Skip to main content

tv   MTP Daily  MSNBC  May 22, 2018 2:00pm-3:00pm PDT

2:00 pm
look at that rain. my thanks to jonathan, donny, john heilemann. that does it for our hour. i'm nicole wallace. "mtp daily" starts right now. hi, chuck. >> you feeling golden? are you readying for round four? >> you know, i'm not engaging. we shouldn't fight about sports. >> come on, it's the only thing that we can at least bring people together on. >> it's the only thing that america has left. >> warriors and celtics in the finals, warriors win in a sweep. >> ouch. >> prediction. >> i agree with you on a celtics sweep, but the celtics won't be there. good-bye! if it's tuesday, the constitutional crisis alarm bells are ringing, but is anybody listening? tonight, fatal distraction. are the president's systemic attacks on the justice department undermining the rule of law as we know it?
2:01 pm
>> if they had spies in my campaign, that would be a disgrace to this country. >> plus, the swamp thing. >> the swamp has never been more foul or more fetid than under this president. >> president trump has become the swamp. >> have democrats found a drain the swamp message too? and stacey versus stacey. how the ideological fight for the soul of the democratic party is playing out in tonight's gubernatorial primary in georgia. this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now. good evening. i'm chuck todd here in washington. welcomes to "mtp daily." we begin tonight with a politically motivated investigation, which is out to prove that bob mueller's investigation is politically motivated. so wrap your head around that for a moment. folks, right now the president
2:02 pm
and his allies in congress continue their campaign to distract from the russia investigation and they hope, discredit it. a group of house republicans today introduced legislation to appoint a special counsel to investigate essentially any number of the president's political enemies, from leaders in the justice department to hillary clinton. the republican chairman of the senate homeland security committee, ron johnson, is trying to dig up more dirt about the fbi's handling of the steele dossier. now, this all follows the president's recent move ordering the justice department to investigate parts of the russia investigation that, of course, is looking into him. the president has seized on reports that the fbi used an informant to make contact with members of his campaign, and he's hyping that revelation with what you might call trumpian levels of hyperbole. >> congress would like to see documents opened up. a lot of people are saying they had spies in my campaign. if they had spies many y ies in
2:03 pm
campaign, that would be a disgrace to this country. that would be one of the biggest insults that anybody's ever seen. that would be very illegal, aside from everything else. it would make every political event ever make look like small potatoes. >> we're scratching our head on the biggest insult comment. everything else sort of made sense there in trumperbole. but there was no evidence that this was trying to spy on the campaign. but there is evidence that this alleged informant was part of the justice department's effort to spy on what russia was doing to protect the trump campaign from being infiltrated by russians. now, the white house yesterday brokered an agreement through its chief of staff, john kelly, which would allow house republicans, but not democratic counterparts, mind you, to view highly classified information related to the russia investigation. that meeting is now planned for thursday. the president's deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein, has resisted those efforts so far. by the way, in case you're
2:04 pm
wondering what the president's view of him is. take a listen. >> do you have confidence in rod rosenstein? >> what's your next question, please? >> wow. make it a bit more obvious. folks, if this was happening in another country, what would we say? if a country's ruling party was being investigated for potential election corruption and responded by attacking that investigation, launched its open counter investigation into the justice department itself, called for the imprisonment of those in the minority party and pressured leaders in law enforcement to lock them up. if that were happening in any other country, we'd probably call it a constitutional crisis for said country. what do we call it here, other than tuesday? joining me now is bob bauer. he was white house counsel under president barack obama. mr. bauer, welcome to the show. >> thank you. >> the thunder that you hear above, we are in stormy times in washington, so let's use the metaphor to talk about today. if you are don mcgahn, white
2:05 pm
house counsel, and the president said what he said on sunday. doesn't matter whether you think he's doing the right thing or not, but he's put it out there, how would you handle that as white house counsel? >> the entire setup in the white house is meeting with the president and the department of justice and intelligence community was highly irregular. i don't know to what extent don was in a position of advising on this meeting, what role he had, but this meeting is a remarkable crossing of a line that i think is held through virtually every administration through richard nixon. >> but there's no law governing this, is there? >> there are norms. >> norms are no laws. >> no, that's correct. but at the same time, i would also say that within the larger context of whether the president is vulnerable to an obstruction charge, this is not helpful. it is not helpful that he collaborated with house republicans to try to out an intelligence source in an ongoing criminal investigation. and it is not helpful that he now has the white house directly involved in supervising,
2:06 pm
essentially, the conduct of a criminal investigation, by opening up investigative files and by putting republican congressional leaders in close proximity to information of a highly sensitive nature. >> they're not even pretending this is bipartisan. >> no. >> they're not inviting the counterparts in those committees. they have two chairman coming. i believe goudy and nunes. i don't believe the two counterparts have been invited. >> correct. i think that's a really important point. if there was an extraordinary situation here, and the president says, although with almost no evidence that we're aware of, that spies might have been planted in his campaign, you would think that he would explain the extraordinary measures, he would try to bring the democratic congressional leadership in on it, brief them on it, try to have them understand what he was trying to accomplish. there's no evidence of this. this is an in-your-face attempt to assert presidential authority over the department of justice. >> if the legislative branch collectively isn't going to take it on its own to sort of challenge the president's authority here and what he's
2:07 pm
doing at the justice department, what's your recourse? >> if the congress doesn't act? >> mm-hmm. >> well, i don't think there's much of any recourse, except we have to hope that the mueller investigation is protected, and that ultimately there's an accounting through the law enforcement process, but as you could tell, the president is getting closer and closer to trying to shut that down. >> so you're basically saying, because we were having this debate in our meeting today. i'm guessing the founders never intended for the legislative branch to step aside when it comes to some of these issues. that they would just sort of let the executive branch do these things without challenging it. i guess they department have a plan "b" for a situation like this, because what you're saying is, does this mean what the president is doing is constitutional, because the legislative branch isn't challenging it? >> well, the legislative branch could ultimately deal with this issue through an impeachment process. the founders thought they could do that and do that with respect to obstruction and other allegations. beyond that, if you didn't have the president in league with his
2:08 pm
own party in this effort, you would have very strong congressional oversight. we saw a glimmer of this when they passed the bill to essentially protect mueller from firing, to send a message to the president. >> when they did it through the committee. >> through the committee, when they came through the committee, you saw a glimmer of that and that light seems to have gone out. >> so this is now -- i guess i go back to, is what -- if the legislative branch doesn't challenge it, is what the president's doing constitutional or not? or is it just, we don't know. and there's no -- is there any way to get the judiciary branch to review this without having the legislative branch challenge it? >> no. i don't believe that there is. >> could a sole member of congress do it? >> no, a sole member of congress -- >> would not have the standing to do that. >> absolutely not. >> so this is a loophole. >> i think there's an expectation that the legislature will take this seriously. if necessary, it will put pressure on the executive branch. and failing that, if it comes to it, it would begin to initiate an impeachment inquiry. that's the view. >> i understand that, but right now, you have a legislative
2:09 pm
branch that does not seem to be troubled by any of this, or at least, as an institution, there are individual members troubled, but as an institution, they're not expressing that view. >> no, because i think they believe their political fortunes are currently bound up with protecting the president and that's what makes a midterm election so terribly important. if they come out of that feeling strengthened, they're going to continue to support the president in this course of conduct. >> all right. what advice would you have for the justice department thunder circumstance? if they're concerned that congress isn't protecting them, and instead is trying to undermine the investigation, what do you do if you're christopher wray and rod rosenstein? >> i think they stay the course, with as they've been doing. they try to address these demands from the president. do what they can to protect the mueller inquiry. i think that's in part what rosenstein did by taking that demand to the president and converting it into an iog and inspector general inquiry. and i think, frankly, it's a rough ride from here on in and they hold on for dear life. >> at what point do you think is resignation a weapon? >> that's an excellent question. not only resignation by them,
2:10 pm
but the question of whether there would be resignations within even the white house, if the president took this to extremes. we haven't seen it yet, but it could happen. >> bob bauer, former white house council for president obama, among other titles, thanks for coming on and sharing your views. let me turn now to capitol hill and a voice who's always willing to come on. i appreciate that, it's louisiana republican senator john kennedy. welcome back to the show. >> thanks, chuck. >> i want to get a to a number of items, but let me pick up where i just left off there. i heard your comments this morning. you said, look, the president can ask for any investigation he wants. it's up to the fbi whether they agree that an investigation is warranted. are you at all concerned, though, about the appearance of this meeting, that the president is convening a meeting, basically with people that are supporters of his, who are trying to micromanage, to be generous, the investigation into him? the appearance doesn't look very gad. >> well, you either trust rod
2:11 pm
rosenstein and chris wray or you don't. what i said on scarborough's show this morning, and i'll say it again, the president has the right to request an investigation. you have the right to request an investigation. i have the right. the people who ask the fbi to look into the activities and behavior of the shooter in parkland have the right. none of us have the right, including the president, to influence an investigation and try to tell the fbi and the justice department how the results should be of an investigation. i don't see any evidence that the president has done that. he didn't try to hide his meeting. i think rosenstein and wray were both there. if he does try to influence it, i will speak out against it. but he has the right to ask for an investigation.
2:12 pm
and i don't -- honestly, chris, i realize there are always two sides to every story -- or, chuck -- >> that's all right. >> but that's his prerogative. now, you may not like the way he does it, and you may not like the tweets that he uses, chuck, about it. but that's a separate issue from whether he has the right to say, okay, the fbi or the justice department or somebody sent an informant into my campaign and, hey, i would like to know what's going on. i would kind of like to know myself. >> do you think -- do you think that he would be taken more seriously by everybody if it was a bipartisan meeting? it seems odd to me to only invite your republican supporters from the house to view this evidence? >> well, i'm not a house republican. i'm a house senator, but i think that if the -- if house leadership is allowed to see certain documents, i think that it's perfectly appropriate.
2:13 pm
indeed, i would recommend it, that our democratic colleagues in the house be allowed to send representatives, as well. i think that's only fair. >> is there a point -- what is your breaking point on this, when it comes to how you've seen this get -- look, at the end of the day, it feels as if there's an attempt to politicize everything that we're talking about these days. at what point do you say, you know what, there's too many people mucking with this investigation. will somebody just let this investigation play itself out. he's robert mueller. this guy isn't, june, xavier. he has a track record that has high-level partisan credentials here. at what point enough people say, enough with these tactics, guys. you're making the president look guilty even if you don't think he is. >> i can only give you my point of view. i don't hate anybody. i know that's rare up here, but i really don't. i want to see the facts. and here's what we know, or here's what i think i know.
2:14 pm
russia tried to influence the 2016 elections. did they succeed? we don't know yet. so we have a member of the fbi, he's specially appointed, mueller, who is supposed to get the facts. we also have mr. horowitz, the inspector general at justice, looking into it as well. everything else is just spin and rumor and speculation and innuendo, on both sides, including the president. but he's got the right to his opinion, just like those who hate him have the right to their opinion. and i'm prepared to wait for the facts. i don't think mr. mueller ought to be fired. i don't think he's a bad guy. i have confidence in the inspector general. i just want the facts. and then, i'll let the american people decide. they're smart enough to figure this out. they're plenty smart. they will figure this out.
2:15 pm
but everything else, chuck, is just -- sometimes it's interesting to listen to. and i'm not saying anybody's wrong to do it. but it's all speculation. you know, the gentlemen that you just had on, i don't remember his name. he seemed to be very intelligent, but, you know, talking about this has provoked a constitutional crisis, i don't see it, you know? i just don't see it. >> fair enough. >> we don't have any facts yet. >> but i think your warning about let the investigators finish their investigation before we question their investigation. >> i wish they would -- >> i know that's a crazy idea. >> i do wish they would hurry up. i think all americans who are in good faith would like to see these investigations concluded sooner rather than later. they're important. but they do suck up a lot of oxygen. i mean, there are times up here on the hill that that's all folks want to talk about. that's okay, except there are other important issues, too. i'm not saying that the investigation is not important,
2:16 pm
but it is -- it does take up a lot of oxygen. >> look, i want to talk about a bill that you're actually co-sporcoh co-sponsoring with joe manchin. in some ways, it's about this larger issue of distrust and trust in our institution, as it is. it has to do with lobbyists. in some ways, that's part of a larger trust issue that we're dealing with. your bill would require lobbyists to disclose if they've been convicted of bribery, extortion, tax evasion and other crimes. why are you confident this will be constitutional? because the reason i say this, any american citizen can be a lobbyist. you know, registering it, there are certain rules about at some point why you have to register as one. but at what point are you, do you think that a -- that the supreme court might say, you know what, you're actually getting in the way of a citizen's right to lobby their government? >> well, you make an excellent point. we, all of us, as americans, have the right to petition our government. and professional, paid lobbyists have the right on behalf of a
2:17 pm
client to lobby the government, as well. what senator manchin's bill and my bill says is that if you're required to register under the lobbyist disclosure act, then one of the things you have to tell us is whether you've ever been convicted of a crime, like fraud or embezzkbeembezzlement kickbacks or bribes. we had a horrible situation a few years ago with a gentlemen by the name of jack abramoff who scammed a native american tribe in my state out of $31 million by saying that he needed the money to do some grassroots work. and i was surprised to find out that lobbyists, when they register, are not required to say if they've been convicted of these crimes. i mean -- >> do you think this will do anything? what do you think this will do? i mean, why not -- like, why not figure out a way to curtail how much money they're loallowed to
2:18 pm
donate or raise? >> if we've learned anything from the russia investigation, we've learned that you've got to be careful who you meet with. now, i like to know -- i tell my staff all the time, look, i know we're -- you know, we're all in a rush here, but i want to know who i'm meeting with. you you know, can i hook them up on wikipedia? pull their registration. i would like to know who they are. and that's all this bill says is. if you care to look, you'll be able to find out if somebody wants to talk to you professionally on behalf of a client has been convicted of bribing a congressman. i would like to know that. >> i think when you're convicted of bribing a congressman, it's pretty much public record. >> it's relevant. >> it's not irrelevant, that's for sure. i would assume they wouldn't be hired to lobby much after that, anyway. >> this is washington. anything around here can happen, chuck. >> now, that is a very true statement, sir.
2:19 pm
thank you very much. >> thanks, man. up ahead, much more on president trump, the russia investigation, and what's going on with korea and a chinese telecon company. is it all connected? meanwhile t, the democrats have a new pitch to midterm voters. will it have them end up running on russia? we'll be right back. ways to lthe northern belly fat. percussion massage. not cool. freezing away fat cells with coolsculpting? now that's cool.
2:20 pm
coolsculpting safely freezes and removes fat cells. with little or no downtime. and no surgery. results and patient experience may vary. some rare side effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. ask your doctor if coolsculpting is right for you. and visit today for your chance to win a free treatment. oh hi sweetie, i just want to show you something. xfinity mobile: find my phone. [ phone rings ]
2:21 pm
look at you. this tech stuff is easy. [ whirring sound ] you want a cookie? it's a drone! i know. find your phone easily with the xfinity voice remote. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around.
2:22 pm
at fidelity, our online u.s. equity trades are just $4.95. so no matter what you trade, or where you trade, you'll only pay $4.95. fidelity. open an account today. ♪ ♪ keep your most valuable insights hidden from your competitors. the ibm cloud. the cloud for smarter business. welcome back. let's get right to tonight's panel. daniel pletges, cornell belcher, and anne gearan, white house correspondent at "the washington post." by the way, a new cooperator in one of the probes, i won't say the mueller probe, because we don't quite know what the michael cohen aspect, how much of it is mueller and how much of it is the southern district of
2:23 pm
new york, but a significant business partner, according to the "new york times" of michael cohen, has quietly agreed to cooperate with the government as a potential witness. it is one of cohen's business partner in the taxi business. he will avoid jail time. anne gearan, i'll start with you. what did we learn today from what the president is doing and what did you make of the president's non-answer on rod rosenstein? zp >> i thought it was, you know, theatrical on his part, but it was very telling. that's a question he doesn't want to answer. and by not answering whether he has confidence in rod rosenstein, you have all the information you need, which is, you know, clearly, he is under the president is considering whether or not rod rosenstein is done and if he fires him, there
2:24 pm
are multiple implications for the mueller probe. and it will be on deck to place, presumably will be someone who will be less protective of bob mueller and the investigation he leads. >> mr. rosenstein has been showing his on level of confidence. here's a mash-up of two from a couple of weeks ago, and one from this week. take a look. >> there have been people who have been making threats, privately and publicly, against me, and for quite some time, and i think they should understand by now, the department of justice is not going to be extorted. >> deputy attorney general is very low profile. not to be recognized. >> yeah, cornell, one thing i will say is, i've -- if i were the president, i would not like rosenstein's confidence. that's a man that doesn't seem to be bothered by the attacks coming from the president. >> he seems like, you know, law enforcement guy who understands that there is separation and he doesn't, in fact, work for the
2:25 pm
president. he works for the american people and no one is above the law. when you see what the president has been doing, how he's going after law enforcement and how he's behaving in a way that whether you're a democrat or a republican, you should be a little bit weary, because it seems like a gun bolt sort of, you know, thing we see from dictators, right? we're at a really sort of touch and go time. and a lot of people, i think, are uncomfortable with the way we're bending norms. no president should go after the department of justice and fbi the way he's going after them. i think he's going after them to discredit them because he knows what's coming. >> danny, i find myself straddling between we in the media can seem too alarmist and sometimes we underplay. this is one of those where i feel like, we're not -- the way this has gone about, the president has gone about this in a very dangerous way. not inviting democrats, it's making it look even more partisan. >> i think to look at things from donald trump's point of view, for one second, not that i can do that with any ease, i
2:26 pm
think what he sees is an investigation that started out about russian collusion and is now, you know, digging through his lawyer's files and levering his lawyer's relationship with some taxi guy, who may or may not be, you know, a russian -- you know, affiliated in any way with russia, other than his name is russian. and so, you know, if you look at it from that perspective, you know, it's not surprising that trump feels persecuted and trump wonders if this is all about getting him politically. and while i agree with cornell, you know, obviously, we're stepping on to very dangerous territory. at the same time, we need to understand that there is an element of this that feels like, what's going to be next? >> you know, it's funny, the big times, now it's ap, "wall street journal," times have all got a version of what was clearly another group of folks wanting to have some relationship with the trump campaign, donald trump jr., this is having to do with this businessman, george
2:27 pm
narratnater, a potential proxy, you throw in the iran deal. some people look at that, is that in part of this that it turns out we were looking this way and it turns out you've got to widen the scope here, or some trump supporters, as the president tweeted over the weekend, you they're looking for other countries. >> probably more the former, rig right? >> i get how people think this looks like part of a larger issue. >> however, if you take a step back yourself and think about it, it will only make sense that russia wouldn't be the only country that might come knocking on the door of the trump enterprise, right? this was a businessman running for president, who ran businesses all around the world. >> had a reputation of being a transactional guy. >> and had friends that did the same, right? >> one person's transaction is another person's breaking the law in this country. >> it's called pay-to-play, right? and it's old as politics in this country, in that other countries
2:28 pm
saw an opportunity to influence it this way, is part of the problem, right? and part of the smell of corruption. i want to get back to one thing about this. this is not smoke and mirrors, right? you have had how many people, five people pled guilty. >> 14 indictments. >> 14 indictments. that's not smoke and mirrors. when you have 19 people around the president who have have been indicted and pled guilty, that's not smoke and mirrors. that's real. that's krucorruption, it is. >> okay, fair enough, but hang on a second. we were just talking about campaign finance and these issues. and you're exactly right. donald trump has spent the last god knows how many decades going business. i know a guy who knows a guy. this is what the problem was with the clinton foundation. when you open the door to this, then everybody will crawl in. and it won't just be the russians. it will be the chinese, it will be the saudis, it will be the emirates. >> the irony is, i didn't bring up, that was the fear of the clinton foundation, and -- times
2:29 pm
ten. >> that was the fact of the clinton foundation. >> here's a problem. bill clinton wasn't president during then. was she president? no, she wasn't president. she was. >> i think we're talking about the trump campaign. >> for you to say that what happened with the clinton foundation is the same as what's happening with -- >> i didn't say it was the same. don't be unfair. >> but cornell, you're actually getting -- we're getting at the heart of -- and i hear this from trump supporters. and we're going to go over it this a little bit. they do believe the clintons were just as corrupt as trump. they will sit there and say, we know trump is corrupt, but he's no less corrupt than what they were doing on the other side. what i'm saying is, that is part of why -- >> by the way, let me say that i am not saying that. >> i know you're not. and i wasn't putting words -- >> but all i'm saying is that particularly for people who thought donald trump wasn't going to win, this was just a way to buy themselves into the good graces. and the trump people have no m damned idea what was legal and
2:30 pm
what wasn't and didn't really care. >> we pay a large price for money in our campaign and our politics. >> we agree about that. >> all right. i'll pause it there. that was a very healthy discussion. seriously, danielle, cornell, anne, stick around. anne, i'm sorry that you chose to -- i get it. we'll be right back. a bachelor. and that's how he intended to keep it. then he met the love of his life. who came with a three foot, two inch bonus. for this new stepdad, it's promising to care for his daughter as if she's his own. every way we look out for those we love is an act of mutuality. we can help with the financial ones. learn more or find an advisor at we can help with the financial ones. fthere's flonase sensimist.f up around pets. 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.
2:31 pm
you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. i'm trying to manage my a1c, then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor.
2:32 pm
she told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin
2:33 pm
may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®. welcome back. what do democrats stand for? and what are they going to stand for in tlhis election? it's a question democrats have
2:34 pm
been asking themselves as they try to take back the house and senate. should they run on economic fairness when the economy is doing well? should they run on russia this year? or run on draining the swamp that president trump promised to drain? congressional democrats have rolled out a new campaign platform. it's called "a better deal for our democracy." and here's how they're pitching themselves to voters. >> instead of delivering on his promise to drain the swamp, president trump has become the swamp. >> moichael cohen's pay-to-play scheme is a stark reminder of the glaring need to take real action. not just rhetoric, but action with actual teeth to bring accountability and transparency to washington. >> we're going to be right back with the democrat who helped craft this strategy and got leadership to start selling it. ♪ this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams
2:35 pm
they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ miracle-gro guarantees results >> vo: these neighbors are starting right. with rich potting mix and essential plant food for three times the blooms. success is sweet. miracle-gro. three times the beauty. one powerful guarantee. hello. give me an hour in tanning room 3. cheers! that's confident. but it's not kayak confident. kayak searches hundreds of travel sites to help me plan the best trip. so i'm more than confident. forgot me goggles. kayak. search one and done. the emotions that shouldn't drive us apart. but when you experience sudden, frequent, uncontrollable episodes of laughing or crying that are exaggerated
2:36 pm
or simply don't match how you feel, it can often lead to feeling misunderstood this is called pseudobulbar affect, or pba. a condition that can occur from brain injury... or certain neurologic conditions like stroke or dementia. nuedexta can make a difference by significantly... ...reducing pseudobulbar affect episodes. tell your doctor about medicines you take. some can't be taken with nuedexta. nuedexta is not for people with certain heart conditions. serious side effects may occur. don't take with maois or if you are allergic to dextromethorphan or quinidine. tell your doctor if you have bleeding or bruising. stop if muscle twitching... ...confusion, fever, or shivering occurs with antidepressants. side effects may... ...include diarrhea, dizziness, cough, vomiting, weakness or ankle swelling. ask your doctor about the only... ...fda approved treatment proven to reduce pba episodes. nuedexta. john chiang's father came it'here with little money,on. but big dreams for a better future. now john has a chance to make history.
2:37 pm
a champion of the underdog, john took on wells fargo when it ripped off working families. and against the odds, he helped saved california from financial disaster during the great recession. ...leaving more to invest in progressive priorities like education, healthcare and affordable housing. john chiang. the proven, progressive leader we need for california's future. and joining me now to
2:38 pm
discuss midterm messaging for the democrats is congressman john sarbanes. congressman sarbanes, thanks for -- thanks for coming on here. i want to start with -- >> thanks for having me. >> i want to start wi, you and have discussed this in the past, i want to start with, what you saw presented this week, you had something in february put out, the democracy reform task force, you called the swamp monster, 400 days, 400 ways the trump administration is flooding the swamp in washington. explain why you believe this is better to run on than, say, running on saving obamacare or running on economic fairness. why do you believe a democratic -- democracy reform message is best? >> well, i don't know that it's better. i think it compliments and reinforces those other messages. when we go out and talk to the public about a better deal on the economy, making sure their wages are going up and jobs are there for the future and so
2:39 pm
forth, what we've been encounter sth ing is that, a lot of them say, well, we support all of those things, but we don't think we get it done because washington has been taken hostage by big money and special interests and they're going to block progress on all of those things. what we realized is that we have to have an accompanying message around reform. rather than an economic message, we have to present a reform agenda. and then people say, now you're talking about. let's go to work on this. and we think it will be very resonant across the country in this midterm election. >> there's part of my brain that agrees to you that there could be some resonance there, but another part of my brain says this, democrats run on the culture of corruption in '06. republicans ran on draining the swamp in '16. republicans ran on a reform message themselves in '10. they've heard this from both parties multiple times in the last decade. and they might just look up and say, you know what, you guys talk the talk, but you never walk the walk anyway.
2:40 pm
why should i trust you this time? >> well, we have to prove it to them. people are rightly very cynical and they're also skeptical. so you're absolutely right. you look at this and they're like, okay, maybe we've heard this before. so it's up to us to get out there and show them we have a real program. this can't just be talking po t points. it's got to be more than a message, it's got to be a plan. and we've actually put something together. the better deal for our democracy is an agenda that cuts across three very important areas. voter empowerment and protecting access to the ballot box. ethics and accountability, cleaning up washington and the culture of corruption. and then fighting the big money influence in special interests here in washington. but i agree, the public is right to be skeptical. we're determined to prove to them that we've got a strong program on this. and as we roll this out over the next six months, i think people are going to recognize that we really do want to do something different. we want to really drain the swamp. we really do want to clean things up and they ought to give
2:41 pm
us the gavel back so we can try to do that. >> what do you say to those democrats who may be running for congress this year and say, this is a great idea, but i'm going to add, an, oh, by the way, i'll impeach him if i get collected. what about those who want to run on impeachment? i know many in the party don't. and i'm guessing you're probably one of them. but some will look at this and say, great, go all the way. >> well, look, i think, you don't even have to get into that topic. all you have to do is offer a positive set of reforms to clean up the institutions. we may have no choice. when mueller comes back with his report or other revelations occur, congress may have no choice but to go down that path. but i would rather set the table for americans to go to the polls and register their views of this administration in 2020, and let them know then that they want to get rid of this culture of corruption. but it's broader than that. this is a long-standing problem in washington that money has had too much influence. people know that.
2:42 pm
they feel it in their gut. and we've got to have a broad program that addresses this systemic issue here, so that the voices of everyday americans can actually be heard on capitol hill. >> you know, yesterday was nancy pelosi and chuck schumer that were the front people to push this. they are known as the two best fund-raisers in the party, respectively. are they the best faces for a reform message? two people who have been in congress since the '80s, i believe, both of them have been raising big money from big interests, from both coasts for years. are they the right spokespeople? >> as long as we're candid with the american people, i don't think they're going to have a problem with the fact that there are certain rules to the game right now. and everybody has to play by those rules. but if we create new systems, new ways of supporting campaigns, of empowering candidacies and so forth, then we can move in that direction and away from the independence that this whole system has on big money. look, nancy pelosi, chuck schumer, anybody here can tell
2:43 pm
you that when you're in politics for more than five minutes, you get tangled up in the money and the power and the influence. that's the problem. the question is, what are we going to do about it? and i think the difference between us and the other side is, we actually really want to change this and get to a new system that respects the voice of the american voter. >> congressman john sar baibaneb wif g -- i've got to leave it there. thanks for coming on and sharing your views. before we go to break, we want to acknowledge the passing of an american icon. richard goodwin died sunday. he was an adviser and speechwriter to presidents johnson and kennedy, he wrote many historic presidential speeches, including lgj's address on the great society. and also, by the way, al gore's concession speech back in 2000. mr. goodwin also wrote speeches for eugene mccarthy, bobby kennedy, in particular. and a particular note to us, richard goodwin was married to our friend and colleague, historian dorris carnkearns goo, a longtime contributor to "meet
2:44 pm
the press." condolences to doris and their entire family. he was 86. we'll wrb. frank knowns northern soul, but how to set up a limited liability company... what's that mean? not so much. so he turned to his friends at legalzoom. yup! they hooked me up. we helped with his llc, contracts, and some other stuff that's part of running a business. so frank can focus on the beat. you hear that? this is frank's record shop. and this is where life meets legal.
2:45 pm
i had a very minor fender bender tonight! in an unreasonably narrow fast food drive thru lane. but what a powerful life lesson. and don't worry i have everything handled. i already spoke to our allstate agent, and i know that we have accident forgiveness. which is so smart on your guy's part. like fact that they'll just... forgive you... four weeks without the car. okay, yup. good night. with accident forgiveness your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it. welcome back today. in meet the midterms, if it's tuesday, somebody's voting somewhere and here's where they're voting tonight. women are the headliners in at least six primaries across the country. and a woman is guaranteed to win in races like georgia's primary
2:46 pm
for governor. it's a matter of which stacey wins. we'll also be watching the vote totals in georgia just to see how long the supposed democratic turnout might be there come this fall. in texas, there's a progressive, laura mozer, who's trying to defeat the democratic candidate's lizzy fletcher. a win by mozer would be another loss for the democratic accomplishment after a liberal candidate pulled an upset in a competitive nebraska house district last week, that got handcappers to move that race back to the republicans. then there's a democratic primary in connecticut that's gotten ugly after mayor jim grey aired an ad about how amy mcgrath only recently moved to the district after moving abroad. a john mccain might have been successful with that. you've got to be careful with military veterans if you're going to allege that. we'll be watching thaez ra iniis and more. introducing the world's first self-winding string trimmer. the new ego string trimmer
2:47 pm
with powerload™ technology. feed the line. push the button. and get back to work. with an industry first, carbon-fiber shaft... lawn care has never been this easy... ...or this powerful. the new ego power+ string trimmer with powerload™ technology. exclusively at the home depot and ego authorized dealers.
2:48 pm
2:49 pm
there's a very substantial chance that it won't work out. and that's okay. that doesn't mean it won't work out over a period of time. but it may not work out for june 12th. but there's a good chance that we'll have the meeting. >> time for "the lid." that was president trump throwing both cold water and then hot water on next month's schedule in north korea. the panel is back. danny, good day or bad day that the president admitted that the summit might not happen? >> today it's a good day. you can't have ever want something more than your interlock interlock interlocketteer. the north koreans have been someplacing with us. the president said, okay, i'll give on that one. but when they kept pushing back, saying, no, no, we're not going to disarm, that's not what we meant when we said disarmament,
2:50 pm
that was bold and it was the right choice that he made there. >> news flash to the trump administration that republican and democrat presidents have been struggling, it's, they say one thing, do the other, right? >> just because your name name trump doesn't mean things have changed. you can be loud and boisterous, it doesn't mean things will change here. >> how much of this is china? >> that china is -- >> china has put. >> china has been quite elly telling the u.s., going through the channels to the white house to say, be careful. t the north koreans may not be ready to do all the things that trump has been saying -- >> meaning don't over-promise? >> don't get overly invested, and also don't put us in the middle. more importantly from china's
2:51 pm
perspective. what does trump want out of summit and out of trade deal. >> danny, that is that bon intertwined. >> we have all these things that are separate in donald trump's mind, the notion of fixing the deficit, the notion of north korea, and he sees them all in different compartment. >> not the chinese. >> well, not everybody. for example, what the europeans want. they want to give us on steel and aluminum so they can be more helpful on iran. they can't -- he just doesn't see it. it's time he saw it. >> or a pollster, i have to ask you -- i got to ask, what is your messaging? i take it you're not a big fan of this, about you how would you run this year? what's your recommendation for democrats? >> i think there's a wave of women running and a lot of
2:52 pm
candidates that don't look like conventional candidates. i think there's an outsider and change element that's really strong. when you look at the suburban, better educated women breaking away from republicans, they breaking away for a reason. it has to do with values, and -- >> so why wouldn't they about a good message? >> i think too much of it is controlled by washington, and most of it needs to be controlled by washington by a lot of these women running for the first time, because they're ticked off by what's going on. >> well, i can't give democrats advice on how to run, but cornel, i think you're on to something in terms of the energy around -- you went through a list there in today's primaries, and you see it. there's a progressive keats have either already put establishment democratic candidates on the
2:53 pm
back foot, or are poised to do so. it's a tension that we saw throughout 2016, obviously. and what it taught or didn't teach. they are still learning the lessons. >> honestly they look like republicans in this sense. they don't know what to do with all this energy. >> what cornel said, he's right. nancy pelosi is like a gift to the republican party every time she stands up and speaks. >> the establishment should get out of the way. >> yeah. i don't get that. >> but what do i know? >> well, more importantly, what do i know?
2:54 pm
>> and what do you make of -- it does seem as if republicans are starting to actually feel as if they can survive this. it hasn't changed that much, but they now feel like they know how to survive this. not as high or as long lasting as it looked a little earlier. we have a good bit of testing ground to go here yet. >> i'll tell you this. i am intrigued by the number of sitting congress members who can't win primaries, whether you're on the left or the right. thanks, guys, great panel. appreciate it. up ahead, the art of the trump tweet. picking the right style takes time.
2:55 pm
one picky customer shouldn't take all your time.
2:56 pm
need something printed? the business advisors at office depot can assist with exactly what your business needs to grow. get your coupon for 20% off services, technology and more at office depot and technology and more the first survivor of ais out there.sease and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. visit to join the fight. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems,
2:57 pm
serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. sure. mom,what's up son?alk?
2:58 pm
i can't be your it guy anymore. what? you guys have xfinity. you can do this. what's a good wifi password, mom? you still have to visit us. i will. no. make that the password: "you_stillóhave_toóvisit_us." that's a good one. [ chuckles ] download the xfinity my account app and set a password you can easily remember. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around. well, in case you missed it you can't debate whether he per effected the art of the deal, but you can't argue he's mastered of art of the twitter typo, and we're learning some may be intentional appeared may not be the president's at all "the boston globe" vasive unit reports trump staffers try to mimic his style, and that's why
2:59 pm
i'm glad of a copy of "the elements of trump style." move our, mr. strunk. number one, please make sure that some words begin with capital letters. it doesn't matter whether mere nounce or verbs. numb number too. some words and ideas must be wring in all caps. there could be a number of misspellings and typoos. tip c apostrophes are optional. it's not important. same with homonyms. and trip number trump don't use exclamation points, you may even insert a semicolon or two, just for giggles. follow these guidelines, and you my friend, can truly be the tweet master general. anything sells in #sad.
3:00 pm
we'll be back tomorrow, ari, he's always grammatically correct. >> if there's going to be a fake tweet it would have the right kind of grammar issues. >> fair enough. >> we have breaking news and michael after nat avenatti. one of michael cohen's closest partner, yvgeni is known as the taxi king. the breaking news is he is officially cooperating with authorities as a potential witness. this came even after he was banned by new york city regulators last year, he continued to do this kind of work. it's been confirmed by the attorney general's office, friedman pleading guilty to a count of


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on