tv MSNBC Live With Alex Witt MSNBC August 25, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PDT
granted immunity. >> you don't use a big fish to eat a smaller fish. >> new information on what could be inside the "national enquirer's" safe as the owner of that tabloid also gets immunity. and we're hearing the other "i" word an awful lot this week. >> i don't know how you can impeach somebody who's done a great job. >> we're going to break down the legal and political realities of impeachment in a little bit. joining me, sir michael singleton, republican consultant under president trump and staff writer at the "atlanta" msnbc contributor as well. daniel goldman, assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. msnbc legal analyst tiffany cross, co-founder and managing editor of "the beat d.c." right to the questions surrounding the trump organization cfo granted immunity. this development on top of many other legal bombshells this week. re-igniting speculation of what president trump might do if investigators cross the red line of touching his finances, which he warned about earlier this
year. natasha, start with you. you wrote a piece about all this. about allen weisselberg and said the significance of this flip compared with michael cohen's recent plea deal cannot be overstated. two slightly over a year for trump's longest serving employees, considered the last two to turn on the president to cooperate with federal investigators and in both cases directly implicate trump in a crime. draw it out more from there. a pivotal week in many ways. how big is this? >> absolutely huge. seems new york prosecutors pose at least a more immediate threat to trump than the mueller investigation does. i wouldn't necessarily say a bigger threat. i didn't write the headline, but i would say it's definitely a more imminent -- offers more imminent legal peril to the president but it's important to remember weisselberg worked for the trumps his entire adult life collusively. right out of college started working for his father at the
trump organization. for him to have taken this immunity deal and testified against michael cohen and potentially anything else he might know about the trump organization and the trump foundation, for example, is huge. of course, we know this is not just something that southern district of new york is looking at. the manhattan district attorney's office also opened an investigation into the trump organization. the new york attorney general is looking at the trump foundation, which, of course, allen weisselberg was the treasurer of. >> wore many hats. >> right. a terrible week for the president in every sense of the word. >> dan goldman, i turn to you. talk about the southern district of new york, natasha a nod to the sovereign district of new york as well. when do you make of the role its playing? some stuff spun off to the sdny. what role do you think folks outside of mueller's team will play? >> i'm going to put the brake on this a little bit, because i don't think it's accurate to say allen weisselberg is cooperating. allen weisselberg, by all
reporting, including natasha the received immunity any order to compel him to testify in connection to the michael cohen case. >> narrow immunity? >> it is for his testimony. but that's very different than flipping or cooperating. there is a mechanism where he could do that and he could not be prosecuted and return for his cooperation, and that would be folsom and get into all the things natasha is talking about in the trump organization. allen weisselberg is not cooperating against donald trump and important to underscore that. he was compelled to testify by the southern district of new york, who granted him immunity, because he asserted his fifth amendment. he, therefore, goes in front of the grand jury, testifies, and people who testify under grand jury immunity are not nearly as helpful witnesses as someone voluntarily cooperating. so we need to put the brakes a little bit on weisselberg and what his implication is in this whole investigation.
it absolutely could be more and i think the investigations, the cooperation to the extent there is cooperation or the separate investigations may dig into the foundation and into the trump organization and we may not have heard the last from weisselberg, but to me seems more like weisselberg was a smaller sort of after the fact player in the whole cohen saga with the campaign finance fraud. david pecker also was granted immunity and we don't know what that may have been because of, but one reason could be the press exception to campaign finance fraud, and even though experts would argue that he falls in that press exception, it's a little dicey to be charging a media executive with, you know, catching and killing -- it's a little bit of a legally dicey thing and may have said give him immunity toy get cohen. a step back. interesting thing. michael cohen is not cooperating with the sdny. i don't know where that investigation goes from here,
but i think without michael cohen's cooperation, it may more or less be the four corners we see. interesting thing, whether cohen goes and meets with mueller, because he apparently has information relevant to mueller's investigation. >> ask you about the code of trump, michael. >> sure. >> he worked in the administration. you know the degree this president apprises loyalty and who who we're talking about. accountant worked with him and his father for decades. david pecker a friend, confidant, you could say for many years as well. >> right. >> and you're seeing the erosion of that. what does that say to you? >> look, i think loyalty and trust with the president is a one-way street. he expects it from every single individual who works for him, advisers and friends but doesn't give that loyalty and that respect and trust back. that's why you see so many people from cohen, even from omarosa, goodness sakes, flipped the script saying we have been loyal to you for decades now,
and omarosa, fired, lied said he didn't know. michael cohen got in trouble and the president first said i don't know about this. ask michael cohen. now michael cohen is a horrible person per rudy giuliani. now you have his personal accountant. i wonder if it's a matter of time before the president says, yeah, worked for me a long time but i don't really know what he did. you look at the culture, the environment fostered from the trump organization into the white house, i don't think any of us could beg to differ why there is so much chaos going on within this administration and i think whether it's mueller, the russian collusion, i think what potentially could ultimately bring down the president is finances. what he did with his organization, what he did with his nonprofit and possibly what he's even doing now by making money with trump hotel in d.c. and other entities we may not even know about yet. >> on that point, you got people out on the campaign trail now. interesting to see who's talking about all of this and who isn't.
talking bringing finances to play here. how hard a sell is that for folks who aren't following this day in, day out, aren't up to speed who's who and what'ses going on, minutia, debates over campaign finance reform. how winnable is that from this point so far? >> you make a really good point. we consume the minutia. the everyday american person is not following this the entire time. it maying a challenges sell if you want to get too much into the detail, but showing that this culture of corruption is casting a wide chattel from the white house to capitol hill to the indictment of those on the hill, easy to make a case against the president. i totally agree as weisselberg but think he's uniquely positioned to talk about the president's finances as you point out he didn't just work for the trump organization but handled trump's personal finances and we have to acknowledge with david pecker that american media inc.,
they -- published a few fitness magazines, but mostly these are supermarket tabloids. it casts an interesting light on what trump and his supporters consider to be real news versus fake news versus what the rest of us consider to be credible. >> to be clear on weisselberg. i agree with you. i think everyone said, oh, michael cohen. he knows all of the secrets. no. allen weisselberg knows all of the secrets about the trump organization, and he has been there since fred trump's days. so even before donald was running it, and there is no doubt that if there is an, a serious investigation into the trump organization, and as a former prosecutor in the sdny i would absolutely be all over that as a follow-on to the cohen investigation and there is wrongdoing we've seen in the cohen case from the trump organization opens the door to an investigation. my point i don't think we're there yet and that may be the next step, the next step i would
take, but there's been no reporting i've seen we are digging into trump organization. >> one quick point on that. how did -- back to the michael cohen tape in which these discussing this hush money payment with the president, in his office in trump tower. he mentions weisselberg. says i've spoken to allen, and he basically implies that weisselberg has done this before. that he knows exactly how to do this. that raises questions about, well, how much practice did he have doing this? how did he know how to set up shell companies and pay off people who were accusing the president, then donald trump, ordinary citizen, of impropriety? that is also going to position weisselberg as an interesting player not jut because st becau he knew about the organization but donald trump's tendencies to kill stories and shut people up. >> looks at the information, it's called. looking at the transcript when michael cohen pleaded and something your former colleagues did in the courtroom, justify
what would happen if it went to trial if i'm not mistaken. talk about what they had and would use for defense. given that, what you've read in that transcript and document what do they have? nerts in other words, what's the size of the universe of knowledge they have about what michael cohen knows? >> a lot. they have a treasure-trove of information from that search. the search is on april 9th, and the golden goose for prosecutors is cell phones. if you can get access in the days, in the day now of smartphones where everyone has e-mail, their text megs, their encrypted text messages into whassup and the signal and search histories, even some documents. when you get this and you can search this, you really get everything that you want. it's hard sometimes to get it contemporaneously. by the way, this is a tactic bob mueller used frequently when he's met people at the airport with search warrant in hand for
cell phones. so the fact that michael cohen had 12 or 16 electronics devices or something, all but one searched, the blackberry they can't open that indicates to me that they have a boatload of information, plus these recordings, which we're aware of. and even as they list out all of the information. e-mails, text messages. documents. so there's an amazing amount of information. the really interesting thing, to me, about that guilty plea, and i think it's a little bit in the weeds but important to unpack it. michael cohen volunteered the information about president trump. that he was directed by -- that was not in the criminal information. there was no allegation that trump is an unindict the co-conspirator in the document and for the purpose what michael cohen was doing he did not have to implicate president trump and most defendants when they take a plea do not say all the other people that they did it with.
so that was really, to my mind, and i don't know the extent to which the prosecutors would have reviewed that beforehand but almost certainly did not write it or require it. that really came from michael cohen. so it was an interesting little wrinkle he added there that was unnecessary to the proceeding but that he volunteered. >> come back and talk what's going on in a courtroom about 300 miles south of where that was taking place last week in a bit. coming up, to impeach or not impeach? that may be the question. a look back at the political and legal realities of impeachment.
i've been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. there's a lot of innovation that goes into making america's #1 shave. precision machinery and high-quality materials from around the world. nobody else even comes close. now starting at $7.99. gillette. the best a man can get. sharper vision, without limits. days that go from sun up to sun down. a whole world in all its beauty.
three innovative technologies for our ultimate in vision, clarity, and protection. together in a single lens. essilor ultimate lens package. purchase the essilor ultimate lens package and get a second pair of qualifying lenses free. essilor. better sight. better life. our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition... for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. ensure. now up to 30 grams of protein for strength and energy!
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.
are you considering pardoning paul manafort? >> i have great respect for what he's done in terms of what he's gone through. you know, he worked for ronald reagan for years. he worked for bob dole. >> paul manafort's a good man. he was with ronald reagan. he was with a lot of different people over the years, and i feel very sad about that. >> feel very sad about that. president trump speaking about his former campaign chairman paul manafort, convicted on eight felony counts of bank fraud and tax evasion this week and stepping into the oval office we have witnessed president trump's affinity for pardoning convicts and many wonder whether he will make the exception for paul manafort? according to a new report from politico, president's top aides and lawyers attempt he will try to use the president's power despite them trying to convince him otherwise. my panel is back.
natasha, rudy giuliani talking a bit about this an argument made to the "washington post," concern, bob mueller could take this pardon and use it as evidence of obstruction. help us understand the calculus going through his legal team's mind and to the extent that dovetails with the president's thinking. >> a lot of the language donald trump used about paul manafort since his trial started and since he was convicted has mirrored exactly the language he used before and after he pardoned joe arpaio, scooter libby and one more i'm forgetting. sousa. >> praising their decency. >> criticizing unfairness. >> treated unfairly, et cetera. verify bbatim what he's said ab paul manafort. the difference, no one in the white house is pushing for a manafort pardon, no one in his ear saying this would be good, help you, really rile up your base. paul manafort doesn't have those kinds of allies in the white house pushing for like, for
example, stephen miller was pushing for a pardon for arpaio or in other instances a lot of trump's allies pushing for the scooter libby pardon such as joe digenova and almost joined his legal team, of course. one consideration. another, that the stakes are higher if the president were to pardon manafort for himself. legally. manafort, of course, is directly implicated in the investigation into trump's own campaign. he has exposure there. of course, the final thing is that pardoning manafort may be useless, because he may still be vulnerable to being prosecuted on a state level. there are a ton of things pushing back against the idea that trump will pardon manafort. that said i think manafort did go into his first trial expecting that the president would pardon him, because no one thought he would actually go to trial. i think he may still be expecting that going into this second trial which is why it's surprising he's decided to go through with it. that may change, of course, before september 17th. but there are a lot of forces pushing back against the
president including his own legal team who told him to delay a pardon for manafort, which, of course, is problematic in and of itself whankts do y itself. >> what do you make of that? watch paul manafort, the wink he gave his wife being taken away. >> the expectation, the president is going to pardon him. the president has the authority to do so but i'm not certain that the ends justify the means here. politically speaking, though, i think a lot of republicans in the base look at the manafort trial and say this has nothing to do with collusion, number one. number two, look at this and say these things occurred several years ago. why all of a sudden are they bringing this up now? >> buying what the president is selling? >> absolutely. appears to be a political witch-hunt, the president's attorneys may say, don't do this because theoretically you may be obstructing justice, politically speaking, a significant number of republicans, yes, you should do this and we will back you if you do this because we think it's a witch-hunt harks nothing
to do with russian collusion. >> he's all but promised. look at his words and the verbiage used. pretty much dangled this in front of him. look what he said about cohen. looking for a good lawyer, don't call michael cohen, but when we get to paul manafort, this poor guy. such a victim. look how horribly they're treating him. i disagree a little. >> that he's a stand-up guy. >> exactly. this chapter of the trump presidency is clearly directed by martin scorsese, obviously. i disagree a little, because this is not a president who necessarily follows the advice of his counsel. right? he's demonstrated that a number of times. when you look at the defense, the trials they put on, didn't make much of a case there. kind of sat back. you saw manafort during the trial give rick gates, former partner, the stink eye the entire time. i'm waiting on a pardon. i would put money on it. i'll buy you a drink back in d.c. if it doesn't happen. >> and what did we learn from the first trial, gentlemen, looking ahead to the next one?
what did prosecutors learn? you've written about, talked about how rick gates wasn't that effective of a witness for prosecutors to put forward. bearing that in mind, how does their strategy change looking ahead to the september 17th trial? >> re-evaluate rick gates a little built. he proved to be a worse witness than they expected. >> essential? told from the get-go, a documents case. how essential was it? how did they make the case themselves he was -- >> a couple things they really did sort of need rick gates to explain, but remember, they charged manafort for all of these crimes without rick gates cooperating. at some point they had a case without rick gates. and you know, it's easy to monday morning quarterback it at this point and i haven't been in that position, yes, a great documents case, but if i can get the right-hand man to narrate through the documents, much better. it wasn't clear to me he was narrating through the documents. he proved to be worse than they
expected on cross-examinatiocro. seem from the jury verdict and from what one juror said they discountered what rick said. re-evaluate whether you need to use him for the d.c. case also charged without him. that's the big thing for the prosecutors. if i could touch on the pardon thing first thing. >> sure. >> game it out a little. right? right now paul manafort has been charged with crimes unrelated to the campaign. okay? so it is not clear at all that he has information relevant to donald trump, that he is a, that he did anything wrong within the campaign. okay? >> back to the point before. >> i don't think president trump will pardon him before the election. sdamp rouse. imagine the scenario after the election before robert mueller releases evidence he has on collusion, which may or may not
involve manafort i think it will, but there's a narrow window there where the president can still say, this is stuff unrelated to the campaign. this is stuff unrelated to collusion. i'm not pardoning for personal gain or self-preservation. i'm pardoning because paul manafort's been treated unfairly and has two trials, et cetera, et cetera. of course, paul manafort chose two trials. not the government. you can see how this can kind of play out a little. >> in the second trial in d.c., i can tell you. the first trial was in virginia. in the second trial i promise you there ain't going to be too many trump supporters on the jury pool. >> natasha. >> final point, the juror that's going around and making the news, the cable news rounds this week, who did serve on the manafort jury paula duncan, is arguably, like, a huge trump supporter and she said she stands by the president, knows this is unrelated to the mueller investigation but manafort is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
>> she said she wanted to find him not guilty. >> restores your faith in the justice system and criminal justice system, which must stand up in the face of this criticism and even a huge trump supporter felt it's a witch-hunt, wanted manafort to be easy. did her -- obeyed her oath and she voted for guilt. >> come back and talk about the political considerations of all this in a moment. a blast from the past. back to 1998. tell you who has changed their tune on impeachment in the last two decades. that's next. at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your business. so this won't happen. because you've made sure this sensor and this machine are integrated. atta, boy. & yes, some people assign genders to machines.
& with edge-to-edge intelligence, you'll know your customers love this color, & don't love this one. never getting grape again. & you can adjust in near real time. & if someone tries to breach your firewall in london & you start to panic... don't. you've got allies on the outside, & security algorithms on the inside. & if it's jammed up here, & it's hot in here. & you know both those things, you can do this. & your flowers won't wilt. at&t provides edge to edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & when her patient's blood pressure drops, she can share the information with...
whassup, whassup? >> so you think you're a '90s fan? >> okay, linda tripp. can you handle this? >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. >> whew! >> i love the '90s and this is 1998. >> oh, glory be. oh happy day. >> with my sincerest thanks to vh1, 1998. armageddon blowing up the box office, "my heart will go on" topping charts. and impeachment all the rage in washington, d.c. this week the specter of impeachment reared its head
again. dive back into the '90s with a man reliving that decade, grunge flannel and maybe not for his new book. steve kornacki. >> the book here. >> "the red and the blue, the 1990s and birth of tribalism." ask about republicans' approach to this. most interesting part towards the end of the book. trepidation. one quote, after voting to move forward on impeachment republicans said as little as possible about it on the campaign trail. gravity they believed was still on their side. what does that tell you about what we're seeing now? this big debate among democrats. you've got tom steyer on one side saying do it now, do it yesterday. something democrats are returning on. then a lot of people in the party again approaching it with trepidation. >> the trepidation the democratic leaders have, like nancy pelosi, there in 1998 is, they saw what happened. the timeline in '98 basically
this. lewinsky scandal broke in january. possibility of an affair. st starr investigation proceeded in august. i lied. i did have the affair. accused of perjury and republicans had a decision to make. put it aside? wait until after the election or press full steam ahead? polling showed the public was not turning against bill clinton but the republican base telling them you got the votes to impeach this guy. we've been looking to get this guy a number of years. your chance. use it. if you want us to turn up on election do, do this. republican voted exactly one month before election day in 1998 in the house to open impeachment inquiry. do it after the election but make no mistake about it, we are the party of impeachment. that fired up democrats. there had been a fear among democrats that you know what? folks, didn't think clinton should go but weren't excited to turn out and vote. when republicans said no.
impeachment is going to happen after this election. democratic voters turned out and something we -- i'm at the board talking about mid-term elections. the white house party never gained seats in the mid-term election. a question how bad it will be. gaining seats then. first time in a sixth year election, sixth year of a presidency white house gained seats since james monroe was president. >> backlash. >> what did the house speaker get rock? predicty a 40-seat pickup ended up losing 5 seats. >> he lost his job three days later. >> two things wrong. one, political gravity, mid-term election. no 34matter what we're gaining seats. they felt in 1998. proved wrong. second thing, the story of impeachment in '98, waiting for the collapse in clinton's numbers that never came. the accusation of an affair with lewinsky came out. surely numbers will crash. didn't at all. went up. forced to admit under oath,
okay, i did lie. i did have an affair. surely numbers crash down? no. the starr report, behavior in the oval office, the president doing this with an intern. no. numbers never dropped and republicans pressed forward and eventually a big election. got to a point the poll capturing it all was end of that year said did the president commit a crime? asked americans. did the president commit perjury? by a 67-27% margin americans said, yes, we believe the president of the united states as president of the united states comitted a crime. next question, do you believe because of that he should be impeached? overwhelmingly, no. the story. >> parallels are obvious right now. >> before we get to them. a new poll from august 23rd 24th. political coe. 42% say yes, impeach. 42% say no. 16% don't know. tiffany you first. >> raised good points stephen. a cultural exist happened at that time. i was a sophomore in college at the time and remember people
talking through, reality tv. the real world around and natasha was 6 which it was happening. ah -- but, yeah. i completely agree and think the difference is that was clearly politically motivated. the impeachment surrounding bill clinton, where i think this one, there are clear lines where you do see relevant issues, i lean to the left, but you see relevant issues not politically motivated an republicans reasonable thinking seeing republican whose think this guy is a danger to our democracy. >> there's a lot of differences between trump and clinton as politicians. we can get into the policy and all of trump's views. >> there's a lot. >> a lot. >> but if you look at the only -- and there's the obstruction angle. okay? but let's put that to the side and maybe we shouldn't put it to the side but if you just look at the campaign finance fraud it is a crime intended to conceal an affair. what was bill clinton charged with? perjury for concealing an
affair. if the analogy stands, you know, then americans don't have an appetite to impeach a president for having an affair. and that's the danger and the rick democrats run. the difference, of course, is at a minimum the obstruction which is quite pervasive even if not criminal and then the open question of, what is going on with the collusion investigation? >> and a debate, do you censure him, do impeachment? an opportunity for republicans to show a big of backbone and do this. was your sense why it's not moving through? >> i was going to ask steve this question. at this point in his presidency president trump's approval rating is extremely low. number one. two, a lot of economists expect that the economy is going to shift starting next year. if you look at equity, bond markets, et cetera. we think that's going to be a problem. i wonder if there could be a legitimate case once mueller's findings come out say next year.
the economy starting to change. trump's approval ratings decrease significantly. would you begin to see perhaps a shift of some republicans in the senate, that is, saying, you know what? maybe we can get rid of him. maybe we should be open to this, because we do have mike pence, who we can actually work with from a policy perspective. >> without the tweets. >> right. is that a possibility? >> the one thing to keep in mind '98 taught us, impeachment is a political question. come up with legal charges, the decision will be a political vote and the definition of a high crime and misdemeanor is a political definition. decide anything fits that if you feel like getting rid of the president. you need two parties to do it. two-thirds of a vote in the senate to convict. in '98 republicans could get the votes in the house to impeach, convict, needed buy-in from the other party. there wasn't buy-ins from democrats, didn't like him particular and democrats said, al gore would be a clean president. won't have to worry about all of
this stuff with him. why don't we get him in there? democrats, never mass defections from democrats every plot point where they might have happened, defections looked up and saw clinton's approval rating at 68%, 70%. looked at midterm gaining seats. we cannot move on this guy. the one political difference i could see potentially emerging is republicans, they have a bloodbath, electorally this november. lose 40 seats, 45 seats, whatever will psychologically shake them to the core they will be in a situation politically, democrats were never at at any point in '98. looking at the president saying i'm seeing evidence of a serious political liability here. then because it's a political question, who knows. >> steve, great to see you. >> thank you. >> steve kornacki. the book, pre-order it now. up next, the president calls off a meeting between the secreta secretary of state and north kore korean, but is this yet another distraction? a and what would happen to the
economy if he were to be impeached h. said in an interview today if they tried to impeach him the stock market would crash and everybody would be poor! yes. just what every stupid boyfriend says. you know? if you break up with me you're going to regret it. you're probably right, donald. we're making a huge mistake. we're going to regret it for the rest of our life. heart emoeching, crying emoji, delete contact in phone. your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered...
in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. money managers are pretty much the same. all but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline.
excuse me, i don't want to so a nuclear weapon destroy you and your family. i have solved that problem. >> getting it memorialalized. >> that problem is largely solved. >> working on this many years and got nothing. i just left through months ago, i left singapore, no missiles shot. no rockets shot. you have no nuclear testing and we got back our hostages and i have a good relationship with him. >> update for you this morning. president trump may be changing his tune just two months after claiming success at that summit with kim jong-un. the president tweeting friday, asking secretary of state mike pompeo not to travel to north korea for an upcoming meeting because he feels too little progress made on due nuclearization. finished quotes with, secretary pompeo looks forward to going to north korea in the near future most likely after our trading
new reporting this morning on the rocky relationship between president trump and senator john mccain. the "washington post" article titled "bad blooz between mccain and trump lingers even at the arizona republican near, the end." says trump does not want to comment on mccain before he dies. white house official said, no effort to publish a statement friday as many politicians released supportive comments on the ailing senator. at that time then candidate trump said he was a war hero because he was captured. i like people who were not captured. according to the "post" told people he does not regret that comment. my panel with me here in new york. steve, turn to you. we haven't seen john mccain in washington now for many months. since back in december of this year. heard from him, though, via statements on a host of issues. how acutely felt is his absence from washington? >> yeah. i mean what he has come to represent sort of in the era of
trump is a brand of republicanism, era of republicanism that i think, it feels in a lot of ways past tense now with trump sort of taking over the party and so many republicans sort of just kind of accepting that saying, hey, this is where we are now. you've had mccain, look -- trump set the terms for the relationship with mccain in 2015 in iowa said the line, i like people who weren't captures. that set it off there. mccain, it's expanded into policy areas. mccain through statements speaking out on charlottesville about a year ago, mccain cast a decisive vote on health care. think about the last couple months. mccain away from washington. trump at rallies. doesn't mention mccain by name but mentions him anyway. talks about, we would have got health care done but there was that good night, that great guy, sayses disparagingly who put the thumbs down. the clearly bothered mccain and the folk, republicans in washington who still are sort of
part of that era when mccain was more of the face of the party. >> you said it, steve, with your hand. that thumbs down, applause line for president trump as he travels the country. steve is talking about how that brand of republicanism is all but absent now on capitol hill. >> it is. i remember when i was a college student at morehouse in atlanta back in 2009. just rechartered the historically black college and senator mccain in town to speak. never forget this moment. had a chance to meet and talk with him. he came over, astonished we had a chapter, hbcu. whatever you need, grabbed whomever, senior person. call us, e-mail, we'll be there to support you. a level of republicanism, conservatism dieing out. i am extremely disheartened and concerned the way the party is
going. they are going. seeing a nationalism and populism that has all but taken over the republican party. at some point i believe we'll witness the death of the republican party as we formerly knew t. and a lot of criticism the legislative branch, republicans who lead it are falling in lockstep with what the president wants to do. we've seen john mccain in person through votes, through statements in his absence while in arizona criticize the president. go against him. just explain the import of that. there was the summit in singapore we talked about a few moments ago. there was the meeting with vladimir putin in helsinki a few months after that. things john mccain disapproved of with his foreign policy world view and not afraid to, indeed, wanted to speak out on? >> vort. becoming extremely rare if not extinct in the republican party these days. one of the most interesting dynamics is between lindsey graham and the president and lindsey graham and john mccain.
lindsey graham is john mccain the best friends. been best friends for years. for him to stick by the president even as his best friend is dieing, even as the president refuses to offer refu offer condolences and discontinues medical treatment and did not mention john mccain on a speech john mccain had worked on. to see the president is on a more granular level, like all things there is a russia threat that runs through this. john mccain was very involved in getting the dossier, the steel dossier to the fbi. >> saw it in the security conference for the first time. >> and very concerned the president might be subject to russian extortion. if there's even a splinter of possibility that the president of the united states may be blackmailed by russian president vladimir putin, that needs to be investigated. he was also a very vocal
advocate for the russia probe. >> these residents among democrats, still holds well with democrats, was this moderate force for so much of his career. what is his absence from washington, from our political discord say about that. that bridge between the two parties. >> i think it will be an end of an era. i want to send warm thoughts to the mccain family. megan is is close to her father. can't imagine the pain they're going through right now. i think you make a good point it will be the end of an era. see a shift in the republican party. i think it is also highlighted some of the hypocrisy we're seeing. leaves many of us scratching our heads. a president dodges drafts i don't know how many times, how was the military with this guy. cheer him on when he talks about nfl players. disrespecting the flag and the
truth, in the next breath completely disrespecting our military by insulating john mccain because he was a war hero who got captured. >> could have gone home earlier, but decided to stay in comradery. you don't see that a lot. a few republicans with a backbone and stand up to the president. you don't see that in the senate or the house. in the bbc we talk to republicans and democrats and on camera and off the record you see the eye rolls and see people clearly frustrated, but when it's time to stand and make moral authority and speak with conviction, they are radio silent. this is a threat to democracy as we know it. i'm with the republican party when i speak out. >> what happened to the power to persuade colleagues from talking about something who democrats would look to as parts.
he's feared on capitol hill. a member of caucus for so long. why this deafness to counter-opinion now on capitol hill. why is there less dialogue against them. >> funny thing about mccain is he has been an irritant to past presidents. george bush, that was a very heated race. look up the primary that year. it was an ugly race. mccain held it. when wogeorge w. bush became president, he was putting himself in opposition. in the democratic party. totally forgotten right now. and yet, even in that moment, intenseness, you didn't have george w. bush firing back and saying the sorts of things that president trump said in 2015. if never got to that level. there was a lot of political heat and intensity.
happened again. mccain gets first two years of obama presidency. summit on health care and white house in 2010. obama invited folks from both parties. pretty heated exchange, we saw the subject right there for everybody to see mccain going after obama in the meeting and obama looked at him and said, i won the election. you could have heated disagreements. we had them before past presidents and yet, his relationship with obama, his relationship with bush, it never crossed into the territory we've seen here. >> last question to you. i want to get a sense from you of what john mccain's political ideology is. the alliances, somebody who cared a lot about immigration and refugees as well. put that into context. what does john mccain stand for. >> i will say this, as a very conservative black man, we
reform to conserve. my question to my party is what is it we're trying to conserve at this point. i'm not sure. thanks to you all. decided to forego medical treatment at his home in arizona. thank you. later this morning on a.m. joy, we'll have apprentice reunion. inside information of what it is like to work with president trump. that is coming up. this is the ocean. just listen. (vo) there's so much we want to show her. we needed a car that would last long enough to see it all. (avo) subaru outback. 98% are still on the road after 10 years. come on mom, let's go! (avo) right now, get 0% apr financing on the 2018 subaru outback. ...to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't.
i'll take that. [cheers] 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. new ensure max protein. in two great flavors. it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can-
for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.
>> would that be a breach of his actual. >> i would say yes. by the way, i would say, i don't -- it's possible that a condo or something. i sell a lot of condo units somebody from russia buys a condo, who knows. >> well, good morning. and welcome to a.m. joy. so how have you been doing? i for one have been on vacation and clearly a lot has happened since i last sat in this chair three weeks ago. we have omarosa spilling all the tee on donald trump in her new book. more on that when she joins the show in our next half hour. and, of course, trump's former
fixer. manmade messy things like chatty mistresses go away. pleaded guilty to finance laws and included the president in his crimes. the biggest blow when we learned a third person familiar with his secrets is cooperating with the feds. allen weisselberg. long time cfo of trump organization was granted immunity for cooperation in the cohn case. could be one of many sgrant threats facing not just trump's presidency, but his business. trump once said would be a red line that mueller shouldn't cross. joining me now is senior vice president for social justice at the news school. paul butler. editor of above the law and dean series xm host of the