tv MSNBC Live With Ali Velshi MSNBC July 5, 2018 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
barrett and raymond kethledge. the president is on his way to montana rallying candidates to push out democrats in states where he's won. that's not the only item on the white house agenda. the administration confirmed that trump and vladimir putin will have a one-on-one meeting later this month. joining me with the latest is hans nichols. lots to talk about right now. let's start first with the supreme court issue, the idea that the president is looking for somebody with whom he's got chemistry. why is this important to him? >> reporter: well, the president wants to present someone to the public and do it in a dramatic fashion that he feels meets the criteria both intellectually and physical -- the appearance of a supreme court justice. we saw that happen with neil gorsuch. he brought him out. he looked like someone from central casting. we've seen this throughout the trump administration. we also know that trump places a great premium on having a rapport, a personal chemistry
with someone. now that said, onthere's not a t of interaction between the president and supreme court justice. there shouldn't be given some of the issues this supreme court could be weighing in on. the latest that we have according to peter alexander, his reporting on that, three finalists might be too strong but seem to be the serious contenders. the names brett kavanaugh, amy coney barrett and raymond kethledge. two of them kennedy clerks, one a clerk for justice scalia. when we think about the theatrics on how this will be rolled out, bill shine is on the plane with president trump as they're flying to montana. lots of time for the two of them to game out their strategy on how they're going to presenting this pick. ali. >> let's talk about the other matter right now, the trump and putin meeting. the president is confirming -- or the white house is confirming they're going to have a one-on-one meeting. what we've learned about this meeting is there's not going to
be other people. we don't think there are going to be other people. this is inherently problematic for presidents and particularly problematic for this president whom so many suspect have an unusual relationship with russia to not have somebody in there who can contradict what the russian readout of the meeting is going to be or any rumors that come out about what they discussed. >> it's another breach of presidential protocol. you always have a note taker present. but i don't think it should be a surprise that president donald trump is doing this one differently. he's indicated that he wants to have a different relationship. he's indicated that he wants to have a relationship with putin. they'll have this meeting initially and then they'll have one later right after with aides present. that's what officials are telling us here. we saw in hamburg their initial meeting they're looking for opportunities to get putin by himself, to pull him aside. they did have that one meeting where there wasn't even a u.s. translator present. so, yes, it's a breach of protocol, but we shouldn't be that surprised at this point
because -- and he's the president of the united states, he was elected by the electoral college. he's the one that's going to be making these decisions and it's his approach. but when you talk to former aides on how this should be done, they simply say it's not the right way to go. >> i think the book when you write the book on the trump presidency, you should entitle it "i don't think it will be a surprise" because that can preface so many things that we discuss. hans nichols at the white house. i want to take a moment to look at who the three top contenders are now for the supreme court justice seat. let's start with the guy who a lot of people are thinking is the front-runner, this is brett kavanaugh. he's 53 years old, a former law clerk to justice kennedy. he was associate counsel to ken starr and helped draft the impeachment against bill clinton. he served as a close aide to president george w. bush for five years who nominated him for the d.c. district court of appeals where he now serves. this is working against him in some circles. he's considered the most establishment pick.
to much of president trump's base, the establishment is kind of as bad as being a democrat. he proposed congress consider enacting a law to protect a sitting president from criminal investigation, indictment or prosecution while in office. that's got to be good for donald trump. recently "the washington post" reports conservatives have raised concerns about his past rulings, including on the affordable care act because his dissent wasn't considered strong enough. the idea that he was against it wasn't enough. he is reportedly a favorite of white house counsel, don mcgahn, who is running this process. this is the more conservative favorite, amy barrett. he's also young, 46 years old. she clerked for supreme court justice antonin scalia. she thought at the university of notre dame law school and was appointed by trump to serve on the seventh circuit court of appeals and was confirmed just last year by the very same senate that's in place right now. if she's selected and confirmed, she will be the youngest justice
on the supreme court. barrett wrote against the high court's decision in upholding the affordable care act in her 2017 opinion titled countering the difficulty. she said chief justice john roberts pushed the affordable care act beyond its plausible meaning in order to save it. she's also suggested in an article she would not be shy in overturning supreme court precedents. finally there's raymond kethledge, he's 51 years old and lives near ann arbor, michigan. he was a former law clerk to justice ken tee. he was appointed by george w. bush to serve on the sixth circuit court of appeals. he was confirmed back in 2008. conservative radio host and political analyst hugh hewitt wrote his resounding support for kethledge in an op-ed. he wrote that he has been faithful for more than a decade to the originalist approach while white house staffers, by
the way, will have read every word of kethledge's many writings and will conclude gorsuch 2.0. let's bring in elliott williams, the principal at the rabin group and previously served as deputy assistant attorney general for the justice department's legislative affairs department during the obama administration. thanks for joining us. >> no problem, thanks a lot. >> let's talk about what president trump is looking for. there's some as hans was just telling us he likes the optics, he likes people who look like they're out of central casting, who would look good as a supreme court justice. it's a little weird but we know president trump is into that sort of thing. more importantly, he has said he won't ask them about their opinion on roe v. wade but he hasn't said he will ask them whether a sitting president should be indicted or a supreme court should rule on an investigation into a sitting president and i think for more people that's important. >> this whole question of he hasn't specifically asked them
about roe v. wade or won't ask them about roe v. wade shouldn't be where the conversation ends. frankly, we heard some of this from senator susan collins saying i won't cast a vote for someone who's hostile to roe v. wade. there's all kinds of ways that the administration can find out what an rindividual's views are. all three of these nominees were meticulously vetted by the federalist society and heritage foundation. all of them got into the specifics as to what their views of roe v. wade or lgbt issues or any number of issues that might come before the court. so i think we should be cautious when we take the president at his word about not asking about a particular issue. >> and the bottom line is the senators will. they will get asked and whether or not the nominee answers that question or how creatively they answer it is going to be what we're watching. >> most nominees won't answer straightforward to a senator or
particularly at their hearing. because of the president's stated commitment on the campaign trail and in the debates that he was committed to overturning roe v. wade and shifting the balance of the federal judiciary to the right, certainly there's been a wink wink as to how these folks potentially might rule, even if they're not going to answer that very question in the pointed way that the president is talking about. >> but the second topic may be more interesting. in other words, is there -- i've heard opinions on both -- i'm not a lawyer and i don't know these things but i've heard opinions on both sides. i've heard maybe the president shouldn't be appointing a supreme court justice when there's a chance issues around the president will reach the supreme court, but if it does happen, what is that supreme court justice or the other one, gorsuch, that have been nominated do if there's a matter in front of them regarding the person who picked them for the job. >> ideally you would have nominated fair-minded individuals who would have been
appropriate jurists with a reasonable approach to jurisprudence rather than folks who have been vetted by far right organizations pretty much as a litmus test for being nominated in the first place. rather than getting into the questions of could under a particular circumstance of a president, whatever, let's think about how the list of individuals was put together and who ultimately was nominated. i think when you have potentially dangerous or bad jurists nominated, the threat to all rulings, you know, including ones involving presidential power are at stake. >> and we saw this by the way during watergate. there were four justices chosen by richard nixon, but only one, william rehnquist, recused himself but that's because he worked in the nixon administration so that felt to some people like it had a higher degree of association with the president. but that's because those justices nominated by richard nixon were nominated well before
the activities related to watergate were -- took place. >> and moreover, something else to keep in mind is that there was a long tradition of people being nominated to the court who were sort of unmoored from politics to some extent. so when you had republican presidents nominating sandra day o'connor and john paul stevens, who ended up being quite fair-minded and reasonable on the court, that would never happen today given the -- the president has made clear that he expects loyalty from individuals including judges. if you notice, he went after chief justice roberts following the affordable care act decision so to some extent i would think the president wants loyalty out of his court as well and the process is dangerous to the union and dangerous to all kinds of things. >> elliott, good to talk to you. it's a complicated issue for those of us not that close to it. elliott williams is a former assistant deputy attorney general during the obama administration. president trump will rally
for montana gop senate candidate matt rosendale to try to unseat the democratic senator, john tester. it highlights an intensifying battle between trump and democrats in states that he won in 2016. as it stands, republicans hold a narrow 51-seat majority in the senate. as "the wall street journal" writes many of these vulnerable democrats plan to keep their seats by positioning themselves as champions of their local constituents rather than trumpeting a progressive agenda, items like medicare for all. joining us is msnbc's garrett haake. good afternoon, garrett. >> reporter: hey, ali. >> what's going on out there? is that a lineup for people going in to see the president? >> reporter: it started at about 6:00 this morning. the local affiliate was out interviewing people in line. this is a big draw in the
western half of the u.s. i've got to tell you, ali, i think we'll have fireworks tonight. the president you mentioned has been targeting some of these red state senators but he doesn't have the same personal animus for a heidi heitkamp or joe donnelly as he does for john tester who he claims for taking down ron jackson so we suspect that tester will be a punching bag for the president. tester has a full-page ad in all the major newspapers in montana today touting all the bills that he supported or authored that the president has signed. he has predicated his whole campaign on being someone who can work with the president when it's beneficial to maunontana a can oppose him when it's not. talking to folks out here and this is not a fair sample of all montana voters, i've gotten two big impressions from this. first, that even republicans have really no idea who matt
rosendale is, the republican nominee for the senate seat. he's an unknown commodity. he was the state auditor here. second, these republicans do not trust john tester as he tries to split the difference on president trump. take a listen to one of the folks we talked to a few minutes ago. >> what's your general opinion of tester and the job he's done? >> i don't think he's done montana any justice at all. i think he likes to play on being a native montanan but he doesn't give us any of the things that he promises. he says he's going to vote one way and votes another. he never -- he's not a man of his word so he's not a man of character to me. >> reporter: so, ali, to put a button on all of this, the supreme court nominee here will be a big issue for john tester who didn't support neil gorsuch, he's not supported very many of president trump's nominees. if he can come around to supporting that supreme court nominee, that will be a big factor in this state, this sort which is sort of a red state but has a democratic governor.
it's a very fine line but the big man from montana will have to walk in november. >> the full-page ad is fascinating, but tester doesn't fall into the heitkamp, donnelly, manchin trio troica that are mentioned. tester, is he feeling safer or what's the difference? >> reporter: the difference, tester has a pretty strong personal brand here in montana. to the degree it's a local race about local issues, it benefits him. he's back here as a farmer all the time. he's well practiced on the issues like public lands and things like that, veterans issues. huge population, huge population of veterans in montana percentagewise so he's strong on those things the to the degree that this race gets nationalized, it does not help him. the more they're talking about president trump here, the harder his path is. he's only ever won in close
races. a democratic operative here in montana said to me this morning you could put a fence post with an "r" behind its name and it would get 45% of the vote in montana. tester has only won close races and this will be another one. people are expecting this to be a single-digit contest and competitive down to the end. >> garrett haake in montana where just in a few hours, president trump will hold a rally. the title of personal attorney to president donald j. trump was dropped from michael cohen's bios yesterday, just days after cohen told abc news that he puts family and country first. cue the speculation that he might cooperate with the investigation into russian colugs in the 2016 election. the british government is scrambling for answers in the second nerve agent poisoning.
police confirmed they were exposed to the same nerve agent used to attack a former russian spy an his daughter three months ago. we're live in london with the details of this new attack. you're watching msnbc. weekends are my time. i need an insulin that fits my schedule. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ (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. injection site 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.
skyscraper. can't fix it with duct tape, then you ain't using enough duct tape. rated pg-13. two people remain critically ill after touching something that was in contact with a chemical weapon in the small english town of amesbury. the man and woman were exposed to the same nerve agent that a former russian spy and his
daughter were exposed to back in august called novichok. i want to take a look at how deadly it can be and just what it is. it means newcomer is refers to a group of advanced nerve agents originally developed by the soviet union in the 1970s and 1980s. western intelligence agencies didn't even know about them until 1991 when a russian scientist defected and reported on russian violations to the 1990 chemical weapons accord. now, according to the experts, the way it works is frighteningly simple. once it enters the body, the chemical blocks neurotransmitters that control your muscles, including those that keep you breathing and that keep your heart beating. the muscles are stuck in the on position so essentially cramps over and over again. a person exposed to novichok convulses and has severe difficulty breathing and their heart slowly stops. there are several variations. at least one is up to eight
times more deadly than vx, a similar nerve agent, but this is classified as a weapon of mass destruction. it is used by the alleged north korean agents to kill kim jong-un's half-brother in an airport in early february. some of these are more powerful than that. the horrifying part is that the standard nerve agent and the dote known at atropine is almost useless. it can cause permanent injury even if atropine saves an exposed person's life. now, the exact chemical makeup is still a closely guarded secret, but it's reportedly what's called a binary agent, which means two separate chemicals, harmless on their own, are combined to create a deadly toxin. the ingredients are not on the banned substance list and at least one of the components is believed to be a powder which makes it difficult to detect. experts believe the poison was designed to get around standard
nato detection. now, police say they don't believe these two people who were targeted were targeted, like the former russian spy, sergei skripal and his daughter, but that the two handled something that contained novichok. the previous attack prompted britain to expel nearly two dozen russian diplomats and much of the world followed. these are all countries who expelled russian diplomats as a result of that. the u.s. expelled 60. russia retaliated during the expulsions and continue to deny any wrongdoing in these poisoning cases. now today russia called on uk police not to get into, quote, dirty political games and for theresa may and her government to stop playing political games with chemical agents. next week president trump travels to london to meet with theresa may and then he has his first summit with vladimir putin. so far neither the president nor the white house have weighed in on this latest poisoning. msnbc's matt bradley is outside
scotland yard for us in london. theresa may called the poisoning deeply disturbing and said police will leave no stone unturned as they investigate, but they also say the area is now safe, which they didn't say right after the first poisoning, so what are we deducing from any of this? >> reporter: actually, they did say that after the first poisoning. they said that the people can now walk around, they're safe, everything is fine. that's what they said again this weekend. so the question is after all of the diplomatic fracas and about diplomats being expelled and relations between russia and the uk and all these other countries, the question is going to be can they brutrust the brih government when they say they have expunged the agent. four months later we have another near-death experience from this couple so that's really troubling for a lot of the people of salisbury. they're not going to necessarily
believe when the british government says again this area is safe. so this is going to be yet another scandal upon other scandals here in britain stemming from this case. you mentioned all these confrontations. president trump headed here in britain and then going to helsinki to meet vladimir putin. there's a possibility that if everything goes as planned, that britain or england and russia could be competing next week against each other in russia in the world cup. so we'll see, yet another confrontation, a more populist one, between these two great powers. >> this caused a lot of tension between president trump and theresa may last time. there's already tension between the two of them. is there any indication that britain wants the united states to take a more aggressive hand, specifically as it relates to these types of things? >> reporter: well, it's not quite clear exactly because theresa may of course hasn't made any demands on how she
wants to answer diplomatically. as you mentioned, there were dozens of countries who expelled russian diplomats and the united states and the uk together expelled nearly 100 russian diplomats between them. so it's unclear whether or not theresa may will be satisfied from that response four months ago or be asking for a new response from her own government and from the united states. that is another drama that we can expect in the week to come. >> matt, thanks very much. matt bradley for us in london. heavy rain is in the forecast for saturday, making rescue efforts all the more urgent in thailand, where crews continue to work to save boys who are trapped in a cave. >> the timing is very important because once the storm is coming in and heavy rain started, then the cave can possibly fully flood and then it will be really hard to get the people to go in and resupply or try to get them out. >> but how they might rescue the boys and their coach remains
unclear. any plan involving them swimming out seems unlikely at this point. rescuers say they're still pretty weak even though they're finally getting food and medicine. they would have to make a five to six-hour trek in dark and murky water in narrow passagewa passageways. coming up we'll have new numbers on how many migrant children are still separated from their parents and how officials plan to reunite them. first, the new york city woman who scaled the statue of liberty yesterday forcing the evacuation of a very crowded liberty island and an hours-long standoff with police is due in court today. she was protesting family separation. she faces federal misdemeanor charges including trespassing, disorderly conduct and intervening with government functions. you're watching msnbc.
man: it takes a lot of work to run this business, but i really love it. i'm on the move all day long, and sometimes i don't eat the way i should. so i drink boost to get the nutrition i'm missing. boost high protein now has 33% more protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. and it has a guaranteed great taste. man: boost gives me everything i need to be up for doing what i love. boost high protein. be up for it. so let's promote our summer travel deal on choicehotels.com like this. surfs up. earn a $50 gift card when you stay just twice this summer. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com billions of problems. morning breath? garlic breath? stinky breath? there's a therabreath for you. therabreath fresh breath oral rinse instantly fights all types of bad breath and works for 24 hours. so you can... breathe easy.
and i am a senior public safety my namspecialist for pg&e. my job is to help educate our first responders on how to deal with natural gas and electric emergencies. everyday when we go to work we want everyone to work safely and come home safely. i live right here in auburn, i absolutely love this community. once i moved here i didn't want to live anywhere else. i love that people in this community are willing to come together to make a difference for other people's lives. together, we're building a better california.
the trump administration is releasing new information on the children separated from their parents at the border. health and human services secretary alex azar revealed that his agency is responsible for the care of fewer than 3,000 children. that's hundreds more than previously thought. he also says about 100 of those kids are under the age of 5 years old.
mariana atencio is one of the reporters on that call with secretary azar. she's reported extensively on the border crisis. mariana, a lot of people have concern for a lot of the people you've talked to, including -- and done stories on. what do we know about the families that have been reunited so far. >> we've covered very few reunifications. we're starting to see more of them but they are few and far between. what we were told on this phone call with hhs is that they are going to adhere to that court-appointed deadline of reunifying the kids younger than 5 by next tuesday, which is around the corner, and the kids older than 5 by july 26th. so they're going to be doing dna testing. they're going to be doing what they called family reunification packets to the these kids together with the parents, but it's still -- i don't know how they're going to pull it off by next tuesday. >> yesterday you and i were talking about one particular family. a mother had been separated from
her kids. any progress on that? >> she told me today for the first time the social worker facilitated a video conference call with her 2-year-old and 7-year-old so some movement for her. as a reporter who's been covering the story for weeks, we were reporting on 2,047 children at one point so that headline out of that phone call today, under 3,000 but it's a much bigger range of children separated from their parents at the border. >> they have got until july 10th, which is just around the corner, to reunite children with parents 5 and under and july 26th for those 5 and over. i guess over 5. is it clear that the government knows where everybody has and has the facility to do this? one of the things your reporting has told me about is that they have separated parents and children and sent in many cases, flown them to different parts of the country. >> scattered them across the country. the kids that we covered yesterday. the mom was in san diego and the
kids are here in new york. they did say on the call that they know the identity and location of every minor in our care, so that under 3,000 number, they know where every kid is, it's just a question of figuring out with the dna testing, which they said was the easiest way and fastest way of pairing them up with their parn a -- parent -- >> not separating them would be the easiest way. any comment or question about whether the government will be able to comply with the court order? >> they said we will comply. we're doing everything we can. they said they have added 230 people from i.c.e., including 130 from orr to facilitate this. but it's still a tall order. we're going to be watching and we're going to be waiting and talking to all of these families to see if it will happen. >> mariana, thanks very much for your continued reporting on this. we will stay on this story. the june employment report comes out the first thing tomorrow morning but there could be cause for concern.
adp and moody's analytics predict employers added 177,000 jobs in june. if that's correct, it would be the fourth straight month that job growth was less than 200,000 jobs a month. analysts say that's because businesses are now actually struggling to find enough new workers, which is why the president's efforts to cut legal immigration are wrong headed. he believes that low skilled foreign workers are costing american jobs and wages. that is simply not true. nevertheless detractors argue that an influx of immigrants means a loss of jobs for native-born workers. i want to take a closer look at this. the united states currently has 6.7 million job openings and it has just 6.4 million available workers to fill those job openings. the problem here is that the available workers either aren't properly trained for the open jobs or they don't live close to where those jobs are.
if this trending continues, it may indicate, it likely indicates that we need more immigration into america, not less. here's another complicating factor. the number of births in the united states dropped bry 2% between 2016 and 2017 to the lowest fertility rate in 30 years. again, this is an ongoing issue not just in the united states but in all developing countries. as you make more money, you have fewer children. the centers for disease control estimates by 2035 the working age population of the united states could drop by almost 8 million people from current figures. that's why we need immigrants to fill the open jobs in our country or we can give people baby bonuses to have lots more children but you've got to get more people in here to work. and when they do come in to work, they pay taxes. the partnership for a new american economy studied the louisville metro area to provide an economic snapshot of
foreign-born workers and it found immigrants earned $1.6 billion in income in 2016 and paid $430 million in taxes. this kind of study has been done all over the country. the results are almost always exactly the same. immigrants earn money and pay taxes. another study from the national academies of science, engineering and medicine found that first-generation immigrants can impose costs on government, but as adults, the children of immigrants turn into the strongest economic contributors in the population, paying more in taxes than even other americans are. here's how former republican president ronald reagan framed immigration and america during a speech in 1980. >> through this golden door has come millions of men and women. these families came here to work. they didn't ask what this country could do for them, but what they could do to make this refuge the greatest home of freedom in history. let us pledge to each other that
we can make america great again. >> that, by the way, is a commercial that's being run by a conservative group. joining us is gene sperling, the director of the national economic council under president clinton and president obama. gene, this isn't even partisan. this is not partisan. this is basic math. >> well, i think, ali, you're pointing to something which is this is not economic strategy. this is, unfortunately, i think part of a world view that has very negative racial and ethnic overtones. secondly, sees the whole world as kind of a zero sum game where one person's benefit has to be another person's loss. let me add a few points to your excellent summary. one, immigrants are twice as likely to be entrepreneurs. 30% of our entrepreneurs are immigrants. if you're creating jobs, that's not zero sum, that's creating
new opportunities. >> new jobs create new money which creates new tax revenue which creates new demand and new demand creates more jobs. >> second, we know many of the lower skilled or low wage immigrants are filling jobs that americans are not competing for. they're not necessarily taking. and as you said, when this congressional budget office looked at the comprehensive immigration reform in 2013, they found it was actually going to lower the deficit by $900 billion over 20 years, meaning exactly what you said, that it would take in more money and particularly help social security for the exact reason you stated, which is that it would provide more working age people filling jobs, but also putting into the payroll system and strengthening social security. >> and we just put up a screen to show in 2010 we had 24.6
million people who were age 70 and older. by 2020 we will have 31.8 million people age 70 and older. that's a 38% increase of americans age 70 and older in ten years, and that is why you need new people to come in, because we're going to have stronger pressures on social security and social safety net matters as our population ages. >> that's, as you said, why this tends to be -- to not break down on partisan lines. you see many republican and progressive economists realizing that there is a need for sound, reasonable legal immigration. what i will say and this is my one caveat, is that as a country, we shouldn't rely on legal immigration to make up for our failures at training our own workers. we should have a much stronger system of skills enhancement, of apprenticeships, of affordable, even free college opportunities. >> so this is an interesting
point. we have 6.7 million openings and 6.4 million people looking for jobs. we should have done a better job -- >> yes. >> when i say we, i mean the entire developed world. free trade agreements help gdp growth, they help corporate profitability. if you're a wage earner in a high income country, we didn't do enough to retrain these people into something that is acceptable or pay for their schooling or do something to allow them to participate in a growing economy. >> exactly. while you can say it's the whole advanced world, we're the worst. the united states spends far less and does far more than countries like denmark and sweden in helping our workers. scott pruitt has resigned as the epa administrator. i want to go straight to hans nichols who has more on this news. scott pruitt has resigned. hans, what do we have? >> reporter: we have a tweet from the president of the united states who's flying out to montana saying that he's accepted the resignation of his embattled epa administrator
scott pruitt. he is saying that the deputy, jeff wheeler, will take over but it's clear the president thanks scott pruitt but is deciding to move on. the question for so long around here at the white house is how is scott pruitt surviving. there have been all these negative reports, more than 15 ethics investigations, so many challenges to him. white house officials would hear that they're troubled or they find these reports troublesome. it was always a variant of that but it always appeared that the president is willing to support him. that has changed, he is now out. now the question becomes what sort of confirmation fight are you going to have this summer as well. we know we'll have one on the supreme court nominee. now we'll have one about the potential epa administrator. it looks like he's heading in the direction of the deputy. but there's so many concerns that so many in congress have about the direction of the epa under scott pruitt. another cabinet level official leaving the trump administration before the second year is out. ali, we'll try to figure out
just what trump's plan is for replacing him and how that confirmation process could potentially cloud or complicate the supreme court nomination process. >> i don't think anybody -- don't go anywhere, i need to talk to you about this. i don't think anybody needs remindied about this because scott pruitt has kept his ethical lapses in the news. he has spent $3 million of taxpayer funds on exclusive security details. he has 15 different investigations ongoing. one of them has been complete. the cost and frequency of his travel, particularly his first class travel, the $3 million on security detail, which has not really been clarified. he spent $43,000 on a phone booth that was supposedly designed for keeping his phone calls private, even though there is a skiff, a facility for making those phone calls at the epa. he apparently worked very hard to get a job for his wife that paid in excess of $200,000. my favorite is that he got a
used mattress from the trump hotel. here's the tweet from the president. i've accepted the resignation of scott pruitt as the administrator of the environmental protection agency. within the agency, scott has done an outstanding job. this is what i want to talk to you about, hans. within the agency scott has done an outstanding job and i will always be thankful to him for this. the senate confirmed deputy epa andrew wheeler will on monday assume duties as the acting administrator of the epa. i have no doubt that andy will continue on with our great and lasting epa agenda. we've made tremendous progress and the future of the epa is very bright. hans, this is the question. there were always questions about whether the president respected the job -- the mission of the state department. there's clarity on the fact that the president does not respect the mission of the education department or the energy department, but there is probably no agency that is more in the sights of moving
conservative and establishment conservatives than the epa because of the rules that they impose so that companies can't simply dump garbage into the river or put garbage out of their pipes. and the reason the president has stuck by this guy for so long is because he was doing god's work in deregulating the epa. >> you don't find a democrat or republican in this town that doesn't think scott prosecuuitt very effective in achieving the goals he and the trump administration set about. that was to deregulate a lot of the industry, have loser environmental regulations. and unleash the animal spirits and to start having more growth and investment in the country. he's been controversial among democrats for what he's done policywise. there's been bipartisan controversy on his ethical i don't want to say lapses but challenges, issues. he obviously has taken his job and done it differently than other epa administrators in
terms of, as you ran through there on the kind of security detail, 1234iinsisting on flyin first class. we just saw him being publicly confronted by a mom with a 2-year-old child in clutch asking him to resign. that lady confronting the epa administrator in a public place just got her wish. ali. >> hans, we sort of sensed in the last 48 hours a shift in tone from the white house on this. shannon pettypiece of bloomberg was on with me on tuesday night. she had been with the president on the way back from a rally where they had asked hogan gidley, one of the white house spokespeople, about this. he had said they time that the reports they're getting, the continued reports about scott pruitt are problematic. two months ago sarah sanders had said it was under review but there was no response subsequent to that. we had been hearing talk that the president was tiring of hearing this sort of thing, but
it took him a lot longer to get down to scott pruitt than, for instance, tom price at health and human services. tom price had contributed to the failure of the repeal of obamacare, it was not successful. scott pruitt, in the president's eyes, scott pruitt was successfully deregulating the epa by replacing career epa people with political people, with a mission, you know, that just isn't in keeping with what the epa had in the past. but it is the president's new mission of reducing regulation. >> reporter: scott pruitt is gone from the epa but his legacy will long endure. what he did in terms of rolling back obama-era and even bush era and bush 41 era environmental protections, that was a core goal not just of this administration but a lot of congressmen. conservatives who have long thought the epa was overzealous, overregulatory. when you talk to conservatives
on capitol hill, yes, they hold their nose on some of the things president trump has done, particularly with tariffs and going the other way on free trade. we've most recently seen that with the tiff and back and forth with the chamber of commerce, a core long-standing republican group. but conservatives always tend to praise trump on two things. number one, neil gorsuch, and now potentially a second supreme court nominee. two, the dismantling of the regulatory state. you've seen that with some of the financial regulatory. frank-dodd has been slightly rolled back. not entirely repealed but they changed some things around the edges, proprietary trading. you've seen this slowly chip away at some of the regulations put in place by previous administrations, democratic and republican. so, yes, pruitt is out. yes, he resigned somewhat in disgrace. but his legacy and his impact will be lasting for generations. i think when we look at the next steps on what the trump administration might do, i think a key question is do they try to make jeffrey wheeler, the
deputy, will they try to make that official, because there are certain duties, certain authorities that you have that you would only have as a full-on senate confirmed epa chief. so that will be another fight. it will be a lot of money poured into that. yet again it will raise the temperature. and i don't mean to make a global warming climate change pun here, it will raise the temperature in what's already going to be a very hot an contentious summer. >> right. and it's worth noting that there are several agencies with a head or departments with a head that have this mission of deregulating. rick perry at energy, betsy devos at education, mick mulvaney at the consumer financial protection bureau, they have renamed that and until right now scott pruitt at epa. but the others, betsy devos is a funny one because she steps in it every now and then. rick perry you hardly hear b mick mulvaney you hardly hear about. they are slowly dismantling the regulations, many of which were put into place by the obama
administration, but they are succeeding in this mission. when the president came out and said for every new regulation, he wants two gone, this is happening. and the epa and the department of energy and the department of education and the consumer financial protection bureau of places in which this is happening. things are either being dismantled or the administrator or cabinet secretary in charge are giving themselves more authority to make decisions as opposed to them going through regulatory processes. >> you know, the establishment republicans that joined the trump administration against maybe their will or what they really wanted, all the jeb bush types, the people that have been in this town for a long time, they did it because they know where the regulatory levers of power are. they can pull these regulatory levers and then how to affect the state on the regulatory side. if you want durable and lasting change you want to go through congress and go through the legislature. that's why obamacare is here to stay. they're trying to tinker with it
and sink it administratively, but it's still the letter of the law. what you saw at the very beginning of the trump administration as opposed to the end of the obama administration was that the bureaucrats and the administrators went at it immediately trying to things add 34i68, nministrative bothering with congress. you can do things quicker that way, but they're more durable. i'll give you a quick example of that. when you saw the obama administration change the rules on transgendered and being allowed to serve in the united states military, that was done very quickly. that was celebrated in some quarters. questioned in others. but as soon as you had a new administration, they were able to reverse that. and so when you think about lasting and durable changes, you come to the congressional aspect and legislative aspect and that's why these midterm elections are going to be so contentious. not only do we have emotional zee bates about abortion and roe v. wade and what's going to happen with the supreme court nominee, but you also have the very real issue of how you legislate and how you investigate. and that's why i suspect you're going to citi a lot of energy on the democrat side.
republicans in town are bracing for it. they know democrats have a lot of enter >> jeff: and can potentially win the house back. donald trump's two years in his first term, last two years in the first term look differently if he is facing a democratic house or senate because of investigative matters and because of their authority to legislate and to control spending. ali? >> stand by for a second, hans. i want to bring in aslan joining me on the phone. the correspondent for the daily beast. he stayed very close to this issue. swin, what have you got? >> well, regarding the recently resigned epa administrator scott pruitt, this is all happening very fast. but just minutes before i got on the phone with you guys, "the daily beast" has been almost flooded with messages from current senior white house officials and also recently resigned or ousted epa officials, some of whom former loyalists to scott pruitt who feel pretty well betrayed by
him. all of whom expressing a mix of a delight and, b, that this has all happened way later than any of them would have felt comfortable with it happening if it were up to chief of staff john kelly, someone like scott pruitt would have been thrown from the trump administration yesterday if not many, many days before. >> interesting points, because when scott -- john kelly sort of signalled to people off the record that before he leaves, and there is some talk that he'll be gone by the end of this month, he wanted to see scott pruitt gone. so this is an interesting development. but part of the problem, swin, you and i were talking about this on tv the other night, is that in the battle to drain the swamp, there are so many people who want to see the mission of the trump administration go forwards, but feel that this was the swamp. i just want to play quickly for you a senior -- i think it was a deputy chief of staff to scott pruitt who was on with scott hayes another night. let me just play for you what he said about him.
>> i actually saw where the chief of staff ryan jackson had to give one of the younger staffers literally pulled six $100 bills out of his wallet and gave it to this young lady. >> wait, what? because she had charged something for the administrator and not gotten reimbursed? >> it was hotel rooms from the inauguration that his family stayed in is what it was. >> all right. so, swin, this is the problem that scott pruitt and his remarkable list of activities, we might put that up on the screen while you're talking, has caused even close supporters of his both from oklahoma and in the trump administration to say, the guy is costing us too much. >> oh, absolutely. listen, when it comes to the deregulatory regime of scott pruitt's epa, he was getting the job done in a way that very much played to the whims and the desires of a president trump and those around him, but it wasn't that that brought him down. it was this cascading list of
scandal after scandal and allegation after allegation that really did turn scott pruitt into sort of a caricature of what you think a corrupt man in trump's swamp would be. and it wasn't just the corruption allegations. as we reported at "the daily beast" last week, he had a bit of a mean streak to him. he would personally direct an order smear campaigns against his own aides, current and former, who he felt had not been sufficiently loyal to him and in essence trying to destroy their careers. this is a guy if all these allegations from his own inner circle are to be believed, is not very nice guy and a pretty laughably corrupt one at that. >> let's go back to hans. hans, there is something interesting about today and i don't know whether it's connected, but bill shine, formerly of fox news has joined the president on his trip to montana. he is joining as the deputy chief of staff. what do you make of this?
>> well, i make two things. number one, bill shine is starting off his day by cleaning house, by trying to have a fresh start at his time at the white house and trying to get rid of some of the ethical challenges, ethical scandals following the president. i take a second point. he is on the plane, bill shine formerlily of fox news on the plane with donald trump on air force one and how do they communicate it? they do it by good old-fashioned presidential tweet. the shine regime apparently will not imperil trump's fondness for twitter and i think we can continue to expect even under shine the president will be making major announcements from 35,000 feet from his twitter handle. ali? >> swin, what are you -- hans and i were talking about what happens next. there are a whole bunch of people around the country either relieved or happy that scott pruitt is gone, but the issue at hand here is that people who follow the epa, i don't know if they've got anything to feel relieved about about the direction of the epa. what's your sense of whether this is a directional change or
this was just scott pruitt being too much of an albatross around the neck of this administration? >> this is a change of getting scott pruitt ousted completely or as much as possible from the trump administration and his to-be successor andy wheeler as far as i can gather, is set to take upon himself a very similar policy agenda as scott pruitt did. so for people, especially liberals who had been concerned about the deregulatory regime of the trump era epa, they can expect that to keep chugging along apace without the -- all the baggage of all the alleged corruption and ethical lapses. >> that is remarkable. that may be, for people who are worried about the air and the water, this may be a bigger problem because scott pruitt's effective nets was reduced by his penchant for getting himself into potential ethical lapses. andrew wheeler, if confirmed, or
whoever else if confirmed, may not have that. i want to remind you what happened a few days ago in a restaurant where a woman named kristin mink, a teacher, confronted scott pruitt with a child in her arms talking about the environment, why don't you resign before your scandals push you out. let's listen to that again. >> this is my son. he loves animals. he loves clean air. he loves clean water. while you're slashing -- you have been hanging -- while approving the pipeline, we deserve somebody who actually does protect our environment, someone who believes in climate change and takes it seriously for the benefit of all of us including our children. so, i would urge you to resign before your scandals push you out. >> i want to bring into the conversation emily holden, politico's climate change and
energy reporter. emily, to that point, too kristin mink's point -- i talked to her on tv the day after she confronted scott pruitt -- and i said what matters more to you, his scandals and the environment? by a long shot, the environment, the air, the water. to people that have those concerns, this is not necessarily a victory. >> absolutely not. i think the perp that you'son y to see replace scott pruitt in the short term or long term is going to pursue exactly the same platform he would have been. if anything there might be less negative attention on the epa from all the ethical controversies we're getting constant news. >> as is the case with the other agencies i've been talking about, the department of energy, the cfpb, things are happening on a daily basis but they're not subject to the type of scrutiny scott pruitt has been getting. is there a danger in your world of coverage of climate and energy issues that changes are being made that americans are
not necessarily clear about in the epa? that's why donald trump likes scott pruitt so much. he was getting stuff done there. >> i do think that a lot of policy news can get buried behind a lot of the day to day political news, but i also believe scott pruitt has really elevated epa into the public mind and the public discussion and i think that it seems like people are paying more attention to what epa does than they used to do. and it's important to remember, too, that a lot of these public records that were only coming out because environmental groups were suing for them are just going to keep coming. we're going to learn more and more about what pruitt and his staff have been doing at epa since they took over following the obama administration. and a lot of news is probably yet to come. >> emily, thanks very much for joining us. hans nick always, thanks everybody for helping us out with the breaking news. the breaking news is scott pruitt, the epa administrator, has resigned. donald trump tweeting he accepted the resignation of scott pruitt as the environmental protection agency. that brings this hour to a close for me. i'll be ra right back here at
11:00 eastern for "the 11th hour." thank you for watching. "deadline white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in washington, d.c., and we begin with breaking news. the president tweeting just moments ago that he has accepted the resignation of epa administrator scott pruitt. the subject of almost daily headlines highlighting one eyebrow raising ethical violation after another. the president sending pruitt off with praise tweeting, quote, within the agency scott has done an outstanding job and i will always be thankful to him for this. the senate confirmed deputy at epa andrew wheeler will on monday assume duties as the acting administrator of the epa. i have no doubt that andy will continue on with our great and lasting epa agenda. we have made tremendous progress and the future of the e palomino, a is very bright. mr. pruitt is the subject of at least 13 -- 13 federal investigations and a government watch dog agency concluded he had broken the law with his