Skip to main content

tv   MTP Daily  MSNBC  August 13, 2018 2:00pm-3:00pm PDT

2:00 pm
be seen as a flawed hero and donald trump will be someone who sold out to the russians and couldn't keep his house in order. >> that does it for our hour. i'm nicolle wallace. "mtp daily" starts with the fabulous katy tur in for chuck. >> your son is wandering around the studio. he's so cute. i almost squeezed him. nicolle wallace, thank you very much. if it's monday, it's firings and few fury. tonight unhinged and unplugged. >> when he talks that way, the way he did on this tape, it confirmed that he is truly a racist. >> the president's former tv apprentice turned top white house aide flips script on her former boss. >> do you have more recordings? >> absolutely. >> plus the president claims a victory in the russia investigation, as the fbi fires peter strzok in the wake of his anti-trump text messages. the former agent's attorney
2:01 pm
joins us live. and democrats 2020 vision. is there a front-runner or maybe a dark horse emerging in the democrats' race for the white house? this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now. good evening, i'm katy tur in new york in for chuck todd. welcome to "mtp daily." we've got major news tonight. the president seems to be taking credit for ousting peter strzok. he's one of the fbi's top agents who helped lead the bureau's investigation into russian interference. strzok was then removed from the special counsel's office after officials discovered that he had written anti-trump text messages during the campaign. the president is now using strzok's ouster to call on the fbi to reopen its investigation into hillary clinton.
2:02 pm
and strzok's lawyer is alleging that the firing was politically motivated, which is a big deal considering his involvement with the russia investigation. i'm going to speak with strzok's lawyer live in just a moment. you're not going to want to miss out on that interview. but as big as that development is, we begin tonight with a white house that is in the midst of another pr nightmare as another top aide to the president turns against him in spectacular fashion. former assistant to the president omarosa manigault newman, who has known mr. trump for 15 years, dating back to her time on "the apprentice" is now calling the president a lying, racist, big oot misogynist who mentally unfit for office. she claims to have listened to a tape of mr. trump using the n-word and claims the trump re-election campaign offered her a job that was basically a $15,000 a month hush money
2:03 pm
agreement and she's produced documents corroborating some of her allegations. she also secretly taped conversations with the president an his chief of staff, which she uses in her new book, "unhinged." she's leaked two of those tapes so far, one of which she apparently recorded in the situation room. she's threatening to leak more if the white house comes after her. >> as you'll see in "unhinged" -- >> how often did you tape people? >> as you'll see, i protected myself because this is a white house where everybody lies. >> do you have more recordings? >> oh, absolutely. i'm expecting that they're going to retaliate and so i'm just going to stand pack and wait. >> and now politico is reporting that she's claimed to have secretly recorded jared and ivanka too. the white house is going after the fact that she snuck a recording device into the situation room at one point, calling it a blatant disregard for our national security. the president today is responding by calling omarosa a vicious, nasty low-life loser
2:04 pm
whom he fired four times. he notes three of those times were on his reality tv show, "the apprentice." so how does hiring -- how does that explain hiring her for a top position in the white house in the first place? well, seriously, because she's only said great things about me, he tweeted. i'm joined now by tonight's panel. gabe is a national correspondent with "new york" magazine. susan del percent ocen percio in strategist. omarosa, she's not credible. >> correct. >> the president is not credible. >> also correct. >> who do you believe? who do you believe in this saga, omarosa, this ex-aide, ex-reality show star who the white house said was fired for not being professional, trying to use the white house as her own personal backdrop for her wedding photographs, et cetera
2:05 pm
or omarosa who says i worked for the guy for 15 years and i realized after 15 years that he's a racist and a bigot and a misogynist. >> the overall thrust of what she's saying is not necessarily that controversial given what we do know about the president, but in terms of the actual evidence doesn't seem to be matching up to what she has said. on the white house side they have been transparent in a weird sort of way. the weird question you asked rhetorically is why did he hire this person? they're being pretty transparent, because she flattered the president and that's what he liked. they didn't hire her because she was credible. now they're trying to say, well, don't believe her, it's a bunch of not credible people -- >> if i heard a tape that i wrote about in my book, that would be something my publisher would force me to write an op-ed about. there is a pr campaign that
2:06 pm
would go along with the revelation of that fact. you don't just drop it casually in an interview. >> it's not surprising that the president himself is going after her because we know he can't resist, but other republicans, including at the top of the white house and the rnc are going after her which suggests that they are in some ways worried about she's saying. >> why are they worried? >> because she has tapes. that's the most -- that's the thing that's scaring them the most is they don't know how many tapes she has and who she has recorded. we know she recorded the president. we know she recorded the chief of staff. we don't know how long she's been taping. did she tape him when he was president-elect? did she tape him when he was a candidate? they don't know and that's the scariest thing in this administration. >> let's play her talking about the president about her firing. >> omarosa, what's going on? i just saw on the news that you're thinking about leaving? what happened? >> general kelly -- general kelly came to me and said that you guys wanted me to leave.
2:07 pm
>> no, i -- i -- nobody even told me about it. >> wow. >> you know, they run a big operation, but i didn't know it. i didn't know that. damn it. i don't love you leaving at all. >> it's important to know that nbc hasn't verified that but the tape itself, while not explosive, the president doesn't say anything in particular, it's notable that there is a tape. why are there people out there that find it necessary to secretly record donald trump? >> well, clearly because he taught them well. let's be clear, omarosa highlights the fact that she's been in some kind of relationship with him, business or friendship or otherwise for about 15 years. this is out of his playbook. so i'm not surprised that the people that he surrounds himself with actually have the same behaviors that he has. what's really interesting is i don't believe for one minute that he didn't know they were going to fire her and he probably didn't demand that they
2:08 pm
fire her. what's hilarious and shown time and time again is how this president speaks out of both sides of his mouth. she wan he wants people to love him and kind of double speaks. he thought he could keep her as a friend, but we're seeing that's not the case. >> you talk to people who don't like either of them. they say they are perfect for each other. she's the perfect person to tear down this president, and this president deserves omarosa, he hired her, et cetera. beyond the drama and the saga of it, what does it say about the way security is treated at this white house. this is only one example. you have the howard stern character who could call in on air force one and get the president on the phone while he was pretending to be somebody else. the president reportedly uses an unsecure phone. i mean that a white house aide would feel it was okay to record the president of the united states or the chief of staff in the situation room, that's got to speak to a broader culture.
2:09 pm
>> absolutely. this is an administration, let's not forget, that had for a year and more than that really top aides that don't have top security clearances, so it speaks to the overall culture as you were saying. it also speaks to the idea that this is -- there's not only tradition here, but there's protocol from white house to white house about how you act and how you secure your communications. the very fact that this firing took place in the situation room suggests that the situation room of all places, i should say, suggests that these traditions and these protocols have been completely done away with. >> why is the firing in the situation room. that's a really good point. why is hr coming to the situation room. nicolle wallace was talking about this on her show. why is the situation room not busy at that time? there's a ton of drama, foreign policy issues. we pulled out of the iran deal, we have north korea, there's russian meddling, why is the situation room not busy enough where the chief of staff can't just pull omarosa in and say we're going to have a meeting now about your employment. >> and it speaks to some sort of casualness about what that room
2:10 pm
represents or something different entirely, which would be sort of strange. because as others have noted, the chief of staff has a pretty nice office himself. he should be able to pull her in and she had an office herself. they could have these conversations elsewhere. it means either something strange is going on about how they're using these different rooms and using rooms set up for different things -- >> it's the same reason why this is guy hanging out at mar-a-lago and taking formal meetings. he's hanging out at his own club charging people massive memberships to talk about the business of the united states. i think that what we are seeing playing out for the last two, three years with this guy that is there's just a lack of respect for our democracy, for the united states, for our protocols, for our security, for the way that government works. and it's not even just ignorance. because i get the fact that maybe none of these people worked in government and don't understand the protocols. but there is a passing of the torch that happens when one president leaves the white house and another one takes over. >> they take over the oval office, which this president has not shown respect for. he is -- does not respect the
2:11 pm
office of the presidency. so how could others who follow in his footsteps or follow his example, rather. you say how can there be tape recordings. well, the president -- not only do they learn by example, but they don't hold the office in the same regard. how can the president not respect the office enough to know that having an unsecure phone is not about an inconvenience. there's national security implications with that. he does not comprehend the scope -- >> the need for that, that protection, how do you convince anybody else? >> exactly. that's the fundamental problem that we see in this white house. that's why the president thinks it's okay to take a two-hour meeting with putin without any note takers. it goes on and on and on. >> let's talk about that, because i had chris whipple on my show at 2:00 p.m. today, the author of the gate keepers, interviews with all the modern
2:12 pm
chiefs of staff. he made that point. while we're talking about the on omarosa saga, what happened in that donald trump/vladimir putin meeting. is there a recording of it? do the russians have a recording of it? >> and how can we take the president's word? how can anyone who works for this president take him at his word when dan coats still doesn't know what happens. even if he gave him a few little nuggets of what happened, how can we trust him, how can his staff take action based on his words because we know he tends to, i'll put it generously, sometimes exaggerate things or make things up that weren't quite there or he flat-out lies. >> but that's my point about this whole omarosa story. it's not what she is saying, because again, as gabe pointed out, these allegations of donald trump being a misogynist, a racist, et cetera, have been out there. it's not like she's breaking new ground on this.
2:13 pm
the rumors of the n-word tape have been out there. until you actually hear it, whatever. not whatever, but let's wait until we actually hear it. but the larger issue is the way that this white house does not have credibility, number one, and how do you trust them on the bigger issues like what he said to vladimir putin or anyone else, but number two, it seems like their disregard for national security. >> remember what happened in london when there was an attack in london and the president leaked out some basic information that was deemed security sensitive? and theresa may went crazy? >> the british decided not to tell the americans things any longer? or when he told the russians in the oval office, by the way, where the russian news agency, who knows what they recorded in the oval office, and he told the russians about information, top-secret intelligence he got from the israelis. >> and they went crazy. >> i'm starting to think we should have an election that's
2:14 pm
based around the security of classified information and communication. >> do americans care? this is the thing that makes me excited to have this conversation. >> not all. >> we know that this white house isn't credible, but the truth is, is that the vast majority of republicans who are going to be voting in november think that they are. >> donald trump has done a very good job of victimizing himself and saying not only are they attacking me, they are attacking you. i am trying to fight for you. then when they, the media, or they, the establishment, or whomever it is attack me, they are attacking you. he's done a very good job of convincing people that, whether you like it or not, that's just the facts. gabe, susan and aisha, stick around with us and be sure not to miss chris matthews interview with omarosa tonight at 7:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. ahead, strzok struck out. the fbi agent fired. we've got his lawyer here, next.
2:15 pm
this is a story about mail and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ with i get rewarded explowherever i go. going out for a bite. rewarded! going new places. rewarded! learn more at theexplorercard.com ancestrydna can open you to a world of new cultures to explore. with two times more detail than any other dna test... you can get a new taste of your heritage. save 40% with our lowest price ever.
2:16 pm
2:17 pm
hundred roads named "park" in the u.s. it's america's most popular street name. but allstate agents know that's where the similarity stops. if you're on park street in reno, nevada, the high winds of the washoe zephyr could damage your siding. and that's very different than living on park ave in sheboygan, wisconsin, where ice dams could cause water damage. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? all your school get supplies today... school.. grade.. done. done. hit the snooze button and get low prices on school supplies all summer long. like these for only a 25 cents at office depot officemax.
2:18 pm
directly to investors. and now we have zero account fees for brokerage accounts. at fidelity, those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win, saved by zero ♪ welcome back. one of the fbi's top agents has been fired. peter strzok was one of the top agents on the russia probe, but was removed when robert mueller discovered he had exchanged text messages during the campaign that were critical of then candidate donald trump. the president and his allies have pointed to strzok's anti-trump text messages as smoking gun proof of bias and corruption at the fbi. strzok says his work was never affected and his lawyer suggested the firing was politically motivated. president trump issued a celebratory tweet that peter strzok was just fired from the fbi finally. the list of bad players in the
2:19 pm
fbi and doj gets longer and longer. based on the fact that strzok was in charge of the witch hunt, will it be dropped? so how will strzok respond to all of this? his lawyer joins me now. thank you so much for being here. we appreciate your time. why was peter strzok fired? >> well, thanks for having me. i don't think that you can rationally reach any conclusion other than it was political. pete, along with several other employees who sent anti-trump texts were referred to the office of professional responsibility or opr, the division within the fbi that is in charge of internally disciplining agents. and we had a process, a normal process where we engaged with opr and submitted something in writing and went in and orally presented and they decided that what the appropriate punishment should be is a 60-day suspension, demotion, and signing what's called a
2:20 pm
last-chance letter which basically is double secret probation and says that you can be fired if you do anything else wrong. that decision was overruled by the deputy director of the fbi. it's something that he had the authority to do, because it was delegated from the director of the fbi, but it is a vanishingly rare occurrence for things to happen this way. an it's difficult to believe given the steady drum beat of texts demonizing pete from the president and all the calls on capitol hill by republicans for pete to be fired that that didn't play a role in the bureau's ultimate decision. >> when you say play a role, though, be specific. you're talking about this being politically motivated. are you charging that the president himself said to somebody at doj, i want peter strzok out, remove him now? are you claiming that? or are you claiming the culture that was created around the president's texts and say that
2:21 pm
congressional testimony last month was so toxic that it -- or so influential that it pushed someone at the doj or at the fbi to decide to fire strzok? >> oh, i think both are true. you already have, i think, an incident where president trump spoke to i think it was pete sessions and encouraged him to fire pete strzok. >> so are you saying that donald trump spoke to sessions, maybe, and then sessions relayed that message to the fbi and the fbi fired strzok on donald trump's orders? >> no, i'm not. i'm saying that donald trump spoke to sessions and that has been reported before and encouraged him to fire strzok and trump also and his allies on capitol hill repeatedly called for strzok to be fired, so it's not a secret back-door thing. they are publicly demonizing this man and saying he should no longer be an agent. >> has the fbi officially explained why strzok was fired?
2:22 pm
>> we got a letter. we got a letter on friday and it contained the entire packet from the disciplinary process with opr, which included a 25-page letter setting everything out, included the signed last-chance agreement that we executed on, i think it was, july 26th, and then there was a one and a half page letter from deputy director bowditch overruling the decision and saying pete's texts were responsible for bringing the fbi into disrepute and that is wildly inconsistent with past precedent. >> when you say opr, that's the office of professional responsibility. let me ask you something very specifically. does opr in its assessment explicitly say that peter strzok's behavior didn't qualify for dismissal? >> no. no, not at all.
2:23 pm
in fact they were very critical of pete's behavior. what they concluded, however, is that on balance and there's a whole kind of statutory framework of factors that are supposed to be considered called the douglas factors. given the near certainty that pete is not going to do anything wrong in the future, he's not going to be a recidivist, given his stellar career and all the contributions he's made and given the unanimous high regard that his work has held in the bureau, that on balance the demotion -- and these are very serious consequences, the demotion and the suspension was the right call and not dismissal. and then that was overturned by the deputy director. >> agent strzok spoke out forcefully against the idea that those text messages mean that he implicitly had bias, that he wasn't able to put his bias aside and conduct a fair investigation. we should note that there's no
2:24 pm
evidence that peter strzok made up information that would start the russia investigation. we should also note that there were no leaks about the russia investigation before the election, which would have certainly potentially tipped public opinion about donald trump or swayed it in one way or another. that being said, we have folks in the democratic party, including representative swalwell today, who said that, yeah, strzok deserved to be fired. those anti-trump messages are hard to put aside. you had frank figliuzzi, the former fbi counterintelligence agent, and he said, listen, the fbi's credibility is all it has. they need that credibility and what peter strzok did took that credibility away. you can't get that back. >> well, i mean first, i think you are absolutely right that it's important to realize that after an exhaustive
2:25 pm
investigation, there is no -- there is no, not a scintilla of evidence that any of pete's political opinions affected his job and in fact you can read the i.g. report who says that pete was one of the more aggressive people on the hillary clinton e-mail investigation and if he had wanted to somehow impact the election, he could have easily done it and did not do it. in terms of what is the appropriate punishment here, pete has repeatedly expressed remorse. i don't think that there's any question that he showed poor judgment in sending these tweets. we have to remember that it was in the context of a kind of bizarre, unprecedented presidential campaign and the tweets should -- i mean the texts need to be considered in that light. but pete signed a last-chance agreement and was willing to take a punishment that the office of professional responsibility who is headed by
2:26 pm
somebody who has decades of experience and is not known within the fbi as a kind of warm, fuzzy cuddly person. she's very tough. this is what she decided was appropriate. so with all due respect to congressman swalwell, the way we decide in this country what punishment is appropriate, whether we're talking about sentencing after a criminal case or whether we're talking about internal administrative discipline is by looking at past precedent. this is way out of proportion. >> let me ask you one other question. when are we going to hear directly from mr. strzok? is he going to speak out publicly in the way that james comey did? >> pete is considering his options. he is only now finds himself as an ex-fbi agent instead of an fbi agent. that wasn't something that he wanted or anticipated, so he is mulling things over right now. >> thank you so much for your time. we do appreciate it. >> thank you. and ahead, breaking news. the government just rested its case in the manafort trial.
2:27 pm
we're live at the courthouse with an update. hey there people eligible for medicare. gimme two minutes. and i'll tell you some important things to know about medicare. first, it doesn't pay for everything. say this pizza... [mmm pizza...] is your part b medical expenses. this much - about 80 percent... medicare will pay for. what's left... this slice here... well... that's on you. and that's where an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company comes in.
2:28 pm
this type of plan helps pay some of what medicare doesn't. and these are the only plans to carry the aarp endorsement. that's because they meet their high standards of quality and service. wanna learn more? it's easy. call unitedhealthcare insurance company now and ask... for this free decision guide. inside you'll find the range of aarp medicare supplement plans and their rates. apply any time, too. oh. speaking of time... about a little over half way and there's more to tell. like, how... with this type of plan, you'll have the freedom to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. great for staying with the one you know... or finding... somebody new, like a specialist. there are no networks and no referrals needed. none. and when you travel, your plan will go with you- anywhere in the country. so, if you're in another state visiting the grandkids, stay awhile... enjoy...
2:29 pm
and know that you'll still be able to see any doctor who accepts medicare patients. so call unitedhealthcare today. they are committed to being there for you. tick, tick, tick, time for a wrap up. a medicare supplement plan helps pay some of what medicare doesn't. you know, the pizza slice. it allows you to choose any doctor, who accepts medicare patients... and these are the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. whew! call unitedhealthcare today and ask for this free decision guide. call unitedhealthcare today the first person to survive alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen by funding scientific breakthroughs, advancing public policy, and providing local support to those living with the disease and their caregivers. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association.
2:30 pm
welcome back. breaking news, special counsel robert mueller's team just rested its case in the paul manafort trial. next up could be witnesses that manafort's team wants to call to the stand. nbc news national security and intelligence reporter, ken dilanian, joins me now from outside the court house. ken, what's the latest? >> reporter: katy, the
2:31 pm
government has rested its case. a little bit with a whimper instead of a bang. the last witness was a treasury agent who had previously testified and was testifying kind of on an obscure issue on whether paul manafort's companies, davis, manafort, had actually filed a report saying that they had foreign bank accounts. they in fact did not file that report. and now the prosecution and defense are going to argue about a motion whether the judge should dismiss any of these counts, essentially saying they shouldn't go to a jury because you haven't proved your case. those rary succeed and no one expects that to happen. tomorrow morning we'll find out whether the defense has any witnesses at all, and if so how many, and whether paul manafort will testify, katy. >> and we heard from a banker today who made a loan to manafort. we talked about this a little bit earlier. fill us in on that and how it ties into the trump transition potentially. >> yeah, this is really interesting testimony for the
2:32 pm
implications beyond the scope of this trial, because what it shows, what it alleges is that paul manafort was committing bank fraud even as he was chairman of the trump campaign. he was, according to this testimony today from a man named james bren appeanabrennan, a vi, said he lied on his loan application and said there were no loans on property listed as collateral when in fact there were loans, misstated his income. now, the defense essentially argued that none of that mattered because the person who made the decision was the chairman of the bank, a man named stephen calk, and he overruled the underwriters. all of his employees told him not to make the loan, that manafort was not a good credit risk but calk said we're going ahead anyway. what's interesting is we know from other testimony in evidence that manafort tried to recommend calk for a position as secretary of the army in the trump administration. so that's not relevant to this trial but very interesting about what kind of deal was being cooked up there. there was also a moment on cross
2:33 pm
examination where the defense suggested that manafort had a net worth of $21 million at the time that he was applying for this loan. now, the indictment in this case and much of the evidence suggests that that's not true, that in fact he was much poorer than that, but the prosecution really didn't rebut this and it raises an interesting question. how much money was manafort worth at the time that he was chairman of the trump campaign. >> interesting, because wasn't there submitted into evidence something having to do with missed credit card payments as well from the prosecution? >> yeah, absolutely. there was a $200,000 something american express bill that was lapsed and unpaid for 90 days. that was to purchase new york yankees season tickets. now, it was paid later, and at this time the defense suggested manafort had a bank account with $8 million in it. those things don't seem to square and we're going to have to wait and see how that all shakes out in the end, katy. >> seems like the kind of thing you don't miss. i could be wrong, though, who knows. ken dilanian, thank you very much. ahead, the future of the
2:34 pm
democratic party as potential 2020 presidential candidates are already starting to cozy up to iowa voters. ♪ -morning. -morning. -what do we got? -keep an eye on that branch. might get windy. have a good shift. fire pit. last use -- 0600. i'd stay close. morning. ♪ get ready to switch. protected by flo. should say, "protected by alan and jamie." -right? -should it? when you bundle home and auto... run, alan! ...you get more than just savings. you get 'round-the-clock protection.
2:35 pm
it's a revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999... intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. and now, save up to $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, no interest until january 2021. ends wednesday.
2:36 pm
2:37 pm
welcome back. forget the beach, the hot vacation spot this monthes more than a thousand miles from the ocean. it's des moines, iowa, at least if you think the white house would make a pretty good home for you in 2020. after all, why else would congressman eric swalwell, who represents southern california, be shmoozing in the state to hold the first nominating contest in 2020. why else would michael avenatti who lives in california be in the hawkeye state. why else would tom steyer or john delany or julian castro all be taking in the iowa state fair. maybe it's the corn dog, who knows. while some democrats want to focus on defeating donald trump two years from now, there's also
2:38 pm
an election about two and a half months from now. with me now is terry mcauliffe, former governor of virginia and former chairman of the dnc. sorry to interrupt your vacation, terry, but good to have you. >> katy, great to be with you. >> let's talk about the midterms. there are a lot of seats that could potentially fall in the democrats' hands, but they are -- they're finding it difficult when it comes to nancy pelosi, or at least there's a road bump with nancy pelosi. why have the republicans been so successful in making nancy pelosi such a boogie man, regardless of what race they're actually trying to defeat a democrat in? >> well, i don't think ultimately, katy, they're going to be successful with it. you're right, they are spending a lot of money on a lot of ads. the biggest issue is what can they run on? they can't run on health care. they have dismantled health care in the country. they can't run on their tax cuts because the money hasn't gone to
2:39 pm
average americans. so they continuously go after nancy. but you know why? she's been a successful speaker. if president obama were sitting with me here today, he would tell you today that we would not have gotten the aca passed had it not been for nancy pelosi. so she's been a very effective leader. i tell folks let's win the elections first. i'm feeling very confident. katy, i like to reach out on these elections. i think we're going to win anywhere from 30 to 55 seats. i think it's a great opportunity. the wind is at our back. people are mobilized. i've traveled to over a dozen states campaigning for people and people are really fired up against the trump administration's policies and what the democrats stand for. once it's over, once we get the house back, i feel confident we'll win a slew of governors. today we're winning in maine, michigan, illinois, nevada, new mexico, wisconsin, huge opportunities in florida, huge opportunities for us in texas,
2:40 pm
we've got opportunities of course in ohio, so it's going to be a good season for us. >> terry, i'm told there are those who are saying the media is just making nancy pelosi an issue. let's look at this graphic right here. 51 democrats right now are opposed to nancy pelosi as speaker if the democrats retake the house. if those 51, 42 are democratic nominees, nine are democratic incumbents and two are democratic candidates. why if nancy pelosi is so effective are they deciding not to actively support her? >> and i think, katy, it's because literally they have spent millions of dollars through the years attacking her. they don't go after someone who's not successful or not powerful. >> but why are the democrats folding? if the republicans are just doing this and spending millions of dollars and it's just because she's successful, why are these democrats folding? >> because millions have been spent negatively attacking nancy so it's an easy thing to say. are you going to vote or not vote with nancy? i'll predict here that nancy
2:41 pm
pelosi when we win the house, i'll predict she'll be speaker. i've had a long relationship and known nancy pelosi since 1979. she and i have been in the battling for 40 years fighting for the progressive causes that matter to this country. she'll be the next speaker. >> let's talk about impeachment. here is what you said on cnn yesterday. i think impeachment is something we ought to look at. if president clinton or president obama had gone to helsinki and done what president trump had done you would already have impeachment hearings going on. tom steyer is adding another $10 million to his kboeimpeachment drive. do you think it's a good idea to run on impeachment or mention it before the midterms? >> first of all, we're not running on impeachment. democrats are running on their agenda, what they're going to do for individuals. yesterday as jake tapper asked me about helsinki, i think it's disgraceful. this is a man who tried to destroy the democracy in our country, came in and undermined
2:42 pm
our elections, he's still doing it today. this man is our enemy, he is our foe, and donald trump bear hugging him like they're best buddies. in ioth any other president they would have tried to go after him in impeachment. let robert mueller do what he's going to do and get done with his report and that's what we'll stand for. >> by mentioning it, you give a talking point to the republicans. you give them that. you give them an ad that you can run. you can have terry mcauliffe talking about impeachment, you have tom steyer buying ads talking about impeachment. even if the democrats aren't actively running on it, it's going to be out there and part of the discussion. >> i hope it's out there and i hope we have a good discussion of donald trump went over to helsinki, russia, which is the economy is smaller than the size of italy, smaller than new york and texas, our 30th trading partner, and this man undermined our elections, tried to destroy the democracy, the greatest democracy in the world, the united states, and donald trump
2:43 pm
is over there hugging and kissing on putin. this is something i hope they talk about it, katy, because it was a disgraceful behavior on this president. there's something there and i hope robert mueller and his team find out exactly why donald trump continues to kowtow to vladimir putin, a man who is out to destroy our country. let's talk about 2020 and the democratic candidates. there are a number of those in iowa, we just listed them at the stop of this segment. what do you think of michael avenatti running? >> you know, anybody who wants to run, let them go out -- >> why are you laughing, terry? >> honestly i don't like the idea of everybody talking about 2020. our future, our party is on the line and myself and many others have been killing ourselves traveling the country getting our message out there. we have got the house, senate and all of these governors. i remind everybody that the governors elected this november will be in the chairs in 2021 when they redraw every line in america. today, republicans control two-thirds of the state chambers. we need democratic governors in
2:44 pm
the chair to stop gerrymandered maps so that we can win with pro-business, progressive democrats who can take this country in the right direction. so forget 2020. that will come soon enough. right now our future is on the line. we need a check and balance against donald trump. we need to make sure we win in the house and the senate and we've got to win these governors or we will be out of the game from 2021 until 2031. i can tell you as a former governor who vetoed 120 of the most heinous bills against women, against the environment, pro gun, against voting rights, if i were not in that chair as a democratic governor with a republican legislature in virginia, they would be law today. virginia would be a different state. luckily i was there to veto it, but we only have 16 democratic governors an we need a lot more and we'll have more after november 6th. >> for the record you didn't answer my question about michael avenatti, but i'm sure i will get a chance to ask you it again. former virginia governor terry mcauliffe, thanks for joining us. >> you bet. thank you. ahead, the gates of wrath.
2:45 pm
we'll explain. let's get started. show of hands. who wants customizable options chains? ones that make it fast and easy to analyze and take action? how about some of the lowest options fees? are you raising your hand? good then it's time for power e*trade the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. alright one quick game of rock, paper, scissors. 1, 2, 3, go. e*trade. the original place to invest online. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats moderate to severe plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin
2:46 pm
is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla . it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with... ...an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have  a history of depression or suicidal thoughts,... ...or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. welcome back. in today's "meet the midterms," an influential member of the democratic party is facing allegations of domestic abuse. congressman and deputy cans chairman keith ellison is running for attorney general in minnesota. over the weekend just days ahead of tomorrow's primary, the son of ellison's ex-girlfriend
2:47 pm
posted on facebook that he had found a video that he claims shows ellison physically and verbally abusing his mother. manahan tweeted that her son's post was true and later released a statement in which she accuses ellison of narcissist abuse. ellison denies the allegations saying karen and i were in a long-term relationship which ended in 2016 and i still care deeply for her well-being. this video does not exist because i never behaved in this way and any characterization otherwise is false. according to minnesota public radio, no police reports or court documents were ever filed about the alleged incident. keith ellison is facing four opponents in tomorrow's democratic primary. we'll be right back. ♪
2:48 pm
you shouldn't be rushed into booking a hotel. with expedia's add-on advantage, booking a flight unlocks discounts on select hotels until the day you leave for your trip. add-on advantage. only when you book with expedia.
2:49 pm
add-on advantage. sfx: [cell phone dialing] no. no, no, no, no, no. cancel. cancel. please. aaagh! being in the know is a good thing. that's why discover will alert you if your social security number is found on any one of thousands of risky sites. time now for "the lid."
2:50 pm
the panel is back. guys, welcome. peter strzok, let's play again and remind everybody about that hearing that he -- where he testified last month, and the l month and the forceful defense he gave of himself. >> let me be clear unequivocally and under oath, not once in my 26 years of defending our nation did my personal opinions impact any official action i took. this is true for the clinton e-mail investigation, for the investigation into russian interference and for every other investigation i've worked on. it is not who i am and it is not something i would ever do. >> he's obviously very forceful there. the hearing itself was near universally panned for the display, just the behavior of the democrats and republicans fighting with each other and refusing to get on with it and the way the republicans went
2:51 pm
after stzok, one even saying he is a dentist and his body language. that being said, what is your take on whether he should have been fired? >> there is the formal review process. at the end of the day, you have to look at this man where he stands today and he cannot effectively do a job for the fbi. he cannot do the job he was hired to do and had a career in. he is always going to be a problem for the fbi and its credibility. there's nowhere else in the fbi he could have worked? >> with 21 years in he's not going to human resources. >> he lost his pension presumably with this. >> we'll see. there will be other litigation to fight that as there was with mccabe. i don't like the idea of him losing his job. di believe the report of nothing he did influenced the election and he didn't let his bias get in the way. the fact is this is where we are
2:52 pm
today. in this reality -- >> if we didn't have a president who tweeted things like this, just fired agent stzok formerly of the fbi, was in charge of the crooked hillary clinton investigation. if we don't have a president who tweets things like that and other things talking about how stzok should be fired and tears down his credibility, would peter stzok have been fired? >> of course not. the reason he was fired because this became politicized in the first place. the text messages were an unfortunate reality. and the reason it became a message because the president turned it into one. the real problem is this was politicized at the president's hands and we're allowing that to be the final word. we don't live in a world unfortunately where there is a conclusion this agent never allowed his political views to actually play into his role. we should take that and allow that to be the case and believe that to be the case and say,
2:53 pm
okay, let's keep that going. >> say the investigation into clinton's e-mails turned out differently and it was found she did something crimphaly improper and charges were recommended against hillary clinton and suddenly we found out there were text messages calling hillary clinton names the same way -- i'm not talking about this administration, i'm talking about the public and how the public would react and how democrats would react, wouldn't it be the same way? >> i don't think it would be the same. >> really? >> i don't think it would be exactly -- >> you don't think democrats would be calling for that person to be fired and the investigation was questionable? >> i think there would be a different approach it to. >> you think was a hearing like that -- >> with the name-calling happening and tweets happening -- i think the democrats, this is a gift and a curse, frankly, actually try to have some semblance of the process, right? there's about to be a crazy civil suit happening because this guy didn't get his due process in the way he should have been let go.
2:54 pm
the democrats, it would have been different. there would have been political undertones but they at least would have tried to go through some staging like should we put him through the process? >> let's see what happens if the democrats win the midterm elections, how they run their hearings. >> 98% of the american public doesn't even know those hearings happened. >> they don't have 12 hours during the day to turn on television and watch an entire hearing. >> standard political brinkmanship aside that's been happening long before the trump era and before we were born. of course it would be different because donald trump wouldn't be the issue. >> we wanted to get into steven miller and political op-ed, stephen miller is an immigration hypocrite. i know because i'm his uncle. you guys at home should read it. it is a fascinating read and
2:55 pm
well worth your time. in the meantime, thank you very much. ahead, when is a gate really a gate? so, how's it going? well... we had a vacation early in our marriage that kinda put us in a hole. go someplace exotic? yeah, bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. what? what happened? i got a little over-confident on a moped. even with insurance, we had to dip into our 401(k) so it set us back a little bit. sometimes you don't have a choice. but it doesn't mean you can't get back on track. great. yeah, great. i'd like to go back to bermuda. i hear it's nice. yeah, i'd like to see it. no judgment. just guidance.
2:56 pm
td ameritrade. then you might have a dcondition called dry mouth.? biotène is clinically proven to soothe and moisturize a dry mouth. plus, it freshens breath. biotène. immediate and long lasting dry mouth symptom relief. this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪
2:57 pm
2:58 pm
in case you missed it, the peter stzok firing has re-opened the flood gates or what the president has called spy gate. to be clear nobody calls it spy gate except the president. but this gives us a chance to ask a question we've been wondering for a while.
2:59 pm
who decides when something is a gate? it all started with watergate in the 1970s. it was called watergate because it happened at the watergate, the name of the building. since then we've had more gates than you can shake a stick at. bridgegate, troopergate, monicagate. that barely scratches the surface. who decides if there is a gate? should there be? if the president can do it, why can't we? omarosa secretly recording general kellie in the situation room. we will call that tapegate. >> million dollar formal way. taylorgate. >> donald trump and junior spotted in the airport at the
3:00 pm
same time, that's gategate. we could keep going but we won't. we will collect these and share the best ones or other words we will aggregate. that's it for today. all of "mtb daily" and now to ari melber. >> i can't gate to see where this goes. >> i got nothing. >> nothing? >> ari, come on! come on, ari, start your show! i like that instagram picture you posted of us, by the way. >> wow, see, i didn't think you had anything because you said you didn't have anything, at the end, it turns out you had something up your sleeve. >> is the honey badger on today? >> not today but you never know until you watch the whole show. katy tur, thank you, as always. we're reporting more

129 Views

1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on