Skip to main content

tv   MSNBC Live With Katy Tur  MSNBC  July 31, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PDT

11:00 am
>> that wraps up this hour of "msnbc live" and katy tur is joining us to pick up the coverage. >> thank you. we are following breaking news. an effort to mettle in the u.s. election elections effort is apparently far from over. facebook has told the lawmakers that they have found a new covert campaign to spread divisive political message s on the network. the announcement is 98 days ahead of the midterm elections, and the company is already taking measures to stop the influence operation. it has removed 32 accounts from both facebook and instagram.
11:01 am
most seized on the divisive issues and the pages promoted organizations like unite the right, and exploited an effort from some of and the left to the abolish i.c.e. with the investigation in the early stages, facebook officials say they cannot confirm definitively who is behind the efforts or what country might be behind the efforts. but that is not stopping some lawmakers from promising action against the cup are tri they believe is the likely culprit, russia. >> i will be introducing thursday a sanctions bill against russia that has everything but the kitchen sink in it, and it is the sanctions bill from hell and any other country who is trying to interfere with our election should should suffer the same fate. you can only do so much on defense. it is now time to go on offense. >> so the big question is why is the white house dragging the
11:02 am
feet when it comes to securing our elections? mime is a national political reporter for nbc news, and kimmer bely atkins is the chief washington reporter for the " s "boston herald" and msnbc contributor, and clint watts is a former fbi agent and he is e author of "messing with the enemy, surviving in a social media world of hackers, terrorists, russians and fake news." sorry if you can hear the phone that has gone off in the back of the studio, but we le work through it. thank you. and we have clint as a national security analyst for msnbc. and guys, first of all, thank you for joining us. mike, let's start with you, and 32 pages and accounts flagged. they appeared on facebook and instagram. relatively new and created from march 2017 and may 2018. >> that is right, katy. if you remember in february, special counsel robert moouler
11:03 am
in the indictment against the internet research agency the russian-backed troll farm specified in detail how the russia russian-backed entity could use social media to affect our presidential election in 2016, and what this information from facebook makes clear that the effort is ongoing and learning from what they did before to refine the tactics, which is really what is remarkable here is that based on the new information from facebook in the last hour is that not only were these 32 facebook and instagram accounts and pages identified as potentially rush-backed entities designed to stoke the political issues near the u.s., but also political events that some of the pages sponsored that actually took place. these are real things that these facebook accounts promoted that were designed to piggyback on the divisive issues line abolish i.c.e. and unite the right white supremist rallies and draw real americans to actual events in the country. so there is a tactic that the
11:04 am
russians used in 2016 and despite all of the talk on capitol hill and a lot of the efforts to try to by facebook to pro proactively address the matter, rush that is still able to address it. i should be clear, because facebook is not specifically identifying russia as the source, but what we know is that in the last 48 hours, the senior members of both the intelligence and the judiciary committees on capitol hill and the leadership and the justice department and the fbi have been briefed and the sources are telling me that they have said that these do bear all of the hall marks of what the internet agency and russian agencies did in 2016. >> and exes pand on this, and how does it compare and contrast to what we saw in 2016? >> it is a exact rep will ka of the playbook. last week, daily beast has p published hackers attempting to hit the senators. if you want to influence the election in 2018, you have to hack in the 2017, and this is what we saw with the two
11:05 am
senators hit late in 2017, and now accounts are being setup, and infiltrate audiences through the social issues and create a behavior change and take every crack and turn it into the chasm so when it is election time, you can drive them politically towards the candidates and the same approach. >> when you say make every crack a chasm and by taking the groups and the ones that we are seeing the examples of right now are the groups on the left and mostly the groups from the page called are resistors, and women resisting the donald trump presidency, resisting fascism according to the page, and talking about men and how women don't need to be beholden to men and they don't need to wear pink for men and be thankful for men or have sex with men essentia y essentially, and how does that help any one political party in the election? >> they attract the followers and the interest by picking up on the wedge issues a at time when people are emotional. and when people are emotional
11:06 am
they are more vulnerable to take on content that feeds what they want to believe or counters what they believe. so these are dual messaging. and it is left or right, and no, you create a page to prove kate the opposition in some cases. and in other cases, you create a page to get people to mobilize to do it, and it is the dual purpose and you can use it for both audiences. >> so when donald trump tweeted that russia is still working hard to interfere in the democrats and the elections and could he have been pointing to this? >> well, might have been, but they have been to the left and the right and going to the twitter accounts in 2016, there was significant influence to tri y to turn down, turn down voter input in 2016 amongst the democrats, and to do that you have to influence. two of the narratives they were pushing is that bernie sanders got a raw deal and still have to show up for jill stein. you want enough levers to elevate a candidate or push a candidate down, and you have to be on both sides of the spectrum
11:07 am
to do that >> and kimberly, the white house eliminated the position, top position on cybersecurity, the coordinator for cybersecurity on the national security council and kconversations that reportes have had with those involved in what is going on today and what is going won the facebook news, and the message has been donald trump hasn't shown a shred of interest in this topic. what is this white house doing, and why aren't they taking this more seriously from the reporting that is out there? >> yeah, i mean, today, we did see dhs secretary kirstjen neilson saying that these efforts by russian groups are ongoing, and using some tough talk saying that it -- >> which is a change from what she had said the other week in aspen? >> yes, it is at change in what she said before, and it is also different from what the president said. we saw him standing with with vladimir putin and afterwards and say, well, yes, it was russia, but it could have been other people, too.
11:08 am
and it is stronger from what the president said, but it is most ly the tough talk on the part of administration officials, and there is ono overarching plan or mechanism to deal with this on the full scale. and different agencies have certain measures in place, and certain internal units that are meant to address cybersecurity and other kinds can of the foreign interference, but there is no coordinated effort coming out of the white house there. is no additional help provided by congress either and we heard senator gram talking about the sa sanctions as a possible to respond, because he said if you don't have defense you have to use offense, but the issue is that. there is no defense so far. and not a very good one over what we saw happening in 2016 as this playbook seems to be being used right the same playbook all over again. >> and one of the topics that they are using according to facebook is that they are seizing on to the movement to
11:09 am
the al boll ish i.c.e., abolish kirsten gillibrand and elizabeth warren as well, so there is an actual movement, and what does it mean when you the president of the united states tweeting 12 times that the democrats in general want to abolish i.c.e., and clint, talk to me about the relationship between those two thi things? is there a relationship between the two things? what is at stake? >> the goal of the russian influence known as active measures is to divide and conquer the united states by breaking us into pieces so that we are fighting against each other, and any issuet of the white house or capitol hill or the public and social, and financial or calamitous, fear-based messages, they will play on those to build the audience around them, and once they have the audiences secured, they will push them the against each other, and the goal is not
11:10 am
to win one election or another, but it is to degrade the democracy as a function weigh to do governance and no trust in the elected officials that they were elect and if they are elected that they have the capacity to do the job. >> and the element of this is that facebook does not want to be accused of 2016 of not keeping a watchful eye of the content on the site. what do you say about facebook's effort and their transparency in this news today? >> yeah, so it is great that they are doing this, and catching it. i remind everybody that there is a senate intelligence committee hearing tomorrow which is a public hearing where facebook and a lot of the social media companies are likely to be punched pretty hard in the nose. at the same point, facebook has mobilized in a strong and significant way. they have put a lot of resources into it, and they are doing the detection and starting to nip it right whenever it starts from the bud. so this is all good. the question is though can they keep up with the pace? it is still easier to make fake news than it is to catch the
11:11 am
fake news and easier to make a conspiracy page than to take it down. >> one last question for you, what is the advice for everyday people like me, and people at home who are using the facebook and instagram and on twitter. >> you have to know the original source of the information and make sure that you know the source, and what is it, and the reason that it is working is two buy biases and that you have explicit and implicit biases. and people like to have filters, but people think that the unfiltered version is the best version and actually the news sources who have a good reputation and using the editors a and have a physical address and know where they are at. if you get a weird news story, and can you show me where the news source is coming from, and if not, there is a good chance c they don't want you to know because they are not el thing the truth. so there are techniques and trust in the physical relationships and the news source more than the facebook friend
11:12 am
friends. they are not trying the dupe you, but they are getting duped themselves. >> the responsibility is not just on the government and politicians or intelligence community or or on facebook or twitter or whatever it is, but it is also on us. nbc's mike memley and kimberly watts and chris, thank you. and now, we have a jury seat ed in the trial of opaul j. manafort, and this is the first defendant indicted by the special counsel to face trial. he is charged with 18 counts of tax evasion and money laundering and this is called a quote paper case, bu t it is based on records. and mueller's team literally has the receipts the actual physical receipts and the prosecution is going to paint manafort as a man who lived a life of oexcess, spending the hidden income het got working for the ukrainian politicians, custom-made suit, and persian rugs and the luxury vehicles buying that sort of
11:13 am
thing while not paying taxes here in the u.s. but manafort will not be the only person on trial in the alexandria courtroom. it is also a test for robert mueller and his investigation. there are only two ways that this can end. manafort will be found guilty and spend the rest of his life behind bars or he is going to be going free and outcome to discredit mooueller and the ove two-year-old probe he has been leading. >> when you are a prosecutor and we used to say all of the time, if you are going to try to kill the king, make sure that he is dead. and the fact is that this case is going to be very important to establish credibility for bob mueller. and if he were to ever lose this case can, it would be an extraordinary problem. >> and so, now, for kim delaney and outside of the courthouse in alexandria is ben whittics a fellow of studies in the brookings institution and nbc news and msnbc legal analyst and
11:14 am
editor and chief of law fair. and barbara mcquaid is an attorney in michigan and nbc and msnbc news contributor and we will start with you, ken. the jury has been seated, and that is a quick seating for the jury. usually, it takes a few days. >> yeah, it was surprising, katy. this district in the eastern district of alexandria is known as the rocket docket which is a reference to civil case, but it moved fast in the courtroom. judge ellis sped it along. there was a pool of 65 potential juror jurors, and he winnowed it down to six men and i six women and then also four alternates, and the real drama in this trial, katy, is going to be the things that are not said. because russia is not going to be mentioned at all and the judge has ruled that the jury will not formally hear that he worked for donald trump and so the idea of collusion or interference in the 2016 election is not coming up, and when the judge began to explain
11:15 am
the charges to the jury, he started out into the dry tax case, and you are absolutely right, this is a paper and document case. but legal experts say it is an overwhelming case and paul manafort faces long odds here, and some of the sort of the unspoken craw ma is that while he is wearing a black suit today and seated -- unspoken drama is that he is going to be wearing a black suit today, he is going to be sleeping in a green jumpsuit in prison, because he is facing 10 years under the guidelines and not the maximum and another trial in d.c. to face 15 year, and so strong consequences for paul manafort, katy. >> and why are the prosecution and the defense said to be avoiding the name donald trump and why not bringing up russia in the context of the mueller investigation? >> well, one of the rules of evidence says that if something is more prejudicial than probative, it should be excluded from the trial, because it could be a distraction from the members of the jury.
11:16 am
i imagine if you rare the defene team, you could have people on the jury who harbor strong feelings about president trump and maybe you don't want them to know about paul manafort's affiliation, and the same with russia. the russian investigation and those who don't pay close attention to the news know something about it. so if i were defending paul manafort i would seek to exclude those references, because they are not directly relevant to the matters before the jury, tax fraud matters and bank fraud matt matters and to avoid the spector of those, i would want that precluded from the evidence as well, and so that is not surprising. >> this is something that one of our contributors at the msnbc said in the daily beast. a conviction is a powerful vindication and i will jitization of the special council office, and anything short of conviction would cause can evoke legendary bursts of
11:17 am
twitter and gloating by the president. so this trial is not about what paul manafort was doing with russia to affect the election in 2016 or what he was not doing with them as a part of the trump campaign, but it is about the way he avoided paying taxes on the money he was making from a foreign government. given that's what this case is about, what do you make of what mee mee rocha is saying and how this could cast a shadow on the mueller investigation if they end up lose ining? >> from my detached intellectual perspective, this case should have nothing to do with anything else, but i think that she is absolutely right when you are looking at it through the lenses of this is the first case publicly from the auoffice of t special counsel, i don't see how anybody can see it intertwined with something of a larger picture, so in many wa ways, it is a referendum on the effective of robert mueller. in many kays, he is lucky this is the first one going to the
11:18 am
trial. and lawyers like the paper cases, because there is less to go sideways. and humans on the stand can fail, and their memories can fail, and their biases can be exposed, but documents don't lie. so this is what i think is likely a strong case. and so, if and when there is a conviction here, i think that will help to calm some members of the public and give them confidence as robert mooueller goes forward. >> and rudy giuliani was talking about paul manafort on cnn and saying that they were not worried about him, because he had no incriminating evidence, and nothing to say incriminating towards the president. take a listen to rudy. >> he has no information incriminating of the president, and i know that for a fact. they can squeeze him, paul manafort does not know anything nor could can it be possible that he did. he was with him for four months and i was there when paul manafort was, and he was a brilliant gatherer of delegates. >> he was the chairman.
11:19 am
>> yes, but he was not really jared and the sons and boss y and the other people running it. >> but on one hand, he has no incriminating information on the president, and on the other hand, he is saying that he didn't have much to do with the campaign and still trying to separate him from what happened in 2016. >> yeah, and of course, rudy says it with the usual ebullient confidence that he knows for a fact. all kinds of things that he is in no position to know, right. and at the most, he is in a position to know what the president tells him, but the president of course is not a reliable recounter of his own li life. and so, you know, he goes out there and he is making the comments that are at once sort of hyperconfident and sort of head scratching in there of how the heck does he purport to know that? look, paul manafort may or may not have a major contribution to
11:20 am
make if he were to flip. but there is no evidence that he going to flip. he is going to trial at this point. that may mean that it is the worst of all worlds for everybody which is to say that if he is convicted, he could can end up not having the benefit of having cooperated in terms of the amount of time that he is going the sero serve, but it ma mean that mueller may not get his cooperation and a deal maybe would have been better for everybody except for rudy giulia giuliani. >> and one other question for you, ben, on a completely different topic. and i hope that the viewers don't mind us doing this, but something stood out the you, something that donald trump said in the first joint session to congress and not the first state of the union, but the joint session to congress that he had right after he was elected and it struck you as an odd thing to
11:21 am
say. and let's play it for the viewers. you know, what i don't have it, but i will read it from the full screen. to data provided by the department of justice the vast majority of individuals convicted of terrorism, and terrorism-related offenses since 9/11 came here from outside of our country. obviously, donald trump is trying to the say that immigration is a bad thing, and he is trying to the propose immigration policies that would severely restrict who can come into the country at the time that they were trying to push through the travel ban which would mean that people from muslim majority nations would not be allowed inside of the u.s., and that struck you as something that you wanted to check up on, and you foiled a foi ya wi-- foia with the doj. >> yes, it is not often that you get a letter that says that the president lied in a speech of a joint session to congress, but that is kind of what i got the other day. i foya'd and i did not believe that statement by the president either about what it said about
11:22 am
immigrants or what it said about justice department data. i have had a year-long sort of the foya back and forth with the justice department. they finally wrote me a letter after we had agreed on what search they were going to do, and they agreed to search for data records reflecting the data on all terrorism and terrorism-related convictions foreign and international and domest domestic. and there are no records responsive to that request. so the day that the president is talking about don't exist. >> and you know, it reminds me of the data this e was using in the election about immigrants that were coming across the border, and they were rapists and criminals and he would talk about the crime in border cities being very high. i presented him with pew research that said it is not the case, and also pew research that said that people who were born here were likely to commit more crime than those who immigrated here. ben, what does it say to you that the president is still saying things that are not
11:23 am
backed up by the facts? >> well, you know, i don't -- i mean, i guess what it says is that something that we all know in our hearts is that we have a president who has no regard for even understanding what the truth is, but it is important to remind people of that, and you know, when the president is standing up in front of the congress of the united states and the well of the house and gives a speech, we have a reasonable entitlement as a public to expect that the words he says, and whether you a agree with the policies or not, but the factual statements that he is making are true. and in the case, this was not true both about his own justice department which did not provide him data to support that statement, and about, you know, the many people who come to this country from all over the world and he's suggesting that they are, you know, responsible for terrorism. so i think it is, you know, it
11:24 am
is not a surprise that the president was lying, but it is a valuable thing to remember every time, you know, something that he says in a policy context just is based on the information that is not true. >> ben wittist, and barbara mcquade and thank you for staying with us with that left turn from the manafort jury. and thank you for that update on the story. and now, moving on to the a breaking news and this time sexual allegations against les moon vez. they say they will not pursue one of the allegations against him a. woman told los angeles police that he had abused her on three occasion in the 1980s. prosecutors have declined due to statute of limitations. the announcement comes after the "new yorker" published an
11:25 am
article in which six women alleged sexual misconduct and it is not known if the woman in this case is among those who spoke to the "new yorker." joining me is the senior editor claire atkinson and what more do you know about this? >> well, another bad day for one of the most powerful men in hollywood. today, we are hearing this news about the lady who apparently in february went to the police and told them about a couple of incidents involving leslie moonves who is the ceo of cbs. and she raised the seriousness of the allegations against the ceo, and we heard about those on friday from the "new yorker's" row na farro with, and it is a d day for them, and obviously, the l.a. county prosecutor's office saying they are declining to prosecute and it is a bad day for cbs, because there is other negative news of the controlling
11:26 am
shareholder of cbs today is revealed to have filed a lawsuit claiming that cbs buried evidence that they had disappearing texts, and she would like them to preserve evidence, because she is in a fight with them. >> is this sherry redstone? >> yes sh, and she controls 60% the shares of cbs. >> and now, these women are saying that he forcibly harassed them or forcibly kissed them and physically intimidated them or threatened to derail the careers can and it became cold or hostile after they were, and after he rejected or they rejected his advances. excuse me. so right now, the -- correct me if i am wrong -- the cbs board is deciding whether or not to keep moonves on or to let him go. >> correct. so yesterday, they had a meeting, and a couple of hours' long and after the meeting was over they decided to hire an outside counsel to the look into the accusations, but many were surprised that they did not
11:27 am
suspend him immediately, which is typical practices here in which a company is investigating a top executive at the company. they did not say they would not suspend him at all. >> and it is interesting, because when we have seen allegations coming out with other powerful men -- >> and john lassie ter for example. >> and the consequences have come through in a much more swifter way. >> yes. >> and what does it say to you that things are starting to slow down in the investigation process it seems before someone is summarily dismissed and it seemed that the companies are o going to be going through and check the allegations out. >> yes, in case, the board seems to have decided that there are two sides to every story and give leslie a chance to defend himself. but that is certainly fair, but i think that a lot of the corporate governance experts that i have spoken to have said it is a little bit awkward for anybody else at the corporation who has an accusation if the person in power is still at the top and not removed while these things are going on. there will be other reports, i
11:28 am
am hearing from other outlets besides the "new yorker" with accusations that men who were accused of bad behavior will be outed and complaints that the women have made have not been heard correctly. so i think that cbs's problem is not just that the accusations have been made against the ceo, but more that there is a culture not addressed internally with the correct processes. >> and it is not just cbs, because the entire company, but it is cbs news and the way that things have operated there and the story by rona far rowe is going to take a look at the way things have been operated at "60 minutes." thank you for joining us, claire atkinson. and one more breaking story. out of the white house, the msnbc news has learned that president trump has asked john kelly to stay on. and despite a year of headlines
11:29 am
detailing the friction between the two men. with me now, the correspondent kristen welker from the white house. kristen, the scoop on kelly? >> well, katy, you got the breaking news right, according to the senior administration official, kelly told staffers on monday that the president had asked him to stay through 2020, through the election, and that kelly has in fact accepted. but look no the backdrop of this, and it is a significant development, because by all accounts, the expectation is that kelly is the eye of the exits given that this is the one-year mark. and look at what he tweeted yesterday celebrating john kelly's first year anniversary, and congratulations to general john kelly and today we celebrate his first full year as at white house chief of staff. the conventional thinking was that kelly's influence here at the white house had wane and that he was effectively thinking of the next steps.
11:30 am
look, kelly was brought on a year ago, katy to really bring more order to this white house, which is particularly in the first few months was wracked by cha chaos. and kelly did that to some extent and limited the number of people pass iing through the ov office who were granted access to the aufl office and the president. he cracked down on the type of information that president trump was seeing and that was filtered into him, and there was broadly a sense that he had brought more order to this white house. now, of course, president trump continues to tweet and continues the say things that he does not necessarily run by the chief of staff, but as you pointed out, katy, as the months went on, there were some divisions between the two that spilled out into the public, and for example in one instance, they really were on opposite ends of an immigration discussion with john kelly seeming to publicly criticize the president trump and he walked it back, but the bottom line, there have been some ups and downs and part of t the reason that folks expected him to leave. that and the fact that the
11:31 am
influence here in recent months, it has been perceived has been waning, so this is a significant development. bapd the way, if kelly does stay on through 2020 that is one of the longest serving chief of staff staffs in u.s. history, katy. now as you know in the trump white house nothing is a done deal until it is a done deal, and so talk about it after the 2020 election to see if he sticks it out. >> talk next week, maybe, because you never know. and this deal through 2020, does it come with the full american breakfast, eggs, bacon and toast? >> i would not be surprised if that is part of the contract, because the chief of staff loves those things for breakfast. >> kristen welker, thank you very much. >> thank you, katy. >> and up next, are russian investigation, and so what? collusion is not a crime. lance. re-align yourself with align probiotic. and try new align gummies with prebiotics and probiotics to help support digestive health.
11:32 am
about the colonial penn program. here to tell you if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month.
11:33 am
i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you, too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the number one most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed, and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. and with this plan, you can pick your payment date, so you can time your premium due date to work with your budget. so call now for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, and it's yours just for calling. so call now.
11:34 am
11:35 am
new laptop with 24/7 tech support. yep, thanks guys. i think he might need some support. yes start them off right. with the school supplies they need at low prices all summer long. save $200 on this dell laptop at office depot officemax. welcome back. welcome to the ever-changing explanations for what did or did not happen in 2016. the president and his campaign are being investigated for what if any ties they had to russia during the election and while the president has often said that there were no ties, we know that is not true. it is just factually incorrect. first, no onet met with any h h russian, and then sure my campaign advisers met with russia, but of no consequence and then nobody met with any russian offering dirt, and yes, they offered dirt, but they did not deliver. >> a lot of people are going to want to know this the about your father. >> yes.
11:36 am
>> did you tell your father anything about this? >> no. it was such a nothing. there was nothing to tell. i mean i wouldn't have remembered it until you start scouring through the stuff. it is a literally wasted 20 minutes whcih minutes which is shame. >> and then the president had nothing to do with the son's statement denying that anyone offered dirt. and then the president dictated the statement while aboard air force one. and no, the president still did not know anything about the trump tower meeting before or after it happened. then, reports michael cohen were willing to tell robert mueller that he did know about it, and don jr. told him about it beforehand and then yesterday rudy giuliani suggested that there were allegations of another meeting a strategy session with rick gates, paul manafort and jared kushner and don jr. to game out the meeting two days before shet got there. >> and the meeting that cohen is talking about is took place
11:37 am
before the meeting of the russian, and the other thing that is contradicted is cohen also now says, because he says too much that two days before he was participate ing ing in the g with roughly the same group of people, but not the president, and definitely not the president in which they were talking about the strategy of the meeting with the russians. the people in that meeting deny it. >> i still don't have any idea what he is talking about. >> and now, there is no collusion. but even if there was, collusion is not a crime. >> i have been sitting here look at the federal code looking for collusion as a crime. >> it is not. >> collusion is not a crime and everything release sod far has shown the president to be innocent. >> and they are not going to be colluding about the russians which i am not sure if it is a crime, colluding about the russians, you start to analyzing the crime, and the hacking is the crime. >> and so, okay. ye yeah. okay. susan del percio is a political strategist, and politico analyst and worked in rudy giuliani's
11:38 am
administration when he was mayor of new york and that seems a long time ago now. and jess mcintosh is a executive editor of share blue and former adviser to hillary clinton the's campaign. collusion is not in the criminal code, no. but conspiracy is a crime, and in order to collude, you have to generally conspire, and that is what robert mueller is looking into it, but it is so interesting, susan, that they are moving the goalpost, and one thing for sure, they are moving the goalpost on what is, what is or is not wrong or crime or bad. or what they did or did not do. >> right. and what they are trying to do is like they did with robert mueller is to muddy investigation and have everyone confused and try to tear down what may come out, and don't forget this whole thing yesterday was in response to a reporter, someone from "the new york times" was going to be reporting on it, and had a story that was never reported on -- >> and also, that new york times reporter is asking what story
11:39 am
they are talking about. >> and she has no idea what he is talking about. >> and wonders if rudy got it from somewhere else and the discovery and the mueller investigation. >> and that is one thing that is important, because we are always about six months behind mueller, and he has already investigated or spoken to people and we find out three to the six months after the fact, and so maybe there are things that are leaked out or the witnesses that are called in that would lead to this, but, again, this is -- we are talking about and i understand the importance of it, but in a lot of ways, we are are talking about nothing, because we don't know. and we are talking about michael cohen saying that there may have been a meeting, but there may not have. >> and what we are talking about is based on yesterday are the words of two of the most unreliable narrator s ths that have ever had in history, michael cohen and rudy giuliani and watching the trump legal team do this spinning thing makes me want to put every major
11:40 am
decision that i have ever have to make in my mind is in the hands of a woman watching this happen. >> and everybody is saying that giuliani and lanny davis and michael cohen maybe not on twitter, but avenatti screaming at each other. >> yes. and it is a lot. and the fact that the trump administration would devolve into to a bunch of men screaming at each other is a surprise to nobody. and the collusion is not a crime is where we have to sit back and perk up and pay attention, because the fact that the president's lawyer is going there suggests something very, very dark indeed. i think that we never actually finished the sentence, colluding with the russians to what. because it goes directly to the legitimacy of the president. like, colluding with the russians may not be a crime, and conspireing with a foreign adversary to cheatt on the way to the white house most certainly is. and every american understands that. >> and does every american understand that? >> when you put it that way, i believe they do.
11:41 am
yes. are you allowed to put your thumb on the scale with a foreign adversary to steal the white house. >> and everybody does it is a refrain that i have heard from folks. >> i cannot imagine, and maybe part of -- and remember only 26% of america only voted for trump and i would say that base is shrinking smaller as we see it play out. the number of people who believe that is an appropriate thing to do to the democracy has to be very small. >> and donald trump is the one who brought up the rigging of the 2016 election back in 2016. >> and speak iing of which -- s piers morgan by the way, a defender of donald trump did a softball interview with him the other day while the president was in the u.k., and sub tweet ed the president today and said that collusion may not be a crime, but if it is something that they find, you should resign immediate ly over it. so when you lose piers morgan. >> that is significant, and so
11:42 am
that is interesting, because something that we saw out of helsinki when he started to get so much negative pushback on what he said, he walked it back. so, like you said, if you are losing piers brosnan, piers morgan. >> and brosnan is long gone. >> and if you are losing that constituency, that a pile-on and that is potentially dangerous for this president. >> and i asked you about this, and if you had rudy giuliani confusing everybody, is that a win? >> well, yes, he is confusing everybody right now, but he is confusing them around an issue and kicking up dust where we know that there was a meeting in trump tower where the president's son at least said, yeah, we'd love some dirt on the opponent and the meeting happen and the president was involved in the cover-up of that meeting and the fact that the lawyer is being confusing about it does not change the facts so for most people following the story, the
11:43 am
idea is that there is too much drama around trump and russia and what it did to help him get the presidency and at the moment when we are trying to stop, and democrats are trying to stop brett cavanaugh and very much wanting to know the truth, the idea that they would be helpful in appointing a justice who would say, you know what, we don't need to know that and america does not deserve to know that. >> and i hear at the very least people have the right to ask judge kavanaugh about that since it was an opinion that he wrote an article about back in i believe 2009 when obama was in power, and he was talking about his experience on the ken starr investigation which was
11:44 am
investigating bill clinton so at the very least people should get a chance to have his thoughts on that now. >> very much in regards to the current situation. >> and the more confusing it gets the more important to have someone answer questions factually which is more difficult to obfuscate and get anything done. >> daylight is the best disinfective. and now, gubernatorial is my favorite and i will say it. thanks in part of support and tweets from the president, and dose santos is running as close to donald trump as humanly possible. >> ron loves playing with the kids kids. >> build the wall. >> he reads story. >> and then mr. trump said, "you're fired." i love that part. >> he is teaching madison to talk. >> make america great again.
11:45 am
>> and some people say that ron is all trump, but he is so much more. >> big league, so good. >> oh, boy. desantis is one trying to be trumpier than trump. >> i own guns and nobody is going to take it away. i have a big truck in case i have to round up the criminal illegal illegals and take them home myself. >> and only oone candidate helped to write the trump words, diane black. and only one voted to wall. >> come on up, diane black. >> i am don trump jr. and i support mark k oobach for governor. >> and so what is happening with ron desantis in your state? >> well, he is winning
11:46 am
republicans and a lot. for all of the bad press that the president has gotten, understand that his base does not really believe the press. and based on the tweets and the endorsement that you just played there supporti ining desantis' support is through the roof. and most of the likely voters support president trump and once he blesss a candidate, that saul they need. >> is that a good thing for the general election in florida? might win a republican primary, but what about running gaiagaina democrat? >> that is great. and remember when we were talking in 2016 thinking, oh, boy, donald trump is going to have trouble in the general election and in florida he won. i talked to a democratic po pollster about the trump's arrival and the total dominance of the republican politics in florida and he said when my side says that ron desantis is too
11:47 am
right wing and better off with the opponent, and that our nominee would fair better against ron desantis i say, did you hear that from the clinton white house, because she was going to win and donald trump was not going to win, and so there is intensity right now for donald trump and on the republican side for ron desantis. >> and so those claiming to be more donald trump than donald trump or trumpier than trump, and they have lost. rick saccone lost in his race, and he was saying all sorts of things. but at the same time, jake, if you are looking at a little bit of the ax yoes reporting today, they point out that trump-backed candidates, and they have won 9 of last 10 contested races including all primary races.
11:48 am
so does that suggest that trump is a boon more than he is a weight? >> i think it is more complicate complicated than that, because in a lot of the races have been in districts where trump is a boon obviously. and if you are looking across the country at races that republicans need to hold both to keep the senate majority and to keep the house majority, trump is not necessarily going to be an additive factor. looking at the 24 seats that the republicans currently hold that hillary clinton won, he is not going to be an additive factor across the country. so a lot of the special elections were sparked by people going into the administration or resignations, but a lot of them were in solidly republican and solidly red seats, so it is not a terrific sample size, and what is more important to think about in this race is that you have adam putnam who has literally a resume that you would dream of the you are a republican
11:49 am
candidate, and already a statewide elected official and former member of the public leadership and versus ron desantis who has harvard and yale degrees and a conservative, and you can see in a nutshell what the electoral climate is in trump's washington and in trump's america post donald trump's presidential victory. >> so are we looking at tight and focused races as opposed to the general election map for the midterms, because when you are looking at, i don't know, the krystal ball for the outlook for, gosh, gosh, i am forgetting the name, and the name is blanking, but the krystal ball says that the democrats have a good shot, and over 50% shot of retaking the house, jake. >> yeah, i mean -- >> larry sabbido.
11:50 am
>> yes, i was going to throw it in, but the vast majority of the party is going to lose the house almost every single time in the first midterm and two exception. 2002 and 1997 when bill clinton was about to be impeached. so the vast majority of data tell us us this and the electoral climate tells us this and thr a loft republicans sitting in seats where the president isn't popular and hillary clinton won those seats. so based on that data, you would have to say yeah it's more than a 50% chance. but like you just indicated, all these races are between two different people. so that's important to keep in mind as we sit now 98 days before election day. >> 98 days. gentlemen, thank you very much. >> thank you. as of midnight, if you want a deadly weapon, all you have to do is press print. 3d guns are just hours away from
11:51 am
being legal, so what could stop this? chances are, you have an e-mail powered by mail chip. how did the two founders turn what was once a side hustle into a half billion dollar business without taking a dime of outside funding? we tell the story of this e-mail marketing giant this sunday at 7:30 a.m. eastern on msnbc. it's pretty amazing out there. the world is full of more possibilities than ever before. and american express has your back every step of the way- whether it's the comfort of knowing help is just a call away with global assist. or getting financing to fund your business. no one has your back like american express. so where ever you go. we're right there with you. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. don't live life without it.
11:52 am
11:53 am
11:54 am
are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. zblunchts if you have access to a 3d printer, you can make your own so-called ghost gun at home. that means it is untraceable. undetectable and unregulated. all courtesy of this man. cody wilson. five years ago, the so-called
11:55 am
techno anarchist successfully made a functioning firearm with a 3d printer. he published the specks online and within day, they had been downloaded 100,000 times. the bush administration stepped in, they said he was violating arms export laws and demanded he take the plans down, then he hired new lawyers and turned the case around on the government. he did not just argue it was his second amendment right to bear arm, he argued it was his first to post the specks online t he claimed free speech. he asserted the code was protected under the institution and garnered support from free speech organizations along with gun rights groups. a month ago after years in the courts, the trump doj sided with wilson, settle d the case and even paid some of his legal fees. now on the eve of the specks going online, eight states and the district of columbia have
11:56 am
filed suit against the trump administration and the president seems to be aware of what his administration is allowing. quote, i am looking into 3d plastic guns being sold to the public. spoke to nra. doesn't seem to make much sense. over on capitol hill, senate democrats slammed the trump administration today for allowing this to happen in the first place. >> the trump administration is responsible for this. no one else. not an accident. it wasn't something that sort of fell through the cracks. >> you can blame it on anyone. if hemts to save face, but it's his doing. it's his responsibility. and the blood's going to be on his hands. >> one of the attorneys general who signed on joins us now, john shapiro. thank you for joining us, what are you arguing in order to get this stopped and do you think
11:57 am
you will be successful? we are just ten hours away. less. >> we've been successful in pennsylvania and we hope to be successful across the country very soon. this weekend, we went into court on an emergency basis and were able to block this code from ever making its way into pennsylvania. >> how do you block something from making its way into pennsylvania when it's online? how do you police that? >> it's not perfect, certainly, which is why we want this to go nationwide, but anybody with an ip address pennsylvania if they try to access this, won't be able to. the real danger is these untraceableable, undetect dbl guns, not only getting sbot wrong hands of the wrong people, but it also just frankly skirts our state gun laws and federal laws, which is why attorneys general, myself included, across this country, have stepped up as a matter of public safety as the law enforcement leaders within our respective states, to stop this code from being published.
11:58 am
this will be able to be b aqui successed by anybody with a 3-d printer. the philadelphia school district would be able to have students there print these guns out if this code is allowed to be made online available to everybody. this is not only against the law, it is a danger to our schools, a danger to our communities and we've got to stop it. >> and this is plastic. so it would not be detect bable by metal detectors, which means you could get it into a school or a sporting event or you could get it on to a plane. >> got forbid, right. you could get it on plane, a school, any sort of public event. and the wrong people would have access to it. terrorists. criminals who can't buy guns legally in pennsylvania right now r or in other states. would be able to very easily click print on their 3drk printer and have one of these guns that's capable of killing. this simply doesn't make sense. and i had to laugh.
11:59 am
today the president tweets out that he just heard about this. even though it was his administration that actually put this in place to allow these plans to be able to put on the sper net and his first phone call was to the nra? come on. his first phone call should have been to leaders in law enforcement to talk about how to keep our communities safe. that's what we need right now. is to focus on the safety and well being of our kids in schools and people all across our communities. that's what's needed and that's why i'm in court right now fighting back to ensure this code never gets out there. so guns can't get in the hand of criminals. >> let me ask you a quick question and we don't have any time left, he won this on a first amendment grounds, saying this was free speech. are you trying to make the argument this is like yelling fire in a feeder? >> it violates state laws. federal laws. you have to meet certain conditions to buy firearm. this allows people to go around
12:00 pm
that. it's dwens the law. that's why we've xwoen to court and i'm hopeful, i'm cautiously optimistic that we're going to be successful in court. >> josh shapiro, mr. attorney general, thank you very much. and that will wrap up this hour up for me. ali velshi starts now. what's interesting about this and what could pose legal hurdles is that the, they did argue this on the first amendment. they were able to marry the first amendment with the second and were able the to say it's uninstitutional to stop me from posting this. and i, i'm not a lawyer and you'd have to ask somebody more steeped in constitutional law, but i wonder if it's as easy to get around that if you're trying to stop a case like this. >> there are overlaps br the back page said we're just a website. you can't blame us. it's a koch kacomplicated issue it's not incorrect to suggest the first amendment isn't there. there are state laws

82 Views

1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on