor to reduce those lines. ask your doctor about botox® cosmetic by name.
the effects of botox® cosmetic, may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyelid and eyebrow drooping and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. the details make a difference. the man makes them matter. see real results at botoxcosmetic.com/men. breaking news here. stormy daniels is suing donald trump for defamation. this is the second lawsuit that daniels has filed against the president. latest suit claims he defamed her when he questioned her story
that a man threatened her to keep quiet about her alleged affair with trump. julia, what do we know here? fill in the blanks. >> this of course the second lawsuit that stormy daniels -- her real name being stephanie delivered -- bei clifford -- is being filed against the president over a tweet he issued saying she was a total con job after she posted a picture of a man who approached her and told her to drop the story about an alleged affair. now she's suing for defamation. that would be the third major case. the two lawsuits she laid out, but then as a result of trump's lawyer, michael cohen, paying stormy daniels $130,000, he is now under federal investigation for that payment which has put the original lawsuit on hold. it is unclear now how far this defamation claim can go because
there is already this broader federal criminal probe into cohen's role in all of this. >> do we know where this is being filed, for instance? >> yes. this would also be in manhattan. this is the same jurisdiction that's overseeing the other probe and it is also the same jurisdiction where michael cohen is pushing back saying that a lot of the materials that have been seized in the raids on his apartment were really protected under attorney-client privilege. what all of this gets back to is whether or not the president forced stormy daniels to remain quiet about their affair. she says she was approached just before the election by a man in a parking lot. she felt threatened. she was there with her child and she came up with the picture of this man who she says she's never seen again. the president reacted saying she's making all of this up. of course there was also the other turn last week where the president did say he had worked with michael cohen when he represented him in this whole stormy daniels thing. that was a little bit more of an
admission that he gave earlier when he said he knew nothing about this payment. so we are getting more details about the way this interaction went down both in donald trump's interaction with michael cohen and how michael cohen may have orchestrated a way to keep stormy daniels quite. all of this came to the public's attention when stormy daniels wanted to dissolve their nondisclosure agreement and no longer stay quiet about this. she's cast stones at the president, he's throwing back saying she's a total con job, nothing's true. and that's what's landed us in this defamation suit. >> this is the heart of the new development, this claim from stormy daniels that she was approached by somebody in las vegas, making some kind of threat. the president saying, apparently that that's kind of a con job. has any more information materialized about that? we put that sketch up there that she helped put together with her description. have we learned anything else about that? >> as far as we know, no, we
don't know who this person is. the sketch gets someone closer to it, we're sure michael avenatti, her lawyer, might be pushing for who in might be and pushing in the trump circles to figure out who they may have hired to do this. what's really key at the heart of all this is who paid this person and where that $130,000 that went to stormy daniels originated. as trump laid out last week, he said it didn't come from campaign funds. but then does that show that maybe he does know where it came from? that's more knowledge of this payment than he's ever admitted in the past. so that's what the federal probe will get into. we'll be looking into michael cohen's role. how far this defamation case can really go at this point seems a little unclear because when you have a civil case that is happening under the umbrella of a federal probe, the federal probe will take precedent. any resources, anything that maybe can't be shared because it could somehow interfere with a federal probe can be put on hold in a civil case to allow the federal probe to continue.
>> all right. interesting stuff there, nbc's julia ainslie, again with the breaking news, at least for now, stormy daniels is suing the president for defamation. we will see where this goes from here. up next, we'll speak with republican never-trumper richard painter who just announced that he is running for al franken's old senate seat in minnesota. he's doing so as a democrat. we're going to talk to him. stay tuned.i have a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. but no matter where i ride, i go for my best. so if there's something better than warfarin, i'll go for that too. eliquis. eliquis reduced the risk of stroke better than warfarin, plus had less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis had both. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual
for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i'm still going for my best. and for eliquis. ask your doctor about eliquis. with a $500,000 life insurance policy. how much do you think it cost him? $100 a month? $75? $50? actually,duncan got his $500,000 for under $28 a month. less than a dollar a day. his secret? selectquote. in just minutes, a selectquote agent will comparison shop nearly a dozen highly-rated life insurance companies,
and give you a choice of your five best rates. duncans wife cassie got a $750,000 policy for under $22 a month. give your family the security it needs at a price you can afford. ♪ tired of wrestling with seemingly impossible cleaning tasks? using wipes in the kitchen, and sprays in the bathroom can be ineffective. try mr. clean magic eraser with durafoam. simply add water, and use in your kitchen for burnt on food, in your bathroom to remove soap scum, and on walls to remove scuffs and marks. it erases 4x more permanent marker per swipe. for tough kitchen and bath messes,
we got to go out. we got to go out and we got to fight like hell and we got to win the house and we got to win the senate. and i think we're going to do great in the senate and i think we're going to do great in the house because the economy is so good. the economy is so good. >> well, that's the president there over the weekend looking ahead to the mid-term leaks. everybody's starting to countdown to november right now. we've talked so much about account republicans hang on to the house but the one that's come in to play here that's getting a little more attention lately is the u.s. senate. little while ago this was supposed to be impossible for democrats but the numbers have changed a little bit. this is the balance of power right now. remember democrats won that special election against roy moore in alabama back in december. that brought them closer to 50. now the battleground was sort of
stacked against them and still many ways is stacked against them. what you are looking at here is sort of an early look at what the battleground might look at. these red states are republican states, varying degrees of possibility there for democrats to win these. might take a particular hat trick if you want to call it that in mississippi to pull it off. but they also got a lot of red states to defend, pa la lot of p states, places trump won in 2016 where democratic incumbents are up here. democrats really got to protect almost all this blue turf and they got to make incursions into those red states if they actually want to get above 50. the other thing, there is a state here that's not colored here that is in the news today when it comes to the senate -- the state of minnesota. minnesota was a clinton state in 2016. a small margin. clinton only won it by two points. this of course is now a special election here for the u.s.
senate because al franken was forced to resign after those unwanted accusations of groping. this is tina smith, a democratic senator, running for election, a full material, in that special election. and today she got a challenger in the democratic primary, a name who's become familiar in the last year or so, a former republican, a bush ethics lawyer, bush administration ethic lawyer and trump critic named richard painter. take a listen to what he had to say. >> our democracy is at stake. we can't have anybody in the united states house and senate -- anybody -- who is supporting the autocratic policies and rhetoric of president trump. and we are not going to have people representing this state in the house or senate. it is unacceptable that people representing this state in the house and senate who are unwilling to stand up to president trump. >> richard painter joins me now. thank you, richard, for joining us. let me start on that clip we
just played. you said it is unacceptable for anybody to minnesota to represent the state and not stand up to the autocratic policies and rhetoric of president trump. you're running against a democratic senator. is she failing to do that? >> well, let's start with the republicans. because i've been a republican for a long time and tried to turn the republican party around on a range different issues. but i've given up. and i'm out with the republican party. i'm fed up. >> i understand. but you're running against a democrat who's a u.s. senator at this point and you just said -- >> yes. >> is she standing up or is she not standing up? >> well, i don't think she's doing as good a job as she could do. but i want to start with the fact that the number one priority is we need to get the republicans out of the house and the senate who are not standing up to president trump. that's the number one priority. whether the victor or the fall is tina smith or myself. that's who my statement there was directed at, was the republican members of the united states house of representatives,
representing minnesota doing absolutely nothing about president trump. now i believe that tina smith, our senator, should be a lot stronger against president trump. she should have come out against his trade war, which is going to destroy agriculture in our state. she should call for his removal from office, quite frankly, because he is not showing that he can conduct himself as a president in accordance with the constitution. furthermore, we have serious problems in the state of minnesota where out-of-state mining interests are coming into our state, large conglomerates, with the support of the trump administration, seeking to destroy our boundary waters and other waterways in the state of minnesota. our establishment democratic farm labor senators and members of congress, most of them are not standing up to that. so we need to have both parties -- both parties need to be fixed. >> i'm hearing some differences there. i'm hearing trade, i'm hearing
impeachment. i want to ask though, the circumstances of this election, the reason why there is an election for you to be running in right now, i think i want to clear up a few things on that. this of course had to do with the resignation of al franken, democratic senator al franken. eight women came forward. they alleged groping, they alleged unwanted advances, they alleged conduct that they thought was far too aggressive. he resigned. there's now a special election. when this was going on, you put a couple tweets out i want to ask you about. one you said, how much of this was for real and how much a set-up job on trumped-up allegations? you also asked here, you said minnesota voters are entitled to an investigation before resignation. this was likely a roger stone-fox set-up job. do you believe that or do you believe al franken is guilty of unwanted advances or do you believe this was a set-up job? >> i have no idea. i put a lot of those tweets out when i first heard about it. i continue to wonder whydzheads
before the minnesota voters did. we are entitled to an investigation, entitled to know what's happened when a senator is elected to a six-year term, we should have him serve the six years -- >> sir, with respect, there are women who have come out and put their names on the record. there's an elected official from new england who said she was on stage in a un. lick setting with al franken and he tried to give her an open-mouth kiss. do you -- you say you do not know at all if any of this happened? >> i don't know the facts. it's supposed to be an ethics investigation. we should have investigations of such conduct. that type of conduct is unacceptable for a united states senator or anyone else. but we should find out the facts, not just have a resignation. we should find out the facts. if we had found out o the facts we might have found out worse facts with respect to senator franken. we may have found out a
different story. we also might have found out why roger stone, who was an associate of president trump and also worked for president nixon, why he was tweeting about that before anyone else did. we need to know the facts. that's the problem with the house and the senate. they don't investigate things. they don't find out facts. they've been ignoring facts with this administration and everything else. >> i guess where i am struggling here, there are eight allegations here with respect to al franken. some are people putting their names on the record. i think back to the instance down in alabama with roy moore. there wasn't ever an ethics committee investigation of roy moore. he never got to the u.s. senate but folks had no trouble looking at those accusations on the record and making a judgment. you are looking at -- >> oh, absolutely right. you are right. >> you are looking at eight accusations. >> you are right. >> you don't know if any of this happened? >> i said voters make those decisions. they made the decision in alabama. the voters make that decision because that's the decision they are entitled to. once the voters have made a
decision and elected someone to the senate, then there should be an investigation. if there is alleged wrongdoing. there should be an investigation about any senator who's accused of sexual harassment, sexual assault, campaign bri beries an the rest of it. we need an investigation in the house and senate. >> do you believe these women who came forward with allegations against senator franken? some of them are democrats. >> i don't know the facts here. that's why we are entitled to find that out. but this election is not about al frank. we can keep talking about al franken but it is not about him. this is about donald trump and his abuse of power. and we need to elect senators and representatives who are going to stand up to him. and if people just want to continue to talk about al franken and those allegations, that's what trump wants to do. >> sir, i'm no the trying to make this about al franken but
we've had a big moment in this country about the issue of sexual harassment. it is called the me-too movement. women have come forward and said men in positions of authority abused that authority, did worse things to them. al franken stepped aside. i hear you saying you don't know if any of them are telling the truth. >> i said i don't know the facts. i think we should have found out the facts. not just when powerful men are accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault. the most famous men. but other men who are running small businesses, who are harassing their employees, who have no recourse. people are being fired. women are fired when they bring up sexual assault allegations in the workplace. very little recourse under the law. we need to fix the law so that all women feel they can come forward, safely and report sexual harassment and sexual assault. it is a serious issue. rather than focus just on the al franken accusations, we ought to
focus on the thousands, tens of thousands of women, who are subjected to this type of behavior in the workforce and the law is not adequately dealing with it. >> i guess i'm just curious. again, there were women who came out and they put their names on these accusations. al franken left before there was any kind of senate ethics committee investigation but it is not enough for you to say i believe these women? >> i am not going to opine on the facts of the al franken case. that was the job of the senate ethics committee. >> isn't it your job as a leader to make a judgment when eight women come forward to say, okay, i believe them? >> if i were on the senate ethics committee it would be my job. that was their job. it's not my job to run around saying who i believe with respect to the accusations made against al franken. this election is not about al franken. and if you want to turn it into that or donald trump does, that's exactly what the far right wants to do in this country. we need to fix this system. we need investigations of
wrongdoing. we need to find out the facts. not just of resignations. not just of accusations. we need to find out facts. we are a country with a rule of law. >> if eight women step forward with an accusation of sexual misconduct against a united states senator, you are unwilling to say whether you believe it or not unless it goes through the senate ethics com t committee. >> i am willing to say there needs toen immediate investigation by the senate ethics committee because that type of behavior is unacceptable and it is not up to me to sit here and opine on the truth of what people are saying about a united states senator or what he said in response to that. that is the job of the senate ethics committee. there should have been an investigation. it should have been a prompt investigation. americans were entitled to the facts. minnesota voters were entitled to the facts. >> richard painter, running for the u.s. senate in minnesota. again, he's challenging senator tina smith, an appointed
incumbent. senator smith's statement says she's focused on working hard to be a strong advocate for the people of minnesota and looks forward to earning and asking minnesotans for their support. richard painter running against tina us. we are inviting senator smith to appear with us on the 2:00 p.m. hour. that invitation stands. white house saying ronny jackson will not return to his position as president trump's personal physician. he's still on the payroll. what's next for the rear admiral.
mr. elliot, what's your wifi password? wifi? wifi's ordinary. basic. do i look basic? nope! which is why i have xfinity xfi. it's super fast and you can control every device in the house. [ child offscreen ] hey! let's basement. and thanks to these xfi pods, the signal reaches down here, too. so sophie, i have an xfi password, and it's "daditude". simple. easy. awesome. xfinity. the future of awesome.
we are getting some new insight from senator john mccain's new book "the restless wave." he gives his frank take in this book on president trump, also shares his thoughts on how to heal america's political divide. this was first reported exclusively by apple news. in it the former naval pilot and p.o.w. writes, quote, he has declined to differentiate our crimes and the crimes of despots. this is from john mccain's new book weighing in on president trump. the doctor is out. this at least at the white house. politico and "the washington post" reporting dr. ronny jackson who withdrew his nomination to be the vasek will not return as president trump's personal physician. sean connoly will remain in that
role. the white house said there are no personnel announcements at this time. people pointed to jackson's nomination as an example of poor vetting by the white house. where loyalty trump's qualifications george "the washington post". quote, credentialed candidates had to prove loyalty to the president with many still being blocked for previous and trump statements. restrategist telling the paper this, the trump white house vetting machine is an octobery mon -- oxymoron. joining me is the author of "the gate keepers." thanks for joining us. what we're describing right there that vetting process as being described by "the washington post". the president decides that's it. you're writing about a very different process that traditionally plays out in the white house. >> this is just the latest example of a white house that's broken and dysfunctional and
seemingly more so by the day. vetting apoepointees is somethi the white house should do. what this shows is, you know, long after the rob porter fiasco and all the other problems that john kelly has failed even in his only very narrow definition of the job. kelly has failed really to bring discipline to this white house. in fairness to john kelly, obviously donald trump is somebody for whom process and discipline are anathema. he likes to announce stuff without any process and that becomes almost mission point for a white house chief. >> shra role or function when you talk about kelly you say you think he failed at that key police there. what's the role for him in the white house then? is he doing other things that we don't see that are important, that don't directly involve the president?
>> he seems to be ignored by trump. and this is one of the huge problems that i think trump faces right now. he's drawn the opposite conclusion from the one he should have drawn from the first year and three months which is not that he needs a less empowered white house chief, he needs a more empowered white house chief to tell him what he does not want to hear. the vetting fiasco is a perfect example of that. but, in a larger sense, trump has failed to learn that there's a difference, for example, between campaigning and governing. we see it all the time. we saw it in that unhinged phone to "fox & friends". we saw it in that rally with schoolyard taunts. a good white house staff would walk into the oval office and say cut it out. this does you no good. you have to govern instead of campaigning. >> the added challenge of what you just described with trump whoever might try to deliver that message in whatever
capacity is the fact that trump is president. the fact that he ran a campaign with people sending that exact message to him saying you can't do this. you can't say that. you can't use your resources this way. you can't ignore that. he seemtd to break every rule in this supposed playbook of how to run for president. i imagine somebody like that sits there in the white house, what do these people know? >> that's the trap trump has fallen into. donald trump is hardly the first person to come in to the white house thinking he's the smartest person in the room. most presidents figure out they need somebody to tell them hard truths and figure out there's a difference between campaigning and governing. that's what the really good white house chiefs could do, the jim bakers, leon panettas and other. donald trump desperately needs
his own version of james baker iii to tell him what he doesn't want to hear. >> interesting to read your book. thank you for joining us. one more thing before we go. for weeks we've been watching a caravan of central american migrants making their way to the u.s. border. for 150 of those migrants, it's just the beginning. there's no telling how long it could take to process all of those applications. members of the caravan are fleeing violence and poverty in their home countries. president trump has repeatedly criticized the caravan and called it a disgrace at one point. at the white house he asked how many migrants at the border deserve asylum in the u.s. >> i won't get into percentages, but we're a nation of laws. we have to have borders. we don't have borders we don't have a country. i've been watching for weeks as the caravan came up. >> we'll keep an eye on what
happens at the border in the coming days. that will wrap things up for this hour. now ali velshi will pick things up right now. good afternoon. i'm ali velshi. president trump is posturing as he continues to make moves with regard to foreign policy. he was side-by-side with nigeria's president. this was the first from an african leader. the statement he made calling countries in africa s-holes. >> i'm not sure about, you know, the validity or whether that allegation against the president was true or not. so the best thing for me is to keep quiet. >> we didn't discuss it and you do have some countries that are in very bad shape and very t