tv Morning Joe MSNBC August 16, 2018 3:00am-6:00am PDT
>> accused of bank fraud, failing to pay taxes on millions of dollars hidden in off shore accounts. >> i would like to begin by reading a statement by the president. i decided to revoke the security clearance of john brennan. >> as a former white house aide makes explosive claims as the jury heads to deliberate in the 2016 campaign chairman, president trump decides to punish one of his most prominent critics. good morning, welcome to "morning joe." i'm willie geist and host of kasiedc, kasie hunt. >> just don't sing dave matthews. >> we'll get you in on dave matthews in a few minutes. >> dave matthews. >> jonathan lamire, heidi prisbilla and national affairs
analyst for nbc news john highland and the white house correspondent for pbs news hour. joe and mika have the morning off and we'll begin with president trump revoking the security clearance of cia director john brennan. white house press secretary sarah sanders announced the action yesterday by wrereading statement by the president. >> mr. brennan's line and recent country is consistent with access to the nation's most closely held secrets and facilities. the very aim of our adversaries. >> focused on a nude to protene among those he holds responsible for the russia investigation saying, quote, i call it the rigged witch-hunt is a sham and these people let it.
so i think it is something that had to be done. on msnbc yesterday brennan said the president is acting out of fear. >> i think he fears individuals who could damage him. could damage his standing from the american people. look at the way he's been referring to bob mueller. bob mueller who is a national treasure and an icon within the law enforcement and justice communities who is doing his level best to investigate russian interference in the election. i think mr. trump is getting more and more concerned. more and more desperate. i would say more and more frightened as there is closer and closer magnification of some things that those around him have been involved in. i do believe that mr. trump decided to take this action as he has done with others to
intimidate and suppress any criticism of him or his administration. revoking my security clearances is his way of trying to get back at me. this is not going to deter me at all. i'm going to continue to speak out. >> so, when the white house d distributed as the document was dated july 26. as you know, yesterday was august 15th. the white house said that was just an error and it was not meant to have any date. commented on president trump's use of the word -- it's astounding how you live up and seems like you will never understand what it means to be president nor to be a good, honest person. john brennan among many former
obama national security eras and signaled this might be coming and went through with it yesterday. >> sarah sanders read off a list of names. reviewing the security clearances of a few weeks ago. >> july 26th. >> right around then. suggested this is a step they might take. discussed yesterday at great length and many critics of that movement did not strip security clearances of those who were doing so. this is depriving the american government of these people's expertise. brennan was near the center of the bin laden raid and allow this government to consult on those matters. now, of course, they haven't been because he has been such a critic. it feels like a punitive step, a step that is purely for punishment and that is something we have not seen before from this president. and the timing, of course, is such. drawn such attention that it comes all amid all these other
bad stories and very bad week for this white house and something they had in their bad pocket that they wanted to drop. >> didn't their aides say, hey, you have a lot of people coming after you because you keep linking people to the russia investigation and then he gives this interview to "wall street journal" saying it had to be done. all part of the rigged witch-hunt which, just like his tweet, seems to build this case for obstruction that he's trying to close these people out because they were involved in an investigation. >> very reminiscent of how we've seen this before where the white house, his aides will present a story. this is why this happened and the president himself an hour or day later will say it happened the other way and it was about russia. >> so, john, in the statement yesterday, sarah sanders put other national security, former national security officials on warning james clapper among others as to say, watch out. if you don't slow down with your
criticism, that is coming for you, as well. >> sort of like that is what they're saying. they're already coming after them and on this list, apparently. i know there is so much of this and i listen to heidi over there asking these questions which are 100% reasonable questions because these are all just the same patterns playing out over and over again. what is this other than the lester holt scenario yet again. the president cannot contain himself. he doesn't go on the record at some point and give away the game to say what his real motives are, he goes on the record the day that he's trying to conceal what his motives are and gives the game away. but, again, we've seen that before. we were laughing because of this thing. we didn't need to have a date on the document. now, i want someone to explain that. i would love to have them sit down and explain how a document that was meant to be undated came to have a date. what would be the circumstances
on which the date would appear on the document like a gremlin in the system. it's just, it's outrageous what they're doing. the only thing, the only thing besides the outrageousness of the whole thing just the quality of it because all of it is so transparent that we have to take it seriously, we need to take it seriously. chi the notion that this is unprecedented and it almost seems like they're going through the motions now trying to come up with cover stories because no way to come up with cover stories because what they're doing is so obvious and the president is not trying any more. he's just telling the truth about it. >> you covered the white house. anything specifically that pushed the president over the edge this time? we showed the tweet from john brennan talking about the omarosa dog tweet and, obviously, it's been a long
running criticism of the president from john brennan but was there something that pushed it over the top here? >> i think omarosa and the need to change the subject has pushed this over the edge. dated july 26th almost as if the white house was waiting to see if there was something that would bubble up and they would then need to talk about this security issue again. it was brought up several weeks ago and here is the first person we're going to revoke. instead in the middle of omarosa drip, drip, drip of recordings we have them explaining, okay, we need to focus on john brennan and what he has been saying about the president. i think at the end of the day this white house is really trying to get its legs, right now, it's really trying to stop the conversation that we have been having about the president and whether or not he said the n word. >> like so many of the threats the president has made this one was pushed aside.
>> and they, of course, are very tired of having to answer questions like these, but, of course, in this case, i asked the speaker about it a couple weeks ago. here's what he said. >> the president has said that he wants to revoke security clearances from some former national security officials who still hold them and who have made political remarks. is it dangerous to go down that road? >> i think this is something that is in the purview of the executive branch. i think some of these people lost their clearances, some people keep their clearances. that's something that the executive branch deals with. it's not really in our purview. >> i think he's trolling people. >> the comments referring to there senator bob corker went out and said this is a move. >> it is very serious. i shed few tears for john brennan or susan rice or half
the national security staff who have clearances in the obama administration because they reduc reduced, they're not being relied on as sources, valued information. so, they're going to be fine. they have media careers ahead of them. the people i'm afraid about are the people who we don't know about. lower level individuals who are going to read this as an effort to silence them and hold their careers in hostage. and that is an abuse of power and that is a real threat and that's something that my conservative friends, i think, really not taken into account. john brennan is explicitly political and as a result, he deserves to have his intelligence clearance revoked. he has been very political. everybody else in the intelligence committee doesn't deserve to be punished. >> is being political enough of a reason? >> no, it's absolutely not. most certainly an abuse of power. however, it can be said that john brennan made himself a political figure and should be
treated like a political figure and to held his intelligence clearance over his head goes too far. he wants to be treated like a foil for this administration and that's how the administration tends to treat him. one more thing about the omarosa. mike cohen dropped the notion that the president knew about this trump tower meeting on july 27. the day after supposedly this happened. why didn't they choose to drop it then? why didn't they want to distract from that news then? it seems much more serious when it comes to the russia investigation. >> it may be that omarosa got under the president's skin. >> she did. they're cut from the same cloth. they are reality tv stars and proven veryand every day drop ae here, drop a tape there and keep
the news cycle going and particularly when the president has been proven sensitive to attacks from women, minority women and in this case she also committed the cardinal sin of loyal. he cannot handles when someone in his inner circle how mu. >> how it is impure in some way for a cia director who has served republicans and democrats as a director of the cia and also served, not as director of the cia but intelligence community of three presidents of different parties has been a lifetime of public service to reach the conclusion that he, that the current president, whoever that person might be, again, just using the hypothetical here is a danger to the country and may speak out. that may be political but not
impure. again, part of what is so compelling about this and kind of horrifying is that this list includes democrats and republicans. the only thing that holds everybody on this list together is they are people who in some way or another been critical of president trump. that is in the purest definition and it's by example with brennan in an attempt to silence and intimidate regardless of the party and purity of their motivation i think it's a stunning thing. again, i agree with you that brennan has become a political figure, clearly. but i think we shouldn't ascribe. in some ways his motives may be purer than anybody's. he is terrified of the country and thinks that the president is a dangerous figure and wants his voice to be heard. >> i don't disagree with that, at all. we're on the same page. the same motivations, i say, would be evident in people who really genuinely believe that the mueller probe has gone beyond and it is the fruit of the quote, unquote poison tree.
i do not share that opinion. but they share that opinion and they're honest and genuine and that is a political statement, right? if somebody is engaging in that and they are engaging in politics. the democratic administration strip someone of their intelligence critics in four years, eight years time. that would be an abuse of power. it is political and it plays into what john brennan wants which is a political foil to this administration. the administration is doing itself no favors politically, but it is, obviously a political maneuver and they're treating it as a political maneuver. >> john rizzo who worked for the agency for more than 30 years and author and your opinion of stripping john brennan. >> surreal, another day at the office at 1600, i guess.
>> do you believe that this is a violation in some ways or is the president within his rights to take the clearance away from a man who is no longer working in the security realm in any official capacity. is the president okay doing this? >> well, you know, i'll give you my lawyer answer first. the president can, would pull a clearance on anyone inside the executive branch. that's his prerogative. i was at the cia for over 30 years. i don't remember the president personally pulling security clearances on current or former officials. it's unprecedented. i don't get this. you know, john brennan, i agree he has become a political figure. he's a longtime friend and recently some of his rhetoric has been over the top.
startling to them. but to take away his clearance, i mean, just a personal, petty insult. i think it's, well, it's beyond. i never heard or seen anything like it. >> what should the reaction of members of congress be because we now have folks like jim jordan last night tweeting out an expanded list of officials who also fit this description of being critics that they want the president to go after. and now that they pushed peter struck out of the fbi, we're also seeing conservative commentators say things out with struck and in with bruce orr and will it embolden them and what should the response be by speakspea speaker. >> this is an isolated event. first of all, members of congress can't pull anyone's clearances. they can urge the president to
do so. now, if he starts going down that path and starts turning into an expanded enemy's list, then i think we have, we have an extreme problem. pulling brennan's clearance, you know, in and of itself practically it doesn't mean all that much, certainly for john. you know, they're never going to consult him anyway in this administration. and he's not going to, you know, john, as you guys know, is a tough talking new jersey irishman. so, he's going to keep speaking. so, it's no practical effect on him. this is the canary in the colemcoal mine. we have a real problem. >> published an opinion piece in "new york times" presenting his side of why he thinks the president yanked his security clearance. russia meddling in the 2016
elections and he writes, quote, mr. trump's claims of no collusion are in a word hogwash. the only questions that remain are whether the collusion that took place, constituted and how many members of, quote, trump incorporated attempted by concealing the movement of money into their pockets. what is your take on what the man that you described as a friend says here and has he crossed any lines there or do you think he's just defending himself fairly? >> no. no. i think, look, what he says in that piece is absolutely fair game. and i trust him. you know, he's an honest guy. this is what he truly believes. i have been out of the cia now for several years and i have no idea what that investigation entailed. i take him at his word on that. as i said, some of the rhetoric,
especially tweets. boy, i wish senior officials wouldn't tweet. it brings out the worst in all of them, i think. and so some of the tweets, i mean, referring to someone's behavior as treasonness and he's a pal. i wouldn't go that far. what you describe is absolute lly fair having you on. what is the crux of it? >> two things. there is in terms of what it actually says and then in terms of what the message is trying to send. not more than what he already said publicly. he makes one point, which i think is relevant and speaks to his authority on this, come is to say that he in 2016 when he and other insttelligence and la
enforcement officials that russians were trying to interfere at that moment with our democratic process that donald trump standing up and calling on russia, which he points out. publicly called on russia to find the missing e-mails of mrs. clinton and mr. trump was not only encouraging a foreign nation to collect intelligence against a united states citizen but authorizing his followers to work with our primary global adversary against his political opponent. it's worth pausing on that because that is just a statement of fact and as the cia director, he claims says here and good reason to credit it. that it made challenges that had intelligence community was facing all the more difficult to have a presidential dnominee an that is what he is referring to when he said collusion is already proven. whether conspiracy is proven but that is an act inviting collusion with foreign power. that is the gist of the article. the message he is trying to send
is quite clear which is as he said yesterday on the phone and other interviews, i'm not going to be silenced here and john brennan was not being retrained before yesterday but to publish this op-ed today in "new york times" i'm going to fire right back and not be giving up an inch. if trump is starting to intimidate me, he is not going to intimidate me. >> in the closing paragraph he makes your point, in part, this is an attempt to scare and silence others who might dare to silence him. >> names we will never hear who need that clearance once they're out of the government in order to make their livelihood. it is essentially holding a gun to their livelihood and families. that is an abuse of power. what republicans are doing, jim jordan and rand paul who are cheering on this kind of behavior. in the event that democrats take congress, we are going to have investigations of every activy this white house engages in and thoroughly justified and tie up
this white house not only the legislative phase of the trump presidency be over but be under a microscope like they have not experienced before. imagine where we're going to be in six months' time. >> john brennan said trump's claims of no collusion are hogwash. ready to meet bob mueller at the supreme court. the latest on the russia investigation and the waning chances of a presidential sit down. plus, governor andrew cuomo of new york hands his opponent some ammunition for attack ads. later, what is the punishment for harassing the parents of a child gunned down in a school shooting? according to twitter, it's a seven-day timeout. but, first, here's bill karins with a check of the weather. >> very summer-like day across
the nation. mid to upper 90s new york kind of similar to yesterday. the other story is the flash flooding threat. we had a lot of rain overnight in areas along the ohio river and louisville and in between memphis and paducah more thunderstorms and you're in a slight risk of that. the ozarks three days in a row they had heavy rain. here's today's forecast. no problems in the northeast, boston, philly, new york and d.c. and charlotte and raleigh look fine. new orleans and tampa during the afternoon. chicago not bad today about 82 degrees. denver looking perfect at 88. let's fast forward into what will happen this weekend. that front stalls on friday in the ohio valley and more flash flooding is possible. on saturday we watched some of that heavy rain further to the south down around areas of the carolinas and appellations. finally on sunday a nice drying
period in ohio valley and the northeast. a little improvement for our friends in the northern half of the country and in the south still in the hot, sticky air mass for at least a couple more weeks. heat advisory for roughly 12 million people in new york city. feeling like 95 to 98 degrees this afternoon. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. ♪ when you have something you love, you want to protect it. at legalzoom, our network of attorneys can help you every step of the way. with an estate plan including wills or a living trust
that grows along with you and your family. legalzoom. where life meets legal. it's a revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now, from $899, during sleep number's 'biggest sale of the year'. it senses your movement, and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. it even helps with this. so you wake up ready to put your pedal to the metal. and now, all beds are on sale. save 50% on the new sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus 24-month financing on all beds. only for a limited time. sleep number. proven, quality sleep. my mom washes the dishes... ...before she puts them in the dishwasher. so what does the dishwasher do? new cascade platinum does the work for you, prewashing and removing stuck-on foods, the first time. wow, that's clean! new cascade platinum.
♪ when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com. and got them this wi-fi is fast. track. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in?
brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. welcome back to "morning joe." a new poll shows the majority of americans do not support the presidential campaign meeting to obtain dirt on a political opponent like the one that took place at trump tower and members of the president's campaign in 2016. 79% of those say it's never acceptable while 12% say it is. broken down by party, 69% of republicans and 92% of democrats say it is not acceptable while
only 3% of democrats say it is. so, i'll start with you on this one. obviously, the white house and president trump have said time and again this is what campaigns do. they get dirt and many people pointed out they don't do that from foreign powers and the first call the fbi if that's offered to you and looks like most americans agree. >> most americans agree it's problematic for a politician to seek after a foreign government to get information. the question is whether or not it will be what is driving people to the polls both in the midterms and maybe in 2020. in my reporting, it's become a very partisan issue. trump supporters see the russia investigation and all the way the president told them to see him. they call it a hoax and they say it is a witch-hunt in the same way that president trump and all his aides have been able to say on fox news and other places to make sure they're laying the foundation and democrats are very concerned about it and if
they take back at least the house, you'll see more talk on what that means. >> i'll just say, so many issues on -- this is clearly, even though the republican number here is the interesting number. 19% of americans think it is acceptable. i find it fascinating because that 19% prior to donald trump four years ago, it would have been 100% republicans who would have said this is unacceptable. 19% of republicans who purely because they think this is a trick question is trying to get them to say something negative about donald trump. i find it fascinating this is one of the rare questions that donald trump 33 or 36 or whatever it is core base. this question, even trump's normally indestructible base split in half on this question. appalling that 19% find it acceptable but sort of interesting that that is a lot
less than normally support him on anything. >> i'm with you there. people are savvy enough that they know the pollster's game. any question becomes a proxy for job approval and dissolve media entities and 40% of republicans with will say sure. almost seven in ten republicans are saying this is a bridge too far. that is kind of heartening. step back a little bit and you have to marvel at the fact that -- we are polling collusion. you're asking the public now whether collusion is okay or not. that is the extent to which the trump administration shifted the goal post away from this never happened and this is nonsense and you're all making this all up. >> here's the thing, we already know that don jr. was trying to get dirt on hillary clinton. he said if that's what it is, great, bring it on. he had the meeting. we already know these facts. here's what this is telling us, that 69% of republicans say that that is unacceptable.
that seeking this information is unacceptable and trump's approval rating is still so high among them. to me, tells me that the job that rudy giuliani is doing and the job that all the people surrounding donald trump is doing in terms of spinning this investigation and convincing people that the facts being set before them are not to be believed is being successful. >> i imagine a lot of those seven in ten do not believe. >> that's what i mean. that's why that is concerning because they don't believe what has already been presented to them. that's what that suggests. >> we also hear all the time from members of congress i'm not asked about this issue. for many republicans, john, perhaps it's not a top of mind issue. you ask them directly about collusion and they say, no, that is not a great idea. i'm worried about my health care. >> some of it is red versus blue
and us versus them. he has turned a story that was negative about him and all of a sudden it's fake news. you're right. democrats have the same concerns where they're trying to figure out do we want to run on these russia issues and collusion and it's not what the voters are talking about when they go back home. to your point, i think there is a sign of some effectiveness here. how giuliani and other trump surrogates have continued to just sort of muddy the waters and changed the goal post and the story has shifted. maybe there was a little collusion, but it was light collusion and nothing took. >> it's not illegal. >> it's not illegal. >> i like the idea that, you know, you use the bad example of what would be the core that would say it's okay for donald trump to dissolve media institutions because media institutions are.
i'm virtually certain if it's a donald trump related question, the threat to which, don't look so appalled. >> i was just working through what that would look like. >> i think it's kind of a test. there are certain things and people who to noah's poin that they just hear the question as the media is trying to test my media to donald trump. it's the question whether trump has the authority to do anything, they will say yes no matter what that thing is. >> that is what i was trying to get to. >> this show got dark real fast. coming up, steve bannon back in the political spotlight with a pro trump. we'll be right back.
♪ ♪ ♪ let your perfect drive come together at the lincoln summer invitation sales event. get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models plus $1,000 bonus cash. 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.
significant improvement of your lung function. symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day. it may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. grandpa: symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggy! (giggles) get symbicort free at saveonsymbicort.com. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com
>> this is a cultural war. >> that's why we must do everything in our power to block this appointment. >> the left wants to undo our country. they want to take away the freedoms we have. >> we have created 2.4 million new jobs. >> 2018 is a referendum as to whether or not a president is allowed to do his job. >> the president is unstoppable. but he is only one man. >> this is tough stuff. we're fighting a war. >> that was part of the trailer from the upcoming film by steve bannon aimed at helping republicans in the midterms and axios got an exclusive look and national political reporter for axios jonathan swann joins us now. >> how are you, willie? >> i'm doing well. trying to keep up with the relationship between steve bannon and the president of the united states. >> there is nothing to keep up with. it remains terrible. in fact, nonexistent is the better way. >> what is up with this movie?
>> it's a curious sort of example of somebody pledging to somebody who despises the other person. i've never quite seen it before. but trump if he watches this will actually love it. it's exactly the way trump views these elections which is a caricature version of the left and people against donald trump the hero. >> the president is unstoppable, but he is only one man. incredible. >> natural voice of movie trailers. i just realized that. it's quite rich and resident. >> kind of like russell crowe. >> why do you always have to bring it back to australia. >> i also saw in some of the clips hollywood and actors on stage. this is the view of the left that the president wants voters to have.
>> look, bannon's theory of the case is actually, the reason this is interesting, it's not that dissimilar to trump's theory of the case which is that it's all about impeachment and you have to whip up the fear. it's all about fear. this is not about. there are republican leaders i have spoken to and we need to talk about tax reform. we need to talk about, no, bannon understands that they're not going to get rewarded. >> do they say it like that? >> we need to talk about tax reform. bannon is like, no, we need to get people really scared and we need to get people worried about impeachment. >> i don't think we can underestimate the impact of this type of endeavor. this reminds me of the clinton cash initiative which really painted the clintons across the entire midwest. just last night i got a note from a woman in iowa telling me how upset she was that we would see a repeat of essentially what
we saw with the clintons. she had been canvassing for hillary clinton and how much she in talking to opponents saw the exact talking points from some of these documentary films and, also, the talking points of fox news and she said when she talked to them, she said when i asked why, why they absolutely hated hillary clinton so much how she wanted to kill babies in the ninth month and stole furniture for the white house and how crooked she and bill were. that is exactly the portrait that is created in these types of documentaries and in this media environment where everything is passed through social media and really gets a big viewing. >> the reality is, too, as much as i sit down in the front row of the press conference there is a billboard that says tax reform and that's all he wants to talk about. they're not running on that in the special elections. the ads on the air. they tried that tax reform message and it didn't work. put ads of immigration up on the air. >> they put ads on the air of
them putting their babies in make america great again onesies. as long as i can get out and campaign y think they're going to win. not a lot of people who can do that physically. fortunately y ha, i have no prom with that. if you want to know the truth, i don't think it energizes them, i think it deenergizes them. the pew research center looked at votes in 2017 and 2018 up about 24%, the democrats have seen a spike of 6 million votes, an 84% increase from the last midterms. the numbers are pretty plain right there. democrats feeling energized so far in these special elections
anyway. >> it's striking to see that literally a 60% difference in the change in democratic versus republican vote, voter turnout. democrats, i think, are really understanding that they need to have a message that is very clear and that is very much personality driven. i talked to democrats who said what we're not going to do is we're not going to run against trump and make him the focus. but in election after election what you hear is democrats making the case that they need to be a check on this president and that people need to elect them because they can do better than this presidency. so, as a result, you have democrats really doing the same thing that steve bannon is trying to do with his film. they're trying to make people angry and remind people about all the reasons they shouldn't trust this government and that is in some ways essentially working for them. >> yawn on thjonathan, two thin true at the same time and
democrats can be energized by his presidency. >> right. look. republicans that i'm talking to who are seeing the early polling just beyond and they see the suburbs and they made the white house political team they're not going to energize any more. they may as well get republicans fired up a little more because you can't fire up the left any more than they are. >> they definitely can't win without him. they need to motivate him. on the turn out thing, one of the most interesting data points came on tuesday when we learned that more democrats voted in the primary in house speaker paul ryan's district than republicans. >> in wisconsin district. >> wisconsin won. if he was not retiring, he would hold that seat, probably no question. he's very popular there. now it is an open seat because he is leaving and it looks like democrats are really, really energized there.
>> in the end game calculation between energizing democrats and the trump base will be innenergd and in the end game, who knows. had longer term caliclculation the mistake the white house made. why people are terrified by this polling, he has alienated so many suburban women. suburban republicans, particularly women, who voted for him or at least were tolerant, found him tolerable in 2016 who are now mortified of what they're seeing in terms of policy and tone and temper and those people are the people, who if trump decided to play a more restrained game six months ago, nine months ago, it's probably too late. to try to keep those women from turning out. >> republicans are already beaten. they're not talking about anything they want to do. they're talking about blocking mechanisms and they're not advancing an agenda. they're saying we're going to stop the other guy who has an
agenda. that is an admission -- >> they don't have tax cuts. >> the tariffs. forget it. >> the tax cut message. but in my home state, new jersey, only 13% think their checks are going to go up. new jersey got hit really hard with the tax deductions and that perception does mat match reality. and just left it all to democrats and abandoned it for negative messaging. that might work. what will republicans do in the event that they win? no one will answer that question because they don't have an agenda any more. >> jonathan swann, thank you very much. good to see you, again. coming up, we'll talk to james lankford about the president revoking the security clearance of john brennan. plus, a member of both the senate foreign relations and armed services committee, democrat jeanne shaheen. "morning joe" is coming right back. why did i want a crest 3d white smile?
dinner date...meeting his parents dinner date. so i used crest. crest 3d white removes... ...95% of surface stains in just 3 days... ...for a whiter smile... that will win them over. crest. healthy, beautiful smiles for life. the first survivor of alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association.
what omarosa has done to the white house and her book and media tour. there's an unspoken or perhaps a spoken agreement when people leave the trump white house whether you're corey lewandowski or sean spicer. even if you write a book it's generous to the president of the united states and omarosa has blown that up. >> what we've seen here is not unprecedented to see blurring between the campaign and administration. in a rather, what is remarkable is first of all the amount of turnover the trump white house has seen in the first year. these aides when they leave they are being found homes close the home. they are being given jobs in the re-election campaign or outside groups that support the president, or groups affiliated with the vice president with mike pence. some are getting significant
checks. trump's long time body guard was given director of overall security and has a $15,000 a month job, part of which is to provide security for the gop convention in 2020. omarosa was offered one of these deals as well. part of it is about the none disclosure agreement. these are not illegal but blurs the lines, experts suggest can't really be enforced but what she's done is spun it on its head and decided to ignore all of that. wrote this book that torched the president. unnerved him. it's something that has bothered him. and the white house's strategy initially, their plan they knew the book of coming, ignore it. they were able to do that for about 24 hours. trump started tweeting and it has taken over the media. >> his closest advisors and his wife, the first lady of the united states, told the president not to engage with 0 ma rosaks it will elevate her
and increase her book sales. >> he rarely can resist a fight. ten days or so he was watching the reair of lebron james interview. >> who believes given that she had these tapes and the way she's done this roll out who believes that trump provoked her? she was going to roll these tapes one way or the other. it's about her reputation and book sales. she was going to find some reason one way or another to launch this book. if trump restrained herself she would be doing the same strategy just playing off different bumpers off the pool table. >> it's a question if it has the legs now if the president hasn't engaged her. >> not quite as much although tapes are compelling to people in our business. >> coming up trump links the revoking of john brennan's security clearance to russian probe. andrea mitchell joins us with her new reporting that senior
intelligence officials were caught off guard by the president's move. and the manafort case heads to the jury. a lot to get to in our next hour of "morning joe". fidelity is redefining value for investors. introducing zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. we have fidelity mutual funds with zero minimum investment. and now, only fidelity offers two zero expense ratio index funds directly to investors. because when you invest with fidelity, all those zeros really add up. ♪ so maybe i'll win, saved by zero ♪
all those zeros really add up. the full value oft wyour new car? you'd be better off throwing your money right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with liberty mutual new car replacement we'll replace the full value of your car. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ the smoother the skin, the more comfortable you are in it. and now there's a new way to smooth. introducing new venus platinum. a premium metal handle boosts control... to reveal up to 100% smooth skin. venus
if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.
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 ♪ >> regardless of recommendation i was going to fire comey knowing there was no good time to do it. and, in fact, when i decided to just do it, i said to myself, i
said, you know, this russia thing with trump and russia is a made up story. it's an excuse by the democrats for having lost an election that they should have won. >> president trump famously telling lester holt last year he was thinking about the russia thing when he fired james comey. turns out also on his mind as he stripped john brennan yesterday of his security clearance. welcome back to "morning joe". still with us we have nbc news capitol hill correspondent and the host of casey dc on msnbc, kasie hunt. >> took out the lightning bolt. >> a rare feeling. sorry editor of commentary magazine. nbc with us national political reporter. white house reporter for the associated press. national affairs analyst for nbc news and msnbc john heileman. and joining the conversation, nbc news chief foreign affairs correspondent and the host of
"andrea mitchell reports," the great andrea mitchell. good morning. great to see you. right to be you on our headline. let's lay it out. we begin with president trump revoking the security clearance of former cia director john brennan. sarah huckabee sanders announced the action yesterday reading a statement from the president. >> mr. brennan's recent conduct and commentary is inconsistent with access to the nation's most closely held secrets and facilities. the very aim of our adversaries which is to sow division and chaos. >> that lengthy statement why the president ordered that is the need to protect classified information. but trump cited brennan as among those he holds responsible for the russia investigation saying quote i call it the rigged witch-hunt. it's a sham and these people led it. the president added so i think it's something that had to be done.
andrea, your first blush reaction to this news. mr. rise jobs formerly of the cia in the last hour called it unprecedented. >> it is. never before have we had an american president revoke the security clearance of a former cia director and veteran official and doing it without any bay circumstance any legal basis, any review by the intelligent agencies which are supposed to do this kind of review if there is going to be a revocation without any claim that there was a release of classified information. so there was no basis other than quote his erratic behavior which is ironic to say the least. being outstone, being-- outspok being a critic is no justification for this. that doesn't mean he should do
it. it does send a signal to the current intelligence community don't tell the president things that he does not want to hear. that's the main impact here. as well as being a direct message to robert mueller, it's clearly aimed at the mueller probe and then the president said it himself in the "wall street journal" interview. this is the equivalent as you've been reporting the lester holt admission. the cia turned the intelligence from overseas over to the fbi which then leads counter intelligence investigations. it was an fbi operation and to say they led it so i had to do it arguably some people will say and i'm not a lawyer but i'm certain that mueller is looking into this, that this could be another issue of potential obstruction of justice, whether it is of criminal import or not
it certainly is a question. >> the president has made a habit of surprising his national security team with these announcements. i'm thinking of dan coats the director of national intelligence sitting on stage with you last month and surprised as the president would welcome vladimir putin to the white house for a meeting. it turns out according to your reporting dan coats was surprised by this announcement yesterday. >> he and the others in the intelligence agencies. technically the cia should have been given the issue to review and to decide. so they not only did not know it was going to be announced, they did not know a decision had been made to revoke and as you point out it was dated july 26th. so clearly this was both to distract from the omarosa mess, the reality tv show that that had become and whatever concerns they had over election results in the midwest and elsewhere. there was a lot of bad news. it was not a great 48 hours or longer for this white house.
and so they were holding it and then unleashed it. but the president showed his hand in the "wall street journal" interview and that will become a problem. >> andrea, you know dan coats real well and after the last instance when it was clear he was kept in the dark both before and after helsinki the question was raised, might dan coats resign under these circumstances? some people called for him to resign in protest. it seems to me after that incident, now we have another incident in which he's been kept in the dark about a serious matter that he should have been informed about. do you think he would contemplate resigning and some people will call on him to. how will that play out? >> my take is that he would not. and the cia director would not as well who has direct responsibility over this security clearance. they view their mission as a much bigger and broader mission. they are clearly not going to be
happy about this. it does diminish and damage the intelligence professionals who do their jobs, the men and women who are in the line of fire, many of them all over the world. this is a terrible message. john brennan was our station chief in saudi arabia. he was the head of the counterterrorism center. he had a controversial period there, as we all know, the so-called torture report. the aclu which had been so harshly critical of him in that period came out last night with a statement saying this was a terrible decision and infringement on freedom of speech and so even those who might have in the past, you know, argued about some of his decisions and he didn't have lined authority over any of that which was why he got confirmed even from some of his harshest critics like dianne feinstein went along with his confirmation to be cia director.
the fact is that this sends a terrible signal that the former leaders of the intelligence community could be punished and threatened in this way, including that long list of nine others. >> by the way, this may just be the beginning, james clapper, susan rice, among those put on notice yesterday. in the last hour the "new york times" posted new op-ed by john brennan in which he writes this. mr. trump's claims of no collusion are in a word hog wash. the only question that remains are whether the collusion that took place constituted criminal liable conspiracy, whether obstruction of justice occurred to cover up any collusion or conspiracy and how many members of trump incorporated attempted to defraud the government by laundering and concealing the movement of money into their pockets. mr. trump clearly has become more desperate to protect himself and those close to him which is why he made the politically motivated decision to revoke by curt clearance in an attempt into scaring into
silence others who might dare to challenge him. now more than ever it's important that robert mueller and his team of investigators be allowed to complete their work without interference from mr. trump or anyone else so all americans can get the answers they so rightly deserve. that's john brennan's in the "new york times". >> the idea there's no collusion is a hog wash. this is a point brennan has been pressed on. trey gowdy on the hill demanding evidence related to this claim. brennan has refused to give up that evidence. not even willing to go this. i'm wondering if what evidence he does have to back it up. >> that is what we're examining right now. there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, for example, the reporting that trump may have known, for instance, what was happening at trump tower, may be even debriefed about it afterwards.
and the fact of the matter is there's a black hole for us but there may not be a black hole for mueller at this point in between what happened at trump tower and then what happened when the wikileaks were dumped because it's a question of collusion. does collusion have to be successful for it to be collusion, and what is the evidence that they have about what transpired between those two moments because what we know is at the back end that information certainly was weaponized and used to great effect. we and other networks have gone over this repeatedly about number of times that this president used and invoked wikileaks as a weapon in the final moments of the campaign. >> the timing was particularly suspect. >> yeah. andrea, perhaps you would know about this. i would love to know who is the animating figure advising the president to do something like this? it is so anathema to any professional in governance,
anybody with a security clearance themselves or has a relationship with democrats and individuals in the intelligence community or in state, et cetera. so it has to be a political figure. but is it somebody inside the white house inis it somebody outside the white house? a media figure who is especially close to the president? i can't imagine donald trump is not getting some positive reinforcement from something who is in the maka crowd. >> i can't imagine if it's john boll on the which is not a political figure. would be shock if john bolton took this step. prepeople that work under him were not aware of itted vance. collusion as brennan is defining it in this op-ed, he's not prepared to argue that it's a legal case because he's not a lawyer but what he's pointing to is that august 6th, i believe august 6th, 2016 rally that said
russia, if you're listening, that was to an intelligence professional, that san appeal to our russian adversaries being investigated by the fbi. that was an appeal to them in his mind, in his opinion, a lot of other people's opinion directly. it was not a coincidence that he said russia, if you're listening and it came after that very suspicious trump tower meeting that is being investigated. those are the sequence of events that he's saying already amounts to collusion whether it's legal, criminally legal, a legal issue or not. certainly is an issue. >> one of the forces here was rand paul who brought this up publicly to the president. >> who has a long standing vendetta on brennan. >> he felt the president had a guilty conscience about something. he's leaning into this idea there's stuff.
the president then candidate trump's appeal was during the democratic convention at the end of july, counter programming. he had a press conference that morning and raised this about emails missing. casey, should we expect any sort of, we've seen rand paul, any republican condemnation of this. anyone suggest this was inappropriate, and in light of what brennan, suggesting that he's fearful for the safety of the mueller probe and continue. will this revive any talk of legislation to protect the special counsel's mission? >> i would be surprised. maybe. when this first came up we saw the strongest condemnation from corker. also on his way out of washington. at this point the question needs to move from are you willing to criticize the president publicly to hey congress are your willing to actually use any of the powers at your disposal. this is not a helpless group of people. they have, you know, many tools of power at their disposal.
they've been choosing not to use them. they deny they have those powers. >> the answer to your question this is an executive decision and minimization of it. >> rand paul has his arguments against john brennan. it wasn't just about the criticism of the president but he believes he should have had his security clearance taken long ago. listen toing my conservative friends the argument is john brennan is not in government, he doesn't need this clearance, he doesn't need access to this intelligence and he's undermining the president of the united states. this isn't the end of the world that is the argument. >> i would agree that it's not the end of the world. the republic will survive. john brennan has diminished his own utility to this white house as a potential adviser by being so political. that applies to dan coats and susan rice and others who have decided --
>> dan coats? >> i'm sorry barack obama's man -- >> clapper. >> clapper. thank you very much. however, this is clearly an abuse of power and my concern as i said in the last hour for individuals who have clearance whose names we'll not know who do not have media careers ahead of them, in order to make a living for their families they are being conformed by this president that your skreer going to be held as a hostage and you should be afraid to speak out against this administration if you fine yourself so inclined. that's a threat. it's an abuse of power. if it's not treated, it establish as precedent they will regret when it's used against republicans. >> it's reminiscent what you expect from kgb in old world war ii science fiction movies. our intelligence officers should not be donating to political causes. but at the end of the day they have the right to freedom of
speech. >> while all this was going on the jury in the the rifle paul manafort now set to reconvene this morning in just a few hours to begin deliberations after the prosecutors and defense both rested their cases yesterday presenting closing arguments. jurors were dismissed yesterday evening after two hours of instruction from judge ellis. the judge reminded jurors the o prove anything. manafort has pleaded not guilty. in their closing arguments yesterday prosecutors told the jury that manafort had lied for years calling the vast amount of documents and emails they say proved manafort's alleged crimes quote the star witness in this case. the defense team tried to place the blame on manafort's former political protege rick gates. joining us from outside the courthouse in alexandria, virginia is msnbc legal analyst
daniel goldman. a former assistant united states attorney in the criminal division of the u.s. attorney's office for the southern district of new york. dan, good to see you. so the jury begins deliberations two hours from now. how long do you expect the jury to be out? >> this is a world impossible to predict. having sat through a number of trials and trying to read the tea leaves from the juror's demeanor and notes that will come out with questions which could range from can we have pennsylvania and paper to what is reasonable doubt mean and anything in between, it's really impossible to tell. there are 18 counts here. it's two separate schemes that they are going to really have to deal with. one relates to tax evasion and one relates to bank fraud. there are nearly 400 exhibits. there were 27 witnesses. and so it's impossible to tell. i think the feeling after
yesterday's closing arguments was that the government did a very good job of martialing all the documentary evidence, of showing the jury paul manafort's own emails, showing his own knowledge of all of the events that are in the indictment. showing back dated documents. if a br indicated documents. blatant lies. knowledge about lies. and the defense tried valiantly to poke holes in that. there wasn't a real coherent tleem with the defense closing. they were able to effectively undermine some of the points that the government made but many were left untouched. so it could be a verdict today and we could be going deep into next week as well. it's impossible to tell. >> as you know, it just takes reasonable doubt. did the defense create enough reasonable doubt in the undermining ever rick gates, making him an unreliable witness
and someone the jury shouldn't trust. >> they tried. one very interesting thing in the government's closing argument they did not mention rick gates for almost an hour. they just focused on the documents and then when they did it was a relatively short period of time that was somewhat defensive. it was explaining why you don't just have to take rick gates word for it, you should look at all the other witnesses and all the other documents to see if it's consistent. there was very little reliance on what rick gates said. the defense tried to -- they did a good job of attacking rick gates as they did on cross-examination what i thought was lacking they didn't set up a scenario where they could convince the jury that the jury had to rely on rick gates, and so, therefore, the fact that he has no credibility would undermine the government's case. i thought they could have done more on that even though they did a nice job of demonstrating that rick gates was not a credible witness. >> if paul manafort is convicted
the maximum sentence is hundreds of years. he won't get that. where do you see the sentence falling based on the charges in front of us here. >> so federal sentences are guided by what's called the united states sentencing guidelines which creates a range of months that the judge then works off of. i think in this case depending on what, if he's convicted and what of it would be in the ten to 12 year range for the guidelines. but in many white collar case the judges go beneath the guidelines because they are somewhat inflated because they are based on the loss amount of the crimes. and so in white collar cases like this which is serious conduct i wouldn't be surprised if manafort were to get high single digits as a sentence and then in federal prison you can get some credit for being a good citizen in prison and you get a reduction in your sentence. i don't think this would be in and of itself a life sentence
for manafort given he's 69 years old. >> we sit and wait. the jury begin their deliberations two hours from now. daniel, thank you so much. andrea mitchell as you get ready for your show today i imagine you'll be focusing some on john brennan and what comes next out of this white house. >> we'll be talking to john mclaugh lin who was depp cia director and then acting director. he and others are concerned about a couple of things, but also that if they have these clearances if there's an issue in iran, in syria with circumstance with al qaeda, that had involved their work, these former officials can then be tasked by the cia and they can be read in on the current intelligence very quickly. that's the point. that's why mike hayden set up this procedure where they keep
their clearances. i can imagine that even john prenarnpr brennan a critic of the professionals if something came up with one of the terror suspects he had been chasing about or knows about in iran or elsewhere, and they needed to know more background and they had an arrest or had someone in rendition somewhere, they could call in john brennan and say let's show you this stuff and quickly what about this plot against new york or washington? that's the whole reason for keeping these clearances. >> donald trump will not be the last president and there will be future presidents who will appeal to these people with their credentials and sprt advertise and to rob them of that. >> if there's a threat out there. that's why this is so self-defeating. >> andrea mitchell, we'll be watching, andrea mitchell reports at noon. still ahead on "morning joe" president trump says new york's governor is in the middle of a
meltdown. this comes after andrew cuomo criticized the white house with rhetoric that missed the mark. we'll explain when "morning joe" comes right back. >> the white house just messaged the entire american intelligence community, if you stand up and say things that upset the president or which he disagrees he will punish you. that's a horrible message to be sending to folks who are there to tell you objective truth.
i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. new york governor andrew cuomo seemed to be mocking president trump's make america great again campaign slogan yesterday when he said this. >> we're not going make america great again. it was never that great. we have not reached greatness. we will reach greatness when every american is fully engaged.
>> yes those were gasps you heard when governor cuomo said that. a number of president's supporters hammered that remark. the president weighed in saying we're not going the make america great again it was never that great. can you believe this is the governor of the highest taxed state in the u.s. andrew cuomo having a meltdown to which cuomo replied what you say would being a great again would not be great at all, we will not go back to discrimination, segregation, sexism, isolationism, racism or the kkk. >> that was not a well formulated tweet. >> the press secretary issued a tweet the governor believes america is great. not a good day. when you have to come out and clarify. >> governor believes america is
not an s-hole country. >> but as you listen to that, i guess you could say that you sort of know what he was trying to say we have a long way to go to reach the ideals of the constitution. a better way to say that. boy, if you want to put that in an ad and create an enemy for president trump to stand as an avatar for the left, there you have it. >> a clumsy remark at best and gave his opponent who is face a democratic opponent cynthia nixon, the actress as he's moved left on a number of issues, he still does maintain a large lead over her in the polls. her response was this is governor cuomo trying to sound like a progressive and failing badly. >> i wonder if it's more of a reflex of the fact he's under so much pressure from his left side. also that poorly formulated tweet of what's happened in the
20th century. >> again the governor's quote we're not going to make america great it was never that great. how do you twist out of that. >> he was trying to sound like a progressive. ejust a very bad retail politician. he was attempting to say we could do better and then we'll achieve greatness. >> his adviser tweeted out make america great again is a dog whistle. he didn't set it up that way. i just said america is not that great. >> as many democrats said the answer is always america has always been great. it's great today. we don't need to go backwards to make america great. we can make it greater. it's not that hard. >> hillary clinton's campaign did that. that's how they spun off make america great.
>> conservatives should make hash of this. they should say that this is what progressives believe. that america is flawed. it's irredeemable. never achieve the greatness we know inherently exists in the constitution and fuel flowering of these enlightenment ideas. that's something conservatives can make hash of and should. >> still ahead info wars alex jones gets a time-out after urging his viewers to ready their battle rifles. jack dorsey explains what's behind the seven day suspension. that's next. ♪ 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 ♪ a
. welcome back to "morning joe". twitter ceo is standing by the company's decision to put info wars alex jones on a seven day suspension. this comes after jones urged his twitter followers to ready their battle rifles as he put it against the media in a video posted to the site. twitter ceo jack dorsey spoke exclusively to nbc's lester holt on the raging technology war with the alt-right conspiracy
the theorist and the reason for the ban. >> it makes someone think about their actions and behaviors. >> do you think alex jones will change his behavior based on the time-out? >> i don't know. it does have the potential to change impact and change behavior. >> how did jack dorsey. >> call your media trainer. that's horrible performance. tech ceos don't do well. he just sounds so kind of dopey in responding to this and the question is the right question. alex jones has created an incredibly profitable lucrative media empire based on conspiracy theory and hate mongering. the idea a week's long time-out will change his structure is ridiculous. again you can have a very interesting debate what kind of platform twitter should be and
what should the rules be. but the dorsey argument by giving jones a week's time-out will change his behavior is not legitimate. >> he didn't get busted for smoking marijuana in the bathroom. >> this is what caused the ban and not everything that alex jones has done before. i actually met some of the parents of the newtown children who were lost. that has been devastating, the narrative he created that newtown never happened and the pain that it's cause police department even one of them had to move. >> it's beyond devastating. they had to move six, seven times. what alex jones has proven decisions like this offer people like him martyrdom. he rallies his followers around. >> it's my biggest fear that driving him underground doesn't make him go away, it creates a
taboo around his, what he's pushing, which makes it more valuable for people and they go seek it out. people around this table think the threat has been neutralized. it's gone from our eyes. we don't have to spend energy debunking this. alex jones is not a new figure. been around forever. nobody shied away from debunking 9/11 theories. i'm afraid that by off loading, outsourcing this job, the job of journalists to media companies like twitter and facebook is absolving us of the responsibility we're supposed to do. >> in jack dorsey's defense that's the case he made. he put the president in this category too. it's better to have their views in the light of day than to throw them off the platform. >> you have a fundamental issue here which is the platform, is twitter is facebook or whatever said newsstand or said magazine
or a newspaper? so, if you want to take the position that we should let everybody speak on the platform and good speech will drive out good speech take that position. we won't ban anything unless they make threats. or take the position you're the "new york times" or nbc news where we don't put people on our air who peddle conspiracy theories and peddle hate. that would be another position. but a week long time-out is a really uncomfortable ridiculous middle ground. have the courage of your convictions in one way or the other. this done solve the problem in either direction. >> if it's not a pause for twitter and jack because at the same time he said they are reviewing their approach going forward. so ill expect they will come out with potentially some new policies. they've got to gate lid on this. >> the idea of martyrdom. it would be interesting to see who rallies around his cause. donald trump has appeared on his
show during the campaign and has not said anything yet about this issue but he has previously cued, you know, the media and social media of being biassed against conservatives. if he decides to weigh in this goes to a whole other level. >> there's a grouch democrats who have taken on president trump and won. democrat state attorneys again one of them we'll talk to one of them about his challenge to the trump agenda. that's next on "morning joe".
(ford chime) it's the ford summer sales event and now is the best time to buy. you ready for this, junior? yeah, i think i can handle it. no pressure... ...that's just my favorite boat. boom. (laughs) make summer go right with ford, america's best-selling brand. and get our best deal of the summer: zero percent financing for sixty months on f-150. get zero percent financing for 60 months- plus $2,800 bonus cash on a 2018 f-150 xlt equipped with 2.7l ecoboost. dinner date...meeting his parents dinner date. why did i want a crest 3d white smile? so i used crest. crest 3d white removes... ...95% of surface stains in just 3 days... ...for a whiter smile... that will win them over. crest. healthy, beautiful smiles for life.
sometimes you need an expert. i got it. and sometimes those experts need experts. on it. [ crash ] and sometimes the expert the expert needed needs insurance expertise. it's all good. steve, you're covered for general liability. and, paul, we got your back with workers' comp. wow, it's like a party in here. where are the hors d'oeuvres, right? [ clanking ] tartlets? we cover commercial vehicles, too. i think there's something wrong with your sink. we cover commercial vehicles, too. the first thing that was important for me to change was the culture of the company. and i think that had to shift to responsible growth. second thing i wanted to change was the leadership of the company.
and the third was for us to start listening. listening to our riders. listening to our driver partners. i think listening is ultimately going to make us a better company. you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. from protecting fuel efficiency rules to defending the consumer financial protection bureau to challenging the validity of president trump's travel ban, democratic attorneys general have sued the trump administration at a record pace. all part of an unprecedented effort to coordinate legal actions across state lines in an attempt to mount an intense
battle against the trump administration to limit its key initiatives. joining us now is one of the attorney general actively engaged against president trump, democratic attorney general mark herring. let's talk broadly and get involved in the cases you're involved with including obamacare, epa, daca, a long list of them. what specifically prompted you and other democratic attorneys general to enter this fight in this way? >> well as democratic attorneys general, we have a real opportunity, in fact, i would say responsibility to serve as a check against a president and an administration that has shown an incredible capacity for pursuing really bad policy and doing it in ways that are oftentimes illegal and that is all happening in the face of a congress that has completely abdicated its accountability role and so it's really fallen to us to make sure that the laws
are followed, to make sure the constitution is followed, and to protect the well being of the residents of our state. >> i was going to say there's a distinction you would admit between policy that perhaps you disagree with as an opponent of the president and something that's illegal. what killing that the president is doing? >> well, certainly we have policy disagreements, no doubt about that. but when the president crosses legal or constitutional lines and virginians are harmed by that you better believe i'm going stand up and i'll use whatever tools i have at my disposal to do that. when the trump administration announced it was going roll back important fuel economy standards it did it with a lot of phillipsy data, no evidence to support it. contrary to how the obama policies were put in place with a lot of thought and data that supported it, and that's going to cost americans more at the pumps, make us breathe dirtier
air and incur more costs and don't it in a way that isn't supported by how policy is supposed to be made under the law. >> one of the cases that you're involved in is the lawsuits to strike down obamacare as unconstitutional. isn't the whole basis for their legal argument what congress just did is undoing the individual mandate and how do you fight back against that? >> well, really, it'sa flimsy l theory that because of the tax bill obamacare goes away. this has been upheld by the supreme court not once but twice. this is not an abstract legal principle at work it has real implications for americans. we have made such progress in reducing the number of uninsured in this country by 43%. 1.3 million virginians could lose protections against pre-existing conditions if this
lawsuit is successful. so we have stepped up and even though the trump administration has joined up with the plaintiffs to try to attack the affordable care act, we're in court defending it because it's so important to residents of our states and to americans. >> so we saw over the weekend some civil unrest on the anniversary of the charlottesville events that happened a year ago and while there was only one arrest as we saw, video evidence from the events in charlottesville and washington showed that reporters were being harassed, sometimes physically, that some police officers were also harassed and often physically and yet there were no arrests. was there an effort on local police departments to inform police officers to take a soft hand, pull back and let these passions play out? >> you know what we saw happened last year in charlottesville was a real tragedy. white nationalists, neo-nazis
came from all over and descend upon charlottesville and that does not reflect charlottesville. it does not reflect who we are as virginians, and that kind of hatred and bigotry has no place anywhere in our commonwealth. after what happened last year, law enforcement and others in the community and the state did a lot of study and thought about how the response occurred last year and drew a lot of lessons from it and implemented it. there's the larger question too about the rise of white nationalism. it is really dangerous? it seems to be growing. seems to be emboldened by a president who makes statements that seems to suggest he's sympathizing with that ideology and it's dangerous. >> the violence we saw over the weekend was not necessarily white nationalists or not only white nationalists, correct. >> it was for make sure that people were safe and protect and i'm sure just as what happened
last year, there will be a review to make sure there are important lessons that are learned. you know, this is just, you know, a few of the tools that democratic attorneys general have. state attorneys general have a lot of tools at their disposal from text our residents. sometime it means going into court and challenging the administration like on the roll back, attempted roll back of fuel efficiency standards. sometimes it could be taking the trump administration to court when he attempted to end the contraception mandate. we went in and got an injunction to block it. sometime it's about making sure that efforts that are under way in the states are continued. when secretary devos tries to roll back important protections for students on campuses we'll make sure here in virginia important gains we made on campus safety don't get rolled back and that progress as long as i'm attorney general will keep moving forward. >> you've also joined a multi-state lawsuit challenging
the trump administration family separation policy at the border. virginia attorney general democrat mark herring. thank you for your time this morning. we appreciate it. jonathan it's interesting to watch this play out at the state level where it feels congress can't get anything done, republican controlled congress to push against the trump agenda. you have 22 democrats. 30 or so states and d.c. have elections this fall. so a lot of this fight, a lot of what we talk about is in congress for the mid-term elections bath lot is happening in the offices of the attorneys general. >> at the state level you're seeing both parties direct more resources. they are seeing that that is a front, whether it's republican side where you can support what the president is doing or democrats attack. but less than paralysis. >> all right.
heitkamp of north dakota. donnelley and heitkamp said they would wait to make a decision until after his confirmation hearing which is scheduled to begin september 4th. according to the latest poll, 44% of voters say the senate should confirm cavanaugh to the supreme court, up four points from last month. 39% say trump's pick should not be concerned, down two points. and 17% of voters remain unsure. that's down 1 point. so a radical idea, wait until after the hearing to decide whether or not you're going to vote. >> a radical idea, indeed. but this is an orchestrated political strategy, as well. one thing that democratic leaders have been urging these red state democrats behind the scenes. schumer understands better than anybody the pressure they're under as they face re-election. his message to them has been hold your fire, let us fight this fight and down the road you can decide what you need to do.
we talk so much about a midterm perspective about taking back the house. heidi, you know this as well as anybody. the calculations for how to win in these trump states, it's building. >> and pressuring them and forcing them into a no vote, it's huge in some of these states. they lose the seat, in the long run bat startedgy because the democrats will be doomed in turns of ever winning the majority back. >> i generally don't know what the strategy is here besides energize the base, besides dip into the well that is what they did to robert bourque, to suggest that this guy is harboring sentiments and prophetical to what we believe, that he will not make america great again.
the abortions, the implications that are going to be made there because they have no power to stop this. >> right. >> so what other strategy is this but to message and be political about it? >> so much of what we heard from the trump administration and those supporting him about the accomplishments of this term so far has been neil gorsuch. he got a good justice on the court and he remains popular among republicans and clearly that's what they're going to lean in here, too, and that makes it difficult for these red state democrats to know that people like gorsuch, they might like kavanaugh and that could be dangerous. still ahead, john brennen hits back at the president in a scathing new op-ed calling the claim of no collusion, hog wash. plus, republican james langford and democrat jeanne shaheen both join us. it's time for the 'biggest sale of the year' on the
new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your movement and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. and now, all beds are on sale. save 50% on the new sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. only for a limited time. (indistthat was awful.tering) why are you so good at this? had a coach in high school. really helped me up my game. i had a coach. math. ooh. so, why don't traders have coaches? who says they don't? coach mcadoo! you know, at td ameritrade, we offer free access to coaches and a full education curriculum- just to help you improve your skills. boom! mad skills. education to take your trading to the next level.
only with td ameritrade. former trump campaign aide waking up to a raft of historic primary wins last night. >> i'd like to begin by read ago statement from the president. i have decided to revoke the security clearance of john brennen, former director of the central intelligence agency. >> as a former white house aide makes explosive claims and the jury heads to deliberate in the trial of trump's 2016 campaign chairman, president decide toes punish one of the most prominent critics. good morning, it is thursday, august 16th. i am willie geist here with kasie hunt. >> just don't sing dave
matthews. >> we'll put new a dave matthew necessary a few minutes. >> dave matthews? >> jonathan lamere, heidi prisbella, know knoah rothman an highland and the white house correspondent for pbs news hours, yamish al sindor. we're going to begin with president trump revoking the security clearance of former cia director john brennen. white house press secretary sarah sanders made the announcement yesterday by reading a statement from the statement. >> mr. brennen's commentary is holy.inconsistent with the access to the nation's closely head secrets the very aim of our access which is to sow division and chaos.
>> in a later interview with "the wall street journal," president trump cited brennen as among those he holds responsible for the russia investigation saying, quote, i call it the rigged witch-hunt. it is a sham and these people led it, trump added, so i think it's something that had to be done. on nbc yesterday brennen said the president is acting out of fear. >> i think he fears individuals who could damage him, could damage his standing among the american people. they look at the way he's been referring to bob mueller. bob mueller who is a national treasure, an icon within the law enforcement and justice communities, who is doing his level best to investigate russian interference in the election. >> i think mr. trump is getting more and more concerned, more and more desperate. i would say more and more frightened. as there is closer and closer
magnification of some of the things that those around him have been involved in. >> i do believe that mr. trump decided to take this action, as he's done with others, to try to intimidate and suppress any criticism of his him or his administration. revoking my security clearances is his way of trying to get back at me. this is not going to deter me at all. i'm going to continue to speak out. >> so when the white house distributed the president's statement, it caused some to question the timing of the announcement. as the document was dated july 26th, as you may know yesterday was august 15th. the white house said that was just an error and it was not meant to have any date at the top. the day before his clearance was stripped, brennen, a senior national security analyst commented on president trump's use of the word "dog" to describe former white house aide omarosa. brennen wrote, it's astounding how often you fail to live up to minute mi mum standards of
decency, civility and problemty. seems like you will never understand what et means to be president nor what it means to be a good, decent and direct person. so disheartening. john brennen has been among many former obama era nationalists to credit is h criticize president trump. >> a few weeks ago, sarah sanders was reviewing the security clearances -- >> you said a few weeks ago. was it july 26th? >> saying this was a step that when, say, the george w. bush and the iraq war, there were many critics of that movement and that administration did not move to strip security clearances of those who were doing so and this is depriving the american government of these people's expertise. brennen, of course, was near the center of the bin laden raid and keeping his clearance would allow this government to consult with him on those matters. now, of course, they haven't been because he's been such a
critic. but this feels like a punitive step and step is purely for punishment. and that is something we have not seen before from this president. and the timing, of course, is such that it's drawn such attention that it comes amid all of these other bad stories of a very bad week for this white house and this feels like they had something in their back pocket that they wanted to drop. >> but didn't his aides say, hey, you've got a lot of people coming after you, gunning for you on the obstruction issue because you keep linking people to the russia investigation and then he goes out and gives this the interview to the "wall street journal" saying it had to be done. these people were all part of the rigged witch-hunt which, then again, just like his tweet, seems to build this case for obstruction that he's trying to close these people out because they were involved in an investigation. >> they were recommend necessariant of how we've seen this before where the white house, his aides will present a story. this is why this happened. and the president himself, an hour or a day later said no, it happened yesterday and it was
about russia. >> so, john, in this statement yesterday, sarah sanders put other former national security officials on warning. james comey, susan rice, james clapper among others as if to say watch out, if you don't slow down with your criticism, that's coming for you, as well. >> i wouldn't say as if to say. it's that is who they're saying. they're already coming after them. they're on this list, apparently. we were laughing a second ago because so much of this is taken off of -- i listen to heidi asking these questions which are 100% legitimate questions playing out over and over again. what is this other than the lester holt scenario over and over again. the president cannot contain himself. he doesn't just go on the record at some point and give away the game. he goes on the record the day that he's trying to conceal what his motives are and gives the game away. but, again, we've seen that before. we were laughing because of this thing like we didn't need to have a date on the document.
that was meant to be documented. i just want someone to explain. i would love to have they have sit down and explain how a document that was meant to be undated came to have a date. what would be the circumstances in which the date would appear on the document like a gremlin in the computer system that would also happen to be the date, as jonathan points out, as the date that he first raised this thing. it's outrageous what they're doing. the only thing besides the outrageousness of the whole thing is the farcical quality of it. it's so transparent that we have to take it seriously. it is a huge chilling affect for national security. the notion of an enemy's list. but it almost seems like they're going through the motions now and trying to come up with cover stories because there is no way to come up with cover stories because what they're doing is so obvious and the president is even really not trying any more. he's just telling the truth about it. >> yamish, as you cover the
white house, was there something specifically that pushed the president over the edge thmts? we showed the tweet from john brennen talking about the omarosa dog tweet from the president of the united states. john brennen was on tv critical of the united states the night before. but was there something that pushed it over the top here? >> i think omarosa and the need to change the subject is what pushed this over the edge. the idea that the document was dated july 26th, almost as if the white house was in some ways waiting to see whether or not there would be something that would bubble up and they would need to talk about this security clearance issue again. it was brought up several weeks ago. they had a long time to be able to say, hey, here is the first person we're going revoke. instead, in the middle of omarosa's frenzied drip, drip, drip of recordings, we now have them explaining, okay, we really need to focus on john brennen and what he's been saying about the president. i think at the end of the day, this white house is really trying to get its legs right now
and it's really trying to stop the conversation that we've been having about the president and whether or not he said the "n" word. >> like so many of the threats the president has made, this one was brushed aside by members of congress including speaker ryan when it was made a few weeks ago. >> yes. and they are very tired of having to answer questions like these. but i asked the speaker about it a couple of weeks ago. here is what he said. >> the president has said that he wants to revoke security clearances from some former national security officials who still hold them and who have made political remarks. is it dangerous to go down that road? >> i think he's trolling people, honestly. this is something that's in the purview of the executive branch. i think some of these people have already lost their clearances. some people keep their clearances. that's something that the executive branches deals with and it's not really in our purview. >> but the banana republic comments that some of your colleagues made -- >> i think he's trolling people.
>> so the comments i was referring to there, senator bob corker went out and said, look, this is a banana republic mover. is it serious or unserious in your view? >> it's pretty serious. i shed few tears for john brennen or susan rice or half the national security staff who have clearances in the obama administration because they are so political, they have reduced their ewe tillty to this administration. so they're not being relied on as sources of valuable information. they're going to be fine. the people i'm afraid for are the people we don't know about who have tscci, lower level individuals who are now going to read this as an effort to silence them, as an effort to hold their careers in hostage. and that is an abuse of power and that is a real threat and that's something that my conservative friends have not, i think, really taken into account. john brennen has become explicitly political and as a result he deserves to have his intelligence clearance revoked. i don't think that's necessarily fair, but it's true.
>> but is being political enough of a reason to take -- >> no, absolutely not. that's most certainly an abuse of power. however, it can be said that john brennen has made himself a political figure and should be treated like a political figure. to hold his intelligence clearances over his head, i think, goes too far. but it's not to say that he is as pure as the wind driven snow. he wants to be treated like a foil for this administration and that's how this administration intends to treat him. but this omarosa thing, the notion that they're trying to distract from omarosa, mike cohen dropped the suggestion that they knew about this the day after it happened. why didn't they want to distract from that that news then? >> some posited that that may be because omarosa really got under the president's skin. >> she certainly does. she has -- they're cut from the same cloth in many ways. they are sort of reality tv
stars. she has proven to be very adept at playing the media here, in terms of capturing our attention. it seems to be that every day drop a tape here, drop a tape there, keep the news cycle going. particularly when this president has proven to be sensitive from attacks from women, minority women, and in this case, she committed the cardinal sin of trump world which is to be disloyal. he cannot handle it when someone in his inner circle breaks with him and it's very clear over his tweets of the last few days how much she has been under his skin. still ahead, two u.s. senators, one democrat, one republican react to the president's push against john brennen. ♪yeah ♪and i just wanna tell you right now that i♪
♪i believe, i really do believe that♪ ♪something's got a hold on me, yeah♪ ♪oh, it must be love ♪oh, something's got a hold on me right now, child♪ ♪oh, it must be love ♪let me tell you now, oh it must be love♪ chair, new laptop headphones, with free 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. like these for only a 25 cents at office depot officemax.
this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's.
president trump insists -- continues to insist his ongoing trade and tariff battles are a good thing, tweeting yesterday this, our country was built on tariffs. tariffs are leading to great new trade materials deals as oppose unfair trade deals that i inherited as your president. in an interview with the "wall street journal" yesterday, president trump said his wide ranging steel tariffs will spark a re-vitezation of that industry not seen since andrew carnegie more than 100 years ago. as the journal points out, steel users from around the country have blamed the tariffs for costs, layoffs and production
cuts. >> president's argument for trade tariffs, he said the tariffs are a good and easy way to win. it doesn't look like that so far. >>. >> there is nothing really there that is a sentiment that can be parsed. there is no internal competition. there is no globalized economy for steel or we needed the steel for half the things they wanted to do. turns out we don't make enough to fulfill that order. it's not one of our primary industries and more and the notion you can say we're only going to have internal competition is unparsble. >> by the way, this is one of the places where we've heard republicans cross the president on the question of tariffs and their effectiveness. >> we have.
we haven't seen them take any more meaningful action. at the same time, mitch mcconnell has prevented anything more substantive from coming to the floor on this. >> we'll talk in just a second about what was going on in turkey, but first, senator langford, just your basic fundamental view on tariffs, good or bad? >> tariffs are badder for us long-term. the best thing you can have is to have low or zero tariffs. we don't have that in a lot of countries right now. the president is trying to push back and raise tariffs on them to bring down both sets of tarif tariffs. what we saw with the eeu was a push to raise tariffs. they came in response saying let's try to get zero tariffs as cross as we can. that is much better for our economy so we can get on a fair
platform. >> what are tower yifs in your state doing in oklahoma? >> oh, wow. let me count the ways on it. whether it's agriculture products and slowdown because on the of places we have higherer tariffs or automobiles, they reciprocate by raising tariffs. we were just talking about and i heard the conversation about oil and gas development which is produced overseas. we don't make that kind of steel here in the united states. if this is a short-term fight that gets to a resolution, it's better for us long-term. if this is a long-term trade war, that is bad for our consumers. >> so in the face of all of that e evidence that you just produced, why do you think the president continues to insist that they're a good thing for the american
economy? >> i think his focus is other countries that have high tariffs on them. if he wants to get cheaper products to us, neff to drive their tariffs down. his focus is force them to the terrible to negotiate and to try to get tariffs down on both sides of it. if that is successful, that is good long-term for the united states. if this is not successful, it will be an epic problem for us for a long time in our country. with all the good news that's within coming in, that can be diminished by trade issues. >> you all took a very abbreviated recess. yet in this span of time, the president has called omaha rosa omarosa a dog. is this an abuse of power
inspect bob corker said this would be a banana republic democracy. do you think it needs to be prevented from happening again? >> security clearances are within the president's purview. it does seem sort of petty to have that kind of a response. john brennen has come out and called the president treasonous and has been on the war path against the president and the president has limited ways to push back and that is one of the ways he's pushing back. >> is it petty or does it amount to black listing a critic? >> i don't think it's black listing a critic. this is a former administration official that doesn't require to have a security clearance right now. he's out of the administration now. it's not like this is a day-to-day person dealing in the administration that you're removing clearance from. this is a former official that quite frankly doesn't need a security clearance in some ways.
>> we heard a couple of reasons for the revocation of the clearance yesterday, first from the white house, sarah sanders said it was in part of mr. brennen's, quote, erratic behavior and increasingly frenzied commentary. is that a reason to take away someone's security clearance? >> no, i don't know that it's a roent. i think it's a message to john brennen. do i think it's a great idea.? no. i don't think it's a good way to respond to it. i think the president can be above the whole thing and be the president and not have to go down to that level, but he's chosen to respond to it and take away something that really isn't important for brennen to have, anyway. >> so we saw later in the day the president did a interview in the "wall street journal" and said it was because of the pushing of the interview. >> again, i come back to the same thing. it's not really a standard. this is something that brennen
has called the president treasonous. and the president just pushed back. >> senator, we're going to take a quick break and bring in your colleague jeanne shaheen and talk about turkey when we come back. insurance that won't replace the full value of your new car? you'd be better off throwing your money right into the harbor.
welcome to at&t innovations where we give you more for you thing. and here's where we shrink the biggest names in entertainment so we can fit them into our unlimited wireless plan. who's first? no. this isn't permanent, right? ask him. [terry squeals.] get unlimited data, live tv, and your choice of an extra on us. more for your thing. that's our thing. visit att.com itreat them all as if, they are hot and energized. stay away from any downed wire,
call 911 and call pg&e right after so we can both respond out and keep the public safe. one call 811 before you dig.ings you can do is to make sure you calling 811 can get your lines marked. it's free, it's easy, we come out and mark your lines. we provide you the information so you will dig safely.
u.s. officials are doubling down on their tough stance towards turkey. the trump administration cited national security concerns while levying new tariffs on the nato ally. vice president pence singled out pastor andrew brunson warning turkey's leadership not to test president trump's resolve. turkey's president issued his own warning to washington reportedly saying the u.s. is trading a strategic nato ally for a priest. jeanne shaheen of new hampshire joins us now alongside republican james lankford. they have been leading efforts to gain the release of the pastor. who is pastor brunson and why is he being held in turkey? >> pastor brunson is a
missionary who had been in turkey for over 23 years when he was arrested in october of 2016. and he's been charged with totally trumped up charges in his indictment, suggesting that he was part of the coup attempt against president erdogan, but there's no evidence to show that. this is a man who loves turkey. he's raised his kids there. and this is really an effort as we've heard president erdogan say to exchange our pastor, pastor brunson, for fatulah galan who is the man that president erdogan blames for the coup against him. so it's unfortunate that we are in this situation where it has escalated to the point that it's not in the best interest, either of the united states or of turkey. they should release pastor brunson. we made some progress when they let him out of prison and put him under house arrest, but it's time for him to come home and for them to release the other americans that they're holding. >> senator, this has escalated
in recent weeks here with new levies against turkey, what other leverage, what other pressure can the united states apply on turkey and erdogan to security the release of pastor brunson? >> putting direct sanctions on those exact individual that's have imprisoned americans in turkey, all these fake witnesses that they have created to bring in fake evidence as they go through the process on it, put direct sanctions on those individuals. they're imprisoning americans and just hoeding them for two years without any real charges. it's a russian missile defense
system and it seems add for us to sell the f-35 to turkey to get rushenan defense systems that are not inoperable with these systems. turkey is unresideble from just a few days ago. turkey is transitioning dramatically away from the west. >> senators, noah rothman from commentary magazine. as you said, we're putting a lot of pressure on erdogan. he doesn't have the capacity to put economical sanctions on us. but as we saw, our air base cut off the power. they can apply pressure to us in a military sense. do we have any sense that anchor is preparing to respond in that sort of way? and also, do you know how this rowe is resinating?
>> turkey is a nato ally. they're an important nato ally. they're a muslim country, they have a very strategic location in the middle east. we need to continue this close relationship that we've had and it's in everybody's interests to try and deal with these issues. turkey needs to release pastor brunson and the americans they're holding and we need to get our relationship back on track. >> yeah. our push has not been to try to push turkey away. it's that we want our friend back. we want to continue to have this close cooperation. while they can put leverage on us, it would hurt the entire region to isolate the air force base. >> senator shaheen, we talked to senator lankford about his views about the brennen situation. i want to give you a chance to weigh in on what you think about what president trump did yesterday in revoking that security clearance, whether it's warranted, and what kind of a
potential precedent it sets going forward, especially with this other list of potential stri strippees, so to speak. >> it sets a terrible precedent. this nothing more than an effort to distract from the white house's current troubles and to go back at and get revenge against people that insult the president. this is to send a message to our intelligence community that they are going to be sanctioned if they tell the president the truth. we want our intelligence community to be willing to lay out what the facts are to the president so he can make the best decisions possible. and what this action does is to send a message that the president is not going to listen if you tell him something that he doesn't like to hear. senator jeanne shaheen and james lankford, we appreciate you for being with us this morning and thank you for keeping us up to
( ♪ ) joni: think i'd give up showing these guys how it's done? please. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are changing the way they fight it. they're moving forward with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. it's proven to help people find less joint pain and clearer skin. don't use if you are allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms of an infection. or if you have received a vaccine, or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. mitzi: with less joint pain, watch me. for less joint pain and clearer skin, ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. ask your rheumatologist then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today.
president trump's legal team is preparing for a showdown to the supreme court. trump's lawyers are preparing to oppose a subpoena from mueller for a trump sit-down. in an interview with "the washington post," president trump's attorney rudy giuliani says, quote, we would move to qua quash a subpoena. the attorneys are ready to argue
it before the supreme court if it ever got there. let's bring in bob costa, msnbc political analyst and moderator of washington week on pbs. bob, it's hard to keep up with this, quite frankly. they want an interview with the president. president trump wants an interview. he wants to sit down with bob mueller. he's his own best advocate. his lawyers don't want him to sit down. now they're going to fight a subpoena. will there ever at the end of the day be a sit-down with bob mueller? >> the question of whether they want it is up for department. you have to follow actions more than people's words sometimes. and with regard to the trump legal team, that's what they're doing. zoully annie tells me they're preparing for a district fight. they would prepare to immediately oppose a subpoena should mueller issue one. they're also getting ready for an interview, but fought really.
>> and, bob, they leak these stories. >> giuliani knows they could get rid of the president's council today. but this is something that stwrully annie says as long as he's the president's lawyer, it could stretch into november or december. >> mueller has this loaded weapon in some accepts, which is the threat of a subpoena. giuliani is basically saying, we have our arguments ready to go, that they're ready to make that
fight. neither side, though, wants that fight. if this is all cabuki, how is that this case. >> he's testing to see if mueller will drop a report without having the president sit down to talk through his intent on certain decisions. mueller isn't communicating very much with trump's legal team. where can you go and threaten not to sit down. >> first, has giuliani previewed any of the political strategies they would do and secondly, he has upped the rhetoric in the last few days.
while there is a belief that mueller would be the come down with his findings, there is a report that soon after labor day that a roger stone ally was going to come in and testify. what sort of response do you expect from the former mayor if the mueller probe keeps moving failure? >> it's pretty clear that the trump legal team is going to have in this memo that they've answered all the questions publicly. giuliani keeps saying all these random things about the president's conduct. it's almost as if he's laying out a case for a subpoena battle saying we've said all these things publicly. there is no need to have a public interview. the load of bricks is the conditioned insistence on a war
against mueller's credibility. >> how much of this is designed to try to get mueller to do something before the end of august and how convinced are they that he would way through the midterm election terd to drop this report? >> they think if mueller waits until past september, early september, they're going to have a case to make to the american people that it's similar to when comey made his announcement in 2016 about the hillary clinton investigation, that they could have a case with the people. they're trying to convince ahead of the midterm elections. they know the investigation is continuing,er regardless. you have the investigation of potentially roger stone's activities, russia's
interference. that is all part of this on the president's conduct. >> hi, robert. this is heidi. what is your sense of inside the investigation? how much of the pieces for obstruction are already there regardless of whether the president gives an interview or not. is it necessary for mueller to kind of close up shop here and issue his report? >> that's a point of intense debate in the -- inside the white house and in the president's legal team. because if you think about all the witnesses who have gone to mueller's office for interviews, the white house has cooperated. so there are many white house officials who have sat down multiple times to sit with mueller's team and talk through some of the things they have witnessed inside of the white
house. mu mueller has a portrait of a lot of these decisions. he's just trying to wrap it up to understand the president's intent and that's why he wants the president to sit down. but that doesn't mean he won't issue a report if he doesn't get an interview. >> we will see. "the washington post" robert costa plugged in as usual, bob. thanks so much. >> thank you. let's turn now to business before the bell and dominic chu. good morning. a chinese delegation headed to washington later this month. what can resolve the trade tensions that set the world on edge. >> the officials said the meetings will take place later on this month. as of earlier on this morning, the treasury department had not made any comment on this particular announcement. the timing is still pretty un clear. what we know is that august 23rd is when the next round of u.s. tariffs were going to take place. the last formal round of trade
talks happened in beijing. that was in early june. we'll see if the white house weighs in on that. that possibility of trade talks resuming is being felt immediately in the markets. the dow jones industrial average will be set to open around 240 points. any possible developments on the trade front are potentially big market catalysts. for now, that positivity is over-shadowing continuing situations with turkey and other emerges markets, as well. on the corporate front, u.s. regulators are looking deeper into tesla or elon musk. the electric carmaker has been satinaed by the u.s. securities and exchange commission regarding tweets and comments made by elon musk that said he was looking to take that company private and that he had secured funding for the deal. among the issues right now is whether or not musk spoke truthfully about the nature of his financing commitments and speaking of those financing commitments. the fcc and tesla declined
comments on those reports. speaking of musk, he is bold in his ambitions, for sure. the latest is connecting a tunnel to dodger stadium. it would have people load on to electric skates to take a trek that would be almost four miles long. that could be a pretty design deal. >> is that using that same hyper loop technology he's been advertising? >> it could be. although in this case, it wouldn't be going into a pod that shoots through the tunnel. it would be everybody get -- about 1400 people getting on these skates and potentially making that trek to dodger stadium. >> you need a ballpark to the tunnel, don't you? >> this is terrifying. >> if i lived in los angeles, i would be -- a tunnel or a -- >> you're pro tunnel? >> some kind of a monorail or those flying cars they've been
advertising. >> would those dodger fans -- >> don't -- now you're just mugging the camera. >> somebody is going to gift that. >> dom chu, thank you. coming up next, hundreds of publishers push back to answer a call on the president's attacks against the media. (indistinguishable muttering) that was awful. why are you so good at this? had a coach in high school. really helped me up my game. i had a coach. math. ooh. so, why don't traders have coaches? who says they don't? coach mcadoo! you know, at td ameritrade, we offer free access to coaches and a full education curriculum- just to help you improve your skills. boom! mad skills. education to take your trading to the next level. only with td ameritrade. chair, new laptop headphones, with free 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. like these for only a 25 cents at office depot officemax. dinner date...meeting his parents dinner date. why did i want a crest 3d white smile? so i used crest. crest 3d white removes... ...95% of surface stains in just 3 days... ...for a whiter smile... that will win them over. crest. healthy, beautiful smiles for life.
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 ♪ they can make anything bad because they are the fake, fake
disgusting news. and even these people back here, these horrible, horrendous people -- fake news, fake news. they are fake. >> the enemy. the enemy of the people, i call them. >> collection of quotes from president trump talking about the pt press in this country. thomas jefferson, on the other hand, once said our liberty depend on the freedom of the press and that cannot be limited without being lost. "the boston globe" took up that mantle last week when it proposed a coordinated editorial response from publications across the country to the president's frequent attacks on the news media. so far, close to 350 editorial boards have joined on reaffirming their commitment to a free press. joining us now is the managing director of the boston globe, linda henry. today's global is entitled journalists are not the enemy. it reads in part the liberty of
the prets is essential to the security of freedom, wrote john adams. today is under serious threat, the press is necessary to a free society because it does not it implicitly trust leaders from the local planning board to the white house and it's not a coincidence that this president, whose financial affairs are murky and whose suspicious pattern of behavior triggered his own justice department to appoint an independent counsel to investigate him has try so hard to intimidate journalists. the greatness of america is dependent on the role of the free press to speak to truth of the powerful. to label the press the enemy of the people is as un-american as it is dangerous to the civic compact we've shared for more than two centuries. linda, good morning. why did you feel "the globe" needed to step forward? >> well, there's been an
increase in the rhetoric against the media. and the globe editorial board decided that it was time to speak out about it. and we decided we're going to do it on thursday. we sent a call out to other newspapers and media outlets around the country. and we were really amazed with the response. at first it was a couple that came through. and then over 350 news outlets, small news. as, large newspapers, different online outlets. and from red states and blue states. it's just this incredible outpouring of people who felt the same way we did. in their own word, that it was time to remind people of what the role of the press is. >> well, it's a shame that the truths you state in that editorial have to be said out loud. obviously they do right now. we know leadership from "the new york times" has gone in and spoken to donald trump about the dangers of calling the press the enemy of the people and literally the next day the president gets back on that
warpath. do you have in hope you will change the mind or at least help the president tone down his rhetoric? >> i think that this is not necessarily for the audience of the president. this is for the audience of the people who work in journalism as well as people in the communities we serve. the messages we're hearing from other newspapers as they talk about this in their role is saying we're the friends. we're the fellow americans. this dehumanizing language labeling journalists and others and enemy is not -- it takes away from the role that journalists play. their kids go to the same schools. they're looking for their truth. they're researching. from every level of government, you know, we hold accountability to school boards and mayors and city councils and governors and all the way up. so it's something that, you
know, because you might not agree with what is being said, the role within the community is still really vital. >> well, linda, i asked you a question and while you were answer, the president tweeted this. quote, the fake news media is the opposition party. it is very bad for our great country. but we are winning. that's a tweet a minute ago from the president of the united states. jonathan lamere. >> on that note, is there any concern here, as much as this is about making a public statement, a declaration, of values, is there any concern it could trigger some sort of backlash? we've already seen the president weigh in. he's not explicitly talking about this. but among his supporters, too, we know the public approval ratings for the media, it's very low. is there any concern this is going to embolden the talk that the media is conspiring against the president when they see something that seems like a unified message against him? >> it's not a message against the president, it is a message
in favor of the constitution and in favor of democracy. and so this shouldn't be controversial. the fact that media outlets around the country feel that there is a critical role for journalism, it should be galvanizing in our belief in what the role of newspapers is. it's not against the president. you can -- the president is a defender of the constitution just as we are. >> you said in the beginning that the target audience is the journalists who work for the organizations as well as the communities they serve, but what about the targets of trump's rhetoric? how do you reach those people? again, just to circle back on this being used against us, even some folks in the community such as the editor of the "san francisco chronicle" said it plays into trump's narrative that the media is aligned against him.
how do you reach the people who are being targeted by trump? >> i think that the individual editorials that were written by these different media outlets address this really well. it's a really good point. these were all written in their own words. again, this is in favor of the constitution in favor of the first amendment. and in favor of supporting and connecting the communities. you know, these are not enemies, these are fellow americans. these are neighbors. these are your friends. some of the editorials put it really well in saying the enemy is corruption. the enemy is darkness. you know, and this is what we are together in pursuit of, democracy. >> well, linda, we in the media appreciate your effort and your leadership in this. i do have one more question as you sit in boston as a yankee fan. do the red sox plan on ever losing again? because this is getting
annoying. >> we did lose last night. >> i saw you lost last night. >> i was going to ask you how difficult it is to work with joe when the yankees are ten back. >> joe and i've got jonathan here. it's really appalling. we're sitting in new york. >> i'm going to the game on sunday. >> the yankees and the dave matthews band, really, i don't know, i don't know. i don't think we can be friends. >> just park the brakes a little in boston with the red sox. linda, thank you so much. we appreciate it. so noah, heidi made the point that donald trump will use this as a here they go, here's the media, coordinating against me. we saw it literally as we were having that conversation, the president tweeted about the fake news. >> he probably will. jack schaeffer in politico has a good piece essentially with the same phenomenon. i'm skeptical this reaches anybody but the converted. republicans have been trying to put the media on the ballet. and they have a bad habit of
just not showing up on the ballot every november. republicans have an opposition party. it's democrats. to the extent they're not messaging against democrats, they take their eyes off the ball. this converts the converted and incenses people who are targeted. bill de blasio has a bad habit of essentially calling murdoch properties fake news and trying to ice them out. it's bad across the board. it should be condemned. as a political issue, as an electoral issue -- >> i've already saw some of them -- >> you can't compare de blasio's calling -- attacking fox knew to the president calling the press the enemy of the people. >> yes, no, there's -- >> there's really not similar things. >> no, when bill de blasio calls reporters for "the new york post," i don't recognize you as real news, that's fake news. >> that's not using stalinist rhetoric -- >> no, that's -- >> that paints a target on the back of the entire national press corps. >> i agree. the president is a different
figure. >> the rhetoric is much more incendiary coming from the president when he's calling us collectively the enemy of the people -- >> -- refuse to condemn the condemnable because one person is maybe a little bit better than the other person, we are creating the situations we're saying we want to avoid. we're establishing moral equivalencies and that's wrong. >> i think we can at least say, look, the press annoys people in all parties, on both sides of the aisle. lindsey graham went out there and said that about -- when he was asked about donald trump's enemy of the people comments. he said look being i find you annoying sometimes. but at the same time, he has stepped out and defended the press. there are a few other republicans who do it with regular layerty. jeff flake, paul ryan come to mind. where they're going, they're not going to be in washington anymore. we need our leaders to step up on this. jonathan, let's go back quickly, about the president's decision to take away the security
clearance of john brennan, the former cia director. do you believe it was the changing of the subject from omarosa, the beginning of something else, take away clearances? >> the timing certainly points to it being an effort to change the subjects. this is a president who also has grown rather enamored with things he can do unilaterally. he's been frustrated by washington. he can't get stuff through congress. he's had trouble with his own staff undermining him at times, again, omarosa. we saw him with this flurry of pardoning people. this is something he can do by himself. it is certainly possible. >> we did not see an outcry from langfo langford. i think the risk is real. these are people who's been on the front lines of the war on terror. he's got an enemies list that maybe he might start taking off.
>> it can be both a shiny object and attempt to distract and a serious threat and potential foreshadowing of bad things to come. >> i will say one thing we introduced in the show this morning is a rothman thing. there's an energy here i'm really into. >> it's kind of like -- >> it's a pilot episode. >> we'll see if we get a full season pickup. guy, thank you so much. thank you for watching. stephanie ruhle picks up our coverage right now. hey, stef. >> thanks so much, willie. good morning, everyone, i'm stephanie ruhle with a lot to cover today. starting with the art of the distraction. the president revokes former cia director john brennan's security clearance and trump makes it clear in an interview and later on twitter exactly why he did it. >> the white house just messaged the entire american intelligence community. if you stand up and say things that upset the president or with which he disagrees, he will punish you. >> the waiting game. any minute now, jury deliberations will begin in the case again