jong-un andereder erdogan. -- [ overlapping speakers ] all right that does it for our hour. i'm nicolle wallace. my thanks to the panel. "mtp daily" starts right now with steve kornacki in for chuck. >> if it's monday, the president is fanning the flames of multiple firestorms. >> tonight, has zero tolerance led to zero civility. >> the calls for harassment and push for any trump supporter to avoid the public is unacceptable. >> reporter: the latest salvo over a border battle that turned down right vicious. plus, inside the tent city. nbc news gets a look inside a texas detention center for migrant children. and you got served? a restaurant gets hundreds of calls for refusing to serve
sarah huckabee sanders. >> some people refused to accept the fact that we are not affiliated. they just are not stopping. >> except it wasn't that restaurant. oops. this is "mtp daily," and it starts right now. ♪ good evening. i'm steve kornacki in for chuck todd. welcome to "mtp daily." a debate about the president's border policies has taken some unexpect and nast 'turns. the president is pouring fuel on a fair of fires involving the story right now. we are not sure what is going to happen next. first, there is his response to the fire burning over his treatment over immigrant families. the president pouring fuel on that fire by seemingly calling for the end of due process at the border. and there is his response to a democratic congresswoman who was
lived over his border policy. she urged her supporters to confront white house officials in public. in response the president seemed to suggest that his supporters might react by physically harming her. after a virginia restaurant refused to serve the white house press secretary in part of the white house's immigration policies. and after kirstjen nielsen was heckled at a mexican restaurant maxine waters said this. >> if you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out you and create a crowd. and you push back on them. and you tell them they are not welcome anymore anywhere. >> and here's how the president react to that today on twitter. congresswoman maxine waters an extraordinarily low iq person has become to the with nancy
pelosi the face of the democrat party. she called for harm to supporters of which there are many of the make america great again movement. be careful what you wish for max. crisis about the president's border policies now turning into a discussion about confronting maybe even harming your political opponents. ltsds' be clear. the crisis involving the president's border policy remains. and as his administration scrambles to undo the damage that was done from that zero tolerance policy, he took to twitter and wrote this, we cannot allow all of these people to invade our country. when somebody comes in we must immediately with no judges or court cases bring them back from where they came that would seemingly potentially, some argue, violate the fifth amendment's due process clause which the supreme court has ruled applies to everyone in the u.s. whether you are here legally or illegally. we should note there are mechanisms to expedite the removal of illegal immigrants without a court hearing which the white house noted today but there has been some debate about
the constitutionality of those policies, too. we are not just dealing with a multifaceted crisis. voing immigration because of the president, we have been saddled with political discourse. joining me, gabe debenedetti. and zerlina maxwell, former adviser to hillary clinton and an msnbc political analyst. thanks to everybody for being here. i want to just start -- we have got a republican, and we have got a democrat here. let me ask you -- >> we get along. we do get along. we are very civil. >>lets' try to keep it up for this panel, then. hopefully we can set some kind of an example here. susan, let me ask you, in terms of the president's response to that video of maxine waters. because that video started making the rouns rounds about 24 hours ago. it's been four or five hours since the president tweeted that. what do you make of the president's response? is that a fair thing for him to do? >> i'm choosing this word very
carefully. it's deplorable. it's absolutely wrong. that's not to say what maxine waters said was any better. it was equally deplorabldeplora. we should not be called out because of our politics at a restaurant or a gas station. there should be no mention of violence. it is unacceptable for both sides. >> what would you like the president to do then? would you like him to say something? what is the megsage he should send, if maxine waters says that and you don't like it what should it be? >> here's the problem. the president has no credibility. even if he said the right thing everyone would be left scratching their head and he wouldn't be able to hold on to it very long. in the best possible circumstance he should move on, talk about i don't know the economy, the things that republicans want to talk about so they can win in the fall and keep the house. >> you are saying say nothing. >> in a perfect world. i don't know if he can do that. >> zerlina, from a democratic's perspective, hearing maxine
waters say that. -- i think also what caught people watching that was the reaction of the crowd. the crowd was into this. >> a major place for a democratic office holder to be? >> i think maxine waters is a leader in the resistance movement. what you heard her is not being violent towards trump supporters is not confront vie listenly trump supporters. she is saying they should not be insulated from the social consequences of their policies f. there are babies in cages over here are you still going to go able to go out in polite saet society and have din tower the democratic citizens of your country not being able to tell you -- we pay you -- we are not able to tell you. >> [ overlapping speakers ] >> let me just ask this. she says this, she says get out and surround them. that sound like the kind of rhetoric that could -- i understand there is not a literal call to violence here but when you talk about finding
people, getting -- isn't there a potential that there is a slippery slope, the situations can get out of hand. >> no, i don't think there is a slippery slope. donald trump is literally telling his supporters he will pay their bail if they beat up a hillary supporter during the campaign. i didn't see as much outrage over that as maxine waters. i think what she is saying we are reading too far into it to essentially say that she is saying the same thing donald trump is saying, and that is not true. >> would you want her to visit a swing state? >> that's not -- >> she is a congresswoman from california. maybe that wouldn't be effective. >> let's stay on this for a moment. gabe. >> there is a clear situation here where donald trump has set the way that we are talking about this and that the nation is talking about this. the reality is that we are setting this up as if maxine waters and donald trump are on a level playing field. donald trump has a biggest bully
pulpit we have ever seen. maxine waters is a member of congress. she has been supported because of the way she talks about him. but to say she is suddenly going to get democrats all over the country to suddenly be violent to administration members is divorced from early. we are look at a president who has tried to more or less say i will excuse you if you are violent towards protesters in the crowd. there is a pattern here. >> if it's unacceptable for president to do that. >> sure. >> if it's different when the president does that just in terms of stature, that's the highest office in our country, in terms of platform, in terms of reach. we can stipulate it's different on all of those levels of even if we stipulate that, is there a responsibility on the other side for what kind of response comes from that? >> what would an appropriate response look like? how polite do we have to be to people how are putting babies in
cages? >> i would say we don't have to be polite to those folks. polite discourse is not appropriate when people are putting babies in aij cages. it is an inflection point for this country. there are babies in jail right now in the united states. if we look back in the history books and we were all politely discussing whether or not that was appropriate, i think shame is on us. >> i guess it was a completely different political climate back in 2014 when barack obama and we made the family separation policy. >> you had democrats calling them -- no, no no, there were no babies in cages. >> children were being detained in facilities back then. >> correct. correct. >> there was a ability at that time it seems to navigate that issue politically -- i understand there is a lot of differences. >> i think that's a little bit of revisionist history only because as somebody who is in progressive movement and in the progressive base i saw people from the left critiquing the president in very virulent
terms. i toured the border in 2015 and some of the things i saw still keep me up today. the reason why is i can't believe that's happening in this country. these policies that this administration is putting forth are intentionally cruel. they are racist. it is our job as citizens to speak out against that. now, does that mean that we are going to be violent in no. does that mean that sarah huckabee sanders can have a nice katy dinner with her family when she is taking our tax dollars to implement this policy? i don't think so. >> what's your reaction to this, susan. >> zerlina you are being provocative with the language you are using. i understand that. that's civil of you. >> what did i say that's provocative. >> it's more about the immigration issue and babies are not in cages. >> based on jacob soboroff's reporting on the channel we are sitting on right now.
>> this wasn't one issue or one policy. this was a personal attack by a congresswoman against an administration member. this should not happen. now, i agree, president trump has set an awful example. but we are not going to be better as a nation going forward if we keep slipping back and using him as the standard in what we should use to fight against him. as a republican who does not stand with donald trump i would not go down to his level to use that language because that's bringing me down. i think we need come up as a country together, and i understand there are elections and things to do. but what congresswoman maxine waters did was intentionally to stir the pot. they have a history. what is worse is what donald trump did in his response. but it doesn't make any one good. it just makes them both bad. >> it strikes me, gabe, looking at the reaction of donald trump the fact that he decided today to stir this up -- he decided to go out there and sweet about sarah huckabee sanders. ier. he decides to come back and talk about maxine waters. i think we have marcia blackburn a republican candidate for
senate down in tennessee trying to raise money off of this. it does seem this is the reaction, the kind of rhetoric that the trump side is hoping to generate. >> if if you had woken me up this morning and said maxine waters is going to say this, what do you think the president -- what do you think congressional republicans are going to do? some of them who are running for things, this is easy, fill in the blanks politics for him. he likes outrage flits to get miss base fired up behind him. marcia blackburn is someone who needs his base behind her in tennessee as she is running for senate. it's easy these politics of division and politics of outrage to inflame the people that are behind donald trump and basically saying the democrats are against you, they are trying to be obstructionist. there is a reason. if you look at the ads that donald trump's team has put together for his re-election. er this digital right now. maxine waters is in every one. to him, she signals a strident democrat who is boogie man at this point. that's where we are.
>> from a strategic standpoint we have been looking at trump's support among republicans. it's down to 41 pz % in gallop. but he is doing with his own party than any president with his own party at this point. one of the reasons it's the react of the opposition, the resistance, the maxine waters clip that is causing republicans to bind themselves to trump at a level that we haven't seen in the past. is that -- politically is that a concern at all? ultimately, you are a democrat, you have got to win elections, got to beat them. does that concern you at all? >> sure, we should register people that are going to vote for democrats. the 40% of people you are talking about are never going to vote for a democratic or support maxine waters. her being a black woman is not irrelevant to this conversation. he is attacking black women
frequently in his tweets and in his rhetoric. so that's again why attacking her resonates with the base as a separate conversation. i think as a democrat it's really about organizing and mobilizing our base to go out and vote. our base is actually very energized. that's why there is 42 seats in special elections that have been flipped as you know. i think as a democrat our job is to speak truth to power. and in this particular moment, we are at an inflection point in this country. it is not just a regular political conversation. we are talking about human rights violations on the border. and not to say that barack obama didn't have trouble in terms of his immigration policy. the defendant was calling him the deporter in chief. that largely did fit with the amount of people that he was deporting and the people he was separating from their family members and literally putting up a wall in between a wife and a husband for example, like folks i met when i traveled around the border. so i think that we need to in
this moment speak truth to power and stop being so shy and scared of speaking the truth accurately. there are babies in kanls. jacob soboroff said he saw that. >> the record you just put out there for the obama administration, the cry tech you put out there, you are saying what you are seeing with the trump administration deserves social ostracism. should there have been social ott tre simple for the obama folks? >> there was social criticism. >> but social ostracism. >> for example. there was plenty of moments where an obama administration official would come to an event to speak and the even should be shut down by protesters protesting immigration policy. that happened. i don't know why it happened in restaurants. i don't know why administration officials seem to have a taste for mexican food in this situation when you are
incarcerating brown people at the border but i would say there were social consequences for the obama administration officials. it manifested in a slightly different way. they were told to be quiet or they were critiqued in public settings like conferences or during interviews. >> you didn't have twitter. you didn't are the importance of the media as it is today. why? because we know that the president watches a lot of television. i think the environment was also different. >> completely, yeah. >> under president obama as far as it having that effect. i'm not sure it couldn't have happened under the similar circumstances. >> the external, the environment around the issue obviously was -- >> there is a different dynamic. there wasn't a resistance to president obama in the same way. although the tea party absolutely did call out obama administration officials. >> much more ahead. the tent city, nbc news going inside a detention center for immigrant children. some law make remembers being denied access to others. we are live at the border. that is next. or is it?
this farmer's morning starts in outer space. where satellites feed infrared images of his land into a system built with ai. he uses watson to analyze his data with millions of weather forecasts from the cloud, and iot sensors down here, for precise monitoring of irrigation. it's a smart way to help increase yields, all before the rest of us get out of bed. red lobster's lobster & shrimp hesummerfest is back! with lobster and shrimp together in so many new ways. like new cedar plank seafood bake, roasted to perfection. or new caribbean lobster and shrimp. but hurry in. this event ends july 8th.
on any one of thousands of risky sites, so you'll be in the know. ewww! being in the know is very good. don't shake! ahhh! sign up online for free. discover social security alerts. we see what they want to us see. we don't know where the girls are. we have never seen any of the babies, the young kids. we have seen the boys in one facility. it's outrageous red flags go up everywhere that they are tried to hide something or something is happening here that they don't want the public to know. that to me is of more concern than anything i have seen so far. >> that was nevada senator catherine cortez mastro after she was denied entry to a brownsville detention facility. she notified them ahead of time she was coming for a tour. instead she said she was blocked and handed pr literature from an employee. transparent and access to
holding centers has been slow coming or non-existent. cal perry got a first look today at a facility. tell us what you saw. >> it wasn't shocking the conditions, which should be expected here in america. let's be clear about that. what we did see was fairly militaryized. it was equivalent to like a forward operating base you would see in american personnel putting out around the country. there were 22 tents. two tents for girls, 20 for boys. 20ities dmids each tent. they were walking around single file as their group coordinates theirent the. there was some astro turf out where kids could play football. we were not allowed to interact with the kids. hhs put that limitation on us when we were told we could visit. the information officer who runs the catch was vocal about how
bad he thought the administration policy was. this is man who is in charge of running the camp. specifically about the access. he thought it wasn't going well because it was happening really in secret or at least it appeared to the media to be happening in secret. his question what is going to happen to the 362 kids behind me. how will they be reunited from their family. 23 were separated from their family. they are working on getting them back. hhs claims they know where each of the kids are that need to be reunited with their families. we will wait to see how this plays out. if these kids are moved onto military facilities they are going to see tents labelled alpha d one through whatever. it's going to be sort of a military state. >> you say there is 23 right now
who you say have been separated. and you are being told that the government knows where the parents are? is there any contact between the parents. i know they are not physically in the same place. can they contact them. >> they are allowed two calls per week, ten minutes in length. someone is listening to make sure that the child is on the phone with the correct person. they are allowed to make two phone calls a week. the 23 kids are between the ages of and 17. we asked about babies or toddlers. they said everyone is given an a 1 number. that number corresponds to a file that has that information. and the child traveled with the file. we pushed. we said we are hearing from moms along the border who say they don't know where their kids are. the 1-800 number is a bit of a
joke. it only opens at 8:00 a.m. on mondays. the hhs spokesperson said we can't account for those reports. he said we know where each of those kids. >> is there a sense of where the policy is going from here, the folks running this facility where you are? what their expectation? do they think they are going to be getting more to deal with? do they think it's going to be handled differently going forward? >> this particular facility is going the see more kids the more that we move the tender age kids around the state of texas and these other border states. that's when it fills up. this facility opened 11 days ago on a government contract. that contract expires on july 13ths. the manager says he hopes to be brecken down, doesn't want to do this anymore. but if that contract is extended that's your sign that ts is going to go on. >> cal perry thank you. ahead the president says the gop should wait to take on immigration. but house republicans still
trying to push through a new proposal anyway. does it have any chance of passing? you're headed down the highway when the guy in front slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. how mature of them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.
each unique piece comes to life in the same way...ands. a messy, sloppy, splattery way. but now she's found a way to keep her receipts tidy, even when nothing else is. brand vo: snap and sort your expenses with quickbooks and find, on average, $4,340 in tax savings. smarter business tools for the world's hardest workers. quickbooks. backing you.
wmust have cost a lot. a fancy hotel. actually, i got a great deal. priceline saves you up to 60% on hotels, but that's something the hotels don't really want other guests to know. i saved about 120 dollars a night! did you say you saved 120 dollars a night on a room? 120 a night on a hotel room... that's a lot of savings! i saved even more on my flight. save up to 60% on hotels with priceline.
are keeping an eye on tomorrow. of course south carolina is probably the first, because the president on the by going down there he is putting his political prestige with his own party on the line a little bit here. if his candidate doesn't get across the finish line it will be embarrassing for the president. henry mcmaster took over as governor when knick audio hayley left to be the u.n. ambassador. mcmaster one of the first u.s. politicians to endorse trump in 2016. he was eight points under 50. so he has a competitor in the runoff tomorrow. donald trump coming down for mcmaster. warren running as the outsider. mcmaster is the favorite here. if he wins, trump there try to take practice. we seen surprise inside republican primaries. 42% may not be that impressive in the preliminary.
this is one to keep an eye on. donald trump going out on a bit of a limb here. we will see what happens. a couple of other races we are keeping an eye on tomorrow night. how about this one? this is a kangs district we normally wouldn't talk about nationally. 11th district of new york. that yellow thing there, staten island. the closest thing to a republican bastion in new york. new york city everybody seems to vote democrats except on staten island in the 11th district. the incumbent is endorsed by donald trump. why would he be in trouble tomorrow? why are we talking about this race tomorrow? remember this guy? michael grim. he's back. michael grim did time in jail a couple years ago. former congressman. gave up his seat. served time in jail. came out. now he says he was railroaded. he is claiming the obama administration railroaded him. running against donovan in the republican primary. there has been polling some indications that grim has a
chance tomorrow of knocking off dan donovan. donald trump has said don't do that. this seat could be in danger in the fall. that's another one we are keeping an eye on in the fall. another blast from the past. mitt romney a present tense figure all of a sudden. there is a primary tomorrow in utah. he is running against mike kennedy. romney is expected to win this thing easily. to go to the u.s. senate so we will have an interesting dynamic there. if mitt romney wins tomorrow it would bring his lifetime record running against a kennedy to .500. he would be 1-1. ted kennedy beat romney in a senate race in ma mass. now romney is in friendlier territory expected to get that nod. and and his dynamic with
president trump will be an interesting dynamic. tomorrow we will be here tracking the primaries all day. we will be back who is trying he says to find a congressional fix for the family separation issue. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® is a once-daily, long-acting insulin that lasts even longer than 24 hours. i need to shave my a1c. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® works like my body's insulin. releases slow and steady. providing powerful a1c reduction. my week? hectic. my weekends? my time. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ i can take tresiba® any time of day. so if i sleep in, and delay my dose, i take it as soon as i can, as long as there's at least eight hours between doses. (renee) once in use, it lasts eight weeks with or without refrigeration, twice as long as the lantus® pen. (announcer) tresiba® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis,
during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injectn si reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins, like tresiba®, may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness, or confusion. ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient
i'm aditi roy with the cnbc market wrap. u.s. stocks closing lower, rebounding slightly after president trump's trade adviser says there are no plans for investment restrictions on any countries. the dow tumbling 328 points. the s&p falling 38. the nasdaq dropped 161 points. that's it from cnbc. first in business worldwide. now back to the "mtp daily." welcome back. house republicans worked flew the weekend on a so-called compromise immigration bill. bucking president trump's advice on friday to stop, quote, wasting their time on the issue
until after the mid terms when trump says more republicans will be elected. the fruits of their weekend labor remain uncertain but kevin mccarthy promised on fox news this morning there will be a vote on the compromise legislation this week. >> there will be a vote this week. not only will it put the money forward for the wall. it will tie any immigration proposal going forward to the money for the wall. that it has to be built. it has to be built. it will end catch and release. it will go to a merit based system for imabrasion grags and it will deal with the daca situation. >> with the president's support far from certain republicans in congress who already saw one immigration bill fail last week are already bracing for this bill to fail as well with one source telling axios over the weekend while leaders were supportive of both bills there was never an expectation that either bill would be able to pass. we expressly never pledged passage, just the process and the effort. joining me, leonard lance,
republican of new jersey. congressman, welcome back to the show. let me ask you, mccarthy is saying, your leader is saying, a vote this week. a vote? is something going to pass this week? >> i hope so, steve. of course i'm working to that en. only time will tell. but i think we should work on this issue. and i think we should work on it now. i favor a path to citizenship for the dreamers. >> when the president last week -- he came and visited fellow house republicans last week. and supposedly we were told in advance of that he was going there in party to rally republican support to get something passed maybe to get it passed last week. of course one of the bills gets pulled and now here we are. talk about if you would what effect did the president coming out and saying, huh, republicans, don't bother with this -- what effect did that have on your colleagues? >> i think that the president should have said that we should pass the bill, and that's the end toward which i'm working.
i disagree with the president when he said we should wait until after the election. i think time is of the essence. and that is why we should continue to work on it. i did not vote for the conservative bill, the goodlatte bill. 41 republicans did not vote for it. i was in that group. and i favor the compromise legislation. i am working to that end. and i know that jeff denham of california and carlos cabello of florida are working very hard on this. >> that gets to it, i think. there is that divide within your party. you say you voted against the goodlatte bill. you are working towards this compromise bill. to get this so-called compromise bill through it seems that republican leaders, folks like you who want to pass it are going to have to get some hesitant republican members on board to do it. that's when i'm asking you, when trump says don't bother does that give license to the hesitant members to say it's not worth going out on a limb as i
perceive it on this? >> that might be the case. that's why i disagree with the president. i think we should work on this issue now and not wait until the november elections. i would hope, steve, that democrats could join us. and if not on this issue, certainly on the issue of the children. i have become a cosponsor of a bill sponsored by brendan boyle of philadelphia on that issue. that is a separate issue but certainly related to the larger whole. >> let's tau about that. part of your leg there, part of your solution you say to this issue of the children and the families at the border is to hire more judges to process this more kickly. you have the president over the weekend, and again reiterating today in front of reporters in the white house -- he says, i do not want to hire these judges. first of all he is saying i don't want to hire 5,000. he is he is also saying i don't want to hire judges at all. do you get a sense where he is getting the number of 5,000 from?
is that what you are calling for? is he again destroying your propose proposal with what he is saying. >> there are 350 immigration judges. i think we should double that to 700. senator kpruz and senator feinstein are working together on that issue over in the senate. i believe they are working toward doubling the number to 700 had. i favor that. if that legislation passes in the senate, and it could pass given the fact that this is being sponsored by a republican and a democrat, then i think we should take that bill up in the house. i favor due process of law, as you know, steve, i am an attorney. and i would like to double the number of immigration judges to roughly 700. >> have you had any contact, any communication with the white house on specifically what their reservations are and if there is any way to address it? >> i personally have not. i'm sure our leadership has. i hope that the president will support a compromise if the it is put target by senator cruz
and senator feinstein. i think it is a hopeful sign that you have ted cruz and dianne feinstein working to the on this issue. >> you are an attorney who favors due process. when the president is out there saying we don't need these judges we need enforcement that's going to fine these people turn them away and send them back quickly, are you saying that the president is out there advocating a violation of due process. >> due process is best served by having jade indication, that means increasing the number of immigration judges significantly. i think we can do that. i hope we can do it in a bipartisan fashion. >> are the president's comments on, had he he talks sending folks away as he does, are those consistent with due process? >> i think due process requires having an adjudication process and i would urge the president to support that. >> changing gears here, something we talked about earlier about in the show. i want to get you to weigh in.
we have had a conversation about civility. this has been going on since the president launched his campaign three years ago. it has been a constant with him. now there is the issue of sarah huckabee sanders at that restaurant. congresswoman maxine waters makes those statements. president trump comes on twitter and cranks it up even further. now one of your republican colleagues there in the house marcia blackburn running for senate in tennessee is trying to fund raise, trying to raise money for her campaign off of republican anger about what maxine waters said, republican anger over the restaurant incident with sarah huckabee sanders. is that an appropriate thing for a candidate for office to be doing? >> i am critical of what maxine waters said. i know the congresswoman. and i have served with her on the financial services committee before i moved to the energy and commerce committee but i thought those were very unfortunate remarks. as you know, steve, i lead by example. i try to be civil with everyone, with those who support me, with those who do not support me.
i have been critical of the president where i do not believe he has been civil. and i'm certainly critical of the situation regarding the restaurant in northern virginia and with statements back and forth. i think we need greater civility on both sides. and that is the way i have always conducted myself, and it's the way i will continue to conduct myself. >> does it mean -- the question it raises though, marcia blackburn is run informinger the senate and clearly seems to perceive by these actions a political benefit in fanning these flames a little bit. getting republican voters upset about the treatment of sarah huckabee sanders. there is a line that republicans, that your party should be drawing here in terms of saying hey we don't like x that the other side is doing but we shouldn't be trying to politicize it further? >> i -- i am critical of what happened in northern virginia. i think it was inappropriate. and i think that dinner should have been served. i don't see why it was not served. >> but is it appropriate to raise money for a campaign off that?
>> i think that's a decision for marcia blackburn. but i'm certainly critical of the fact that ms. huckabee was not served. i think that that lacks civility. i agree there has been lack of civility in some of the president's tweets. and i think that all sides should be civil, steve. and that is why i lead by example. and that is why i am always civil and will continue to be moving forward in a direction that i think is in the best interests of the nation. and that requires civility on all sides. >> congressman lance republican from new jersey thank you for the time. up next, nbc reporting on defense secretary mattis out of the loop with the president. we'll be right back. so where are you robots headed? i need to tell humans to switch to sprint now! i heard they can get 4 lines of unlimited for $25 per month per line with the 5th line free. we have to hurry because this deal it's going, going, gone, baby!
a lot of progress has been made in the middle east. a lot. and it really started with the end of the horrible iran deal. that deal was a disaster. and things are a lot different since we ended that. a lot different. >> welcome back. president trump talked up his middle east policy, including the withdrawal from the iran nuclear deal this afternoon. officials are now telling nbc news that the president made that major geopolitical move on iran without the counsel of his defense secretary, jim mattis. nbc reports that mattis has been caught offguard by several major policy decisions from president trump thug the withdrawal from the iran nuclear deal, the pause
in military exercises with south korea and the call for creation of a military branch overseeing abrasions in space. the president is more inclined to rely on his own instincts or mike pompeo or john bolton. when asked for a comment a pentagon spokesperson said quote this is pure silliness. we will be right back with the uncivil war in washington. politics getting even nastier. but what's at the root of the problem? (vo) this is not a video game. this is not a screensaver. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪
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.
...to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. i'll take that. [cheers] 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. new ensure max protein. in two great flavors. welcome back. time now for lid. we talked earlier this hour about civility in politics, more appropriately the lack of civility in politics. we talked about how the political and culture wars are actually getting nastier. let's talk about how we got to this point, triflism, vitriole. whatever word you want to use. the panel is back.
susan, i'll throw something out there. i will plug a book i have coming out. it's about the 1990s but i think about newt gingrich rich and th and contrast. there's no benefit in working p political points scored in being one against the other. >> used to be that compromise was a good thing. we would see our leaders go to washington. knew they didn't agree on everything, they would come to a compromise to serve the country. now they seem to serve themselves even more. and there was one thing when we were offset and civil among ourselves, she brought up a good point. this is the case. we need to listen to each other more. we have to be able to have a dialogue that you're not automatically put in one category or the next or the other, i should say, because you have different ideas. you have to be able to listen all the way through and that's really what's happening now, and
in this environment of twitter and quick jabs and everyone trying to get a bite at that sound bite, it is leading to less talk and worse, less listening. >> and i mentioned gingrich, the question he was posing to republicans on the way up, what is the value in compromise? what do you get from compromising with a democrat. you score more railing against them. he got the house majority that way. seems like there's a recognition of human nature in that. >> good politics of the moment, not good politics in the next moment. we are in danger falling into the same rosy trap a lot of people fall into, nostalgia, how the good old days we got along. this country has a long history of not getting along. we had a civil war. not to put too fine a point on it. people have been disagreeing in politics a long time. if you talk about violence in politics and things like that,
we had senators in fights with each other. this is not a new thing. is it true in the last 10, 15, 20 years after the gingrich revolution things have gotten more and more partisan within the current bounds, absolutely. let's not pretend this is a breaking point all of a sudden. we've seen this before. >> do you think it is going to get better or worse in the five, ten year future? >> i think short term gets worse before it gets better. i'm a little scared about the up tick in rhetoric. during the campaign, there were a lot of trump rallies, the one in chicago comes to mind first when there were protesters inside and outside the arena, that's the one he was like take them out, take them out in terms of protesters. those rallies looked like another era in united states history. i remember at the time strong language, but i turned to a colleague, a latino colleague and said this feels like a clan
rally. it felt like something different was happening than a standard republican presidential rally. there was toxicity in the air. obviously i wasn't there on the ground, but as an observer, it looked like there was a lot of vitriol and mob mentality that we hadn't seen before, and i do agree with you that newt gingrich is the catalyst for a lot of this. it wasn't just that your opponent is the other side but your opponent is the enemy, evil, doing bad things to you and your family members. i think that polarization began in the '90s in terms of locking democratic members out of committee hearings and casting them as the enemy. i think that's something needs to change. >> even though it is cyclical, we have seen it before, it is in no way to throw our hands up, say oh well, in a few years it will calm down again. we have to recognize there's an obvious problem the way people talk to each other. that's not going to solve all
the problems in politics now. it is good electoral politics to gin up your base to win when you have a country so starkly divided. having a few senators talk across the aisle is not going to be the short term way to fix that. >> if you see a massive blue wave and republicans get knocked down tremendously and have to go back and they're did he secimatn they have to find another way or they keep losing more. for political survival, sometimes that civility has to come back out by one side or the other. >> i have to say, susan, i remember barack obama in the 2012 campaign say if i win, it breaks the republican fever. and the republicans instead doubled down on their strategy and won big in 2014 and now they're looking at donald trump in the white house. >> it has to go a couple of cycles. you have to lose 2018, 2020, 2022, and then see where you are.
one second. barely enough time for this man to take a bite of turkey. but for cyber criminals it's plenty of time to launch thousands of attacks. luckily security analysts and watson are on his side. spotting threats faster and protecting his data with the most securely encrypted main frame in the world. it's a smart way to eat lunch in peace. sweet, oblivious peace.
properly? take the case of t red hen in lexington, virginia, facing a heaping helping of outrage and support for not serving sarah huckabee sanders. but if you're going to dish it out, please just dish it out to the right place because apparently people are calling up another d.c. area restaurant, also named the red hen, to complain or send their praise. but the two restaurants are not affiliated. that's an easy mistake to make, but there are more. people are calling up a third red hen, this one in new jersey, 300 plus miles away. the restaurant says it received more than 600 angry phone calls. we are here to help. let's review the restaurant that ousted sarah huckabee sanders is this red hen, not this red hen, also not this red hen, and also not the red rooster in new york or blue rooster in sarasota, or yellow bird chicken in boston, not the purple pig in chicago. none of these are the red hen. if you're going to criticize a restaurant for its politics or
praise a restaurant for its politics, all we ask is check, please. that's all for tonight. we'll be back tomorrow with more of mtp daily. the beat with ari melber starts now. donald trump spent last week on the defensive and partly caved over his border policy. tonight, he is clearly eager to turn the corner. let me tell you exactly what's happening. your president is advocating a blatantly unconstitutional proposal to gut due process inside the united states. from a legal perspective, the good news tonight is due process is not a choice for politicians. this is not donald trump's call. it is a right secured in the fifth amendment, and upheld by judg judges. trump raised a new topic that underscores limits on his own power, and maybe