tv MSNBC Live With Velshi and Ruhle MSNBC December 26, 2018 10:00am-11:00am PST
is this do you think driven by the fact that fed chair powell's job safe as of today as of now? >> second leg up is i think you can attribute to the comments of the white house head economic adviser gave that 100% promise. we didn't see it from larry kudlow, not from treasury secretary mnuchin but kevin. who's, you know, kind of among equals and to a certain extent that was responsible for the second leg up. we were up 240 at the outset. first 36 minutes of trading and then fell to negative trading on the dow and since then, spiked rather sharply and good news he's safe. it's a steady hand and adept and had a couple of communications errors and nothing that wouldn't see in any other fed chair's history so he is so far on track to do the right thing for the economy. i think the president is overly sense theive to the stock market
decline and a pretty steep one so far. >> logically, think that it's postchristmas, everyone returning the terrible gifts. >> very good holiday shopping season. 6% gain in sales. >> exactly. that's got to drive something here today. >> absolutely. the economy's on perfectly good footing for the moment. it will slow down according to many economists next year and the markets looking at commodities, stocks or interest rates, there is a message there that suggest that is the economy's likely to slow back towards 2.5% or so in 2019. the global economy is weak. we still have some outstanding issues. we have the china trade war, concerns over whether or not the president's cabinet will remain intact or see more tumult there. he is going into a period in which he's fighting with democrats in the house over policies. we have the shutdown and none of those things are resolved yet but only thing resolved today is the powell tenure at the fed. >> because we see a decline in
the markets over last december, pretty bad overall, doesn't necessarily mean that the economy is at a bad point right now. >> no. in fact, you know, the economy is in decent -- in fact, quite strong shape at the moment. most economists, observers like myself think it's anticipatory and not reactionary. when bond market interest rates are falling as inflation expectations come down and sensitive commodity prices drop as they have, it can be a protend of slower growth. and i think that is what the markets are pricing. could be a growth recession where you go below trend for a period of time and that may be what the markets are sussing out here. >> talk to me about this decision of mnuchin call the big banks. >> that was a mind blower.
>> is this really a white house showing anxiety? the president likes to tout the economy to the base the fact he's doing well. >> listen. last thing you want them to do is say the banks were fine when no one was worried about the banks. >> should we be worried? >> most bankers said, listen, steve, we are okay. there's no liquidity crisis here. there are some weaknesses in certain portions of the credit market. this is getting into the weeds a bit but there are these products called levered loans, highly levered loans. borrowed money used to support them and tanking of late but it's not -- nothing like the crisis we saw in 2008. not to say that that could never happen again but not where we are. banks are well capitalized. they have plenty of liquidity. so it was odd for the treasury to put out a statement. maybe it was for an audience of one to show some action that treasury secretary mnuchin was on top of things. he cannot control the stack
market. the stock market may be discounting. it's not something the treasury can come out and say, hey listen, the entire financial system is fine. there's no reason for stocks to be down. one, that would be an inaccurate sfa statement and, two, more bothering that he called the banks. >> quickly put your political hat on here. if the domestic economy does begin to tank, does the president lose his base here? >> well, depends on how badly they're affected. so far the base is not helped by the president's policies. relatively wealthy people that dabble in real estate may have been helped by this. the farmers, the trade war hurt them. some areas of manufacturing not necessarily helped. and so, i think at the end of the day his base is with him almost irrespective of wlornhet or not they're helped by his
policies even if it causes them pain thinking in the long run they help. not everybody necessarily agrees with that assessment. >> until job loss. >> correct. >> ron, thanks for joining us. appreciate it. when we talk about the economy, we are also talking about the shutdown. president trump's demand for that border wall funding is alive and well. the president speaking to reporters christmas day in the oval office would not commit to a timetable for even ending the shutdown. watch this. >> i can't tell you when the government is going to be open. not until we have a wall, a fence, whatever they'd like to call it. i'll call it whatever they want. but it's all the same thing. >> so now it's possibly a wall or maybe a fence. it became starkly real, of course, after an 8-year-old boy died christmas eve while in custody of immigration officials, the second death of a
child in the agency's care this month. want to bring in hans nichols at the white house, garrett haake, also with us, national security reporter julia ainsley and ken vogel. hans, i will start with you on this one. we heard from the president on the holiday mostly in the form of tweets. but that's to be expected. what's the bottom line here? is the white house making an effort to work with congress to end the shutdown? >> reporter: they're sending no signals that they actually are worried about the economic impact of the shutdown. i think that's the story line out of the white house this morning. kevin hasset saying they'll see no impact on the economy. this is a president that's willing to suffer some short-term political pain, even market gyrations, economic pain. but the wall is a priority and indicated that time and time
again. guys? >> garrett, the president claiming he has support of the shutdown, that it is all actually the democrats' fault, despite the fact he sat there saying that he's going to take the blame for the shutdown and here we are saying -- shifting the blame to the democrats. what are you hearing? >> reporter: since saturday we have been in a stalemate. no major negotiations going on. both houses of congress are out until tomorrow. at the earliest. over the holiday, we did hear the president claiming he has some support for the shutdown from an unlikely source. take a listen. >> but many of those workers have said to me and communicated stay out until you get the funding for the wall. these federal workers with an't the wall. the only one that doesn't want the wall are the democrats. >> reporter: that's a tough one to verify as federal workers about 800,000 affected by this partial government shutdown, half of those will be furloughed, half working without
pay. today they start to feel the bite of this. we had the weekend and the holiday coming in between when the government shut down late friday night. they would be sitting at the desks knowing that the paycheck is held up. we also know that the shutdowns are broadly unpopular and according to polling so's the wall. so the president is in a political tricky spot here and democrats are willing to sit back and wait for him to come to them with a better offer. >> i'm wondering what federal workers think of the shutdown. it's a tough thing to verify. ken, the president's also faltering on what he wants now. he was saying a wall. now could be a fence. whatever. what do you make of that? >> well, it is going to be the ultimate test of whether the base is willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here. this was a seminole, perhaps the seminole promise of his campaign. build the wall chants at the rallies, now potentially moving the goal post a little bit to
set the stage for a possible compromise deal. democrats obviously when they take control of the house aren't going to be willing to give him funding for the wall. and maybe there are, however, some compromise solutions that involve increased funding for border security that he could somehow cast as a win. that said, it would be a real test of his base's willingness to accept that, given that's why a key reason of the supporters cited for supporting him. >> we're a couple days into this thing and doesn't seem like anybody's budging and then come january the democrats come in power in the house. at that point, how do things get resolved? >> i mean, it makes it a lot tougher. democrats already don't have a lot of incentive to give him anything. now they will have more power and still this incentive to sort of force his hand. he's in really tricky spot here between congressional republicans, his base and the
incoming house majority, incoming democratic house majority. we saw the base and particularly the voices in the conservative media rebelled when he suggested to step away from his hardline on the wall and funding for the wall in order to reopen the government. we're really going to see him put to the test on that once democrats come in in the coming year in the house majority. >> the president now also not talking about the wall but associating wit the upcoming elections of 2020. want to take a listen of that. >> so it's all being built. the new piece, the new section is very, very exciting. what's going on there. and you will see it. because in january i'm going there. we're almost having a groundbreaking. it's my hope to have this done completed all 500 to 550 miles to have it either renovated or brand new by election time. >> hans, what do you make of the president's expectations here to have this thing renovated, done,
by 2020? that doesn't leave a lot of time. >> reporter: it doesn't give a lot of time, though. but i clear the question is what we call it. is it a wall? is it a fence? is it a slat? there is a slight change in language. whether or not that change in lang wang means there's a changing or moving of the goal post, that could be an indication that that's the direction we're heading in. but, you know, when the president talks about 115 miles of something, new construction, new contract in texas, it's very unclear to everyone that we're talking to in the federal government what the president is hinting at. guys? >> julia, we have been discussing the border security as a political issue and reporting on an 8-year-old boy that died monday while in custody. cpb announcing changes to the way it handles child immigrants. nbc's jacob soboroff said he was held in dad with three hours and
then two days at processing station and two days at another station and moved at 11:17 p.m. to a third station. that's when cbp says he got sick. what are you hearing? why did it take two deaths before the cpb decided to r re-evaluate here? >> it's hard to have this debate without seeing the backdrop because there's deterrent after another all year, separating children or having a fight over whether asylum seekers should wait in mexico and then a battle over funding for the wall and each forces families to more remote places like the place where jakelyn came this month and like this place where this boy and his father arrived a few days ago. it seems in this case the boy was given emergency medical treatment, he was taken to a hospital and discharged, discharged even though he had a
103-degree fever. at first they thought it was a cold and then a fever. he was still taken out and the border control held him at a highway check point. there's questions of why he was taken to a checkpoint and had welfare checks but a welfare check is basically asking you if you're exhibiting any symptoms, it is not taking your vitals, temperature as you would think you would do after going in for a hospital visit like that. by the time he got back to the hospital he was not able to be revived once he was showing more symptoms and he died just before christmas day. and now they're calling for more people to be there to administer what they called secondary screening. trying to get them out to the more remote places so it is good news for those worried about these children but it does seem to be something that's coming a little too late in this case. two children who died just this month. and previously, over the last decade, there were no child
deaths in cpb custody at all and there could be more health risk associated with that. >> do we know the resources they're putting into all of this and changing the procedures? we know that the girl died of septic shock and reported last week. so it's interesting to hear that they sent this little boy home considering the news of the death of this young girl really a week or so it seems before. >> yeah. that's true. there are a lot of details that have to be ironed out. they reached out to the coast guard to use their medical professionals and talks in hhs and the department of defense. they have asked cdc, the centers for disease control and prevention, to come in and look at the rising numbers of migrants with illnesses crossing. but as we have pointed out, you are likely to see migrants with more serious house problems going through the dangerous ways and when they're being held longer by customs and border protection. they're not supposed to be held there longer than 72 hours. that's policy.
regardless of whether or not they're a child and as we have seen them stay longer, the health risks have become greater and supposed to be send to i.c.e. but in order to find more space, this administration would have to make the choice between holding more migrants who have just crossed the border and not saving space for those picked up in raids internally inside the country. they're supposed to be taken to i.c.e. to be held before they're deported but if they're trying to get people into a more humanitarian place after they cross the border, they will have to make space there and more details and possibly more debatds to be had over this. >> i bet there is. the secretary of health and human services was grilled by congress over the deaths. want to listen to that. >> did i understand you correctly to say that as you sit here today you do not know how many human beings have died while in the custody of the department of that you lead?
and you in preparation for today's hearing you didn't ascertain that number but you don't know it today? >> i don't have an exact figure for you. >> do you have a rough idea? >> sir, what i can tell you -- >> i'm talking about people who have died in your custody. you don't have the number? >> i will get back to you with the number. >> okay. >> i mean, so that was december 20th. ken, i want you to weigh in on this and then, julia, you follow up. how does she not have that information? >> yeah. it's pretty shocking, especially when you play the audio there. this was actually part of the subject of that hearing and conceivably doing research and prepping her for this very if not specific question though they clearly should have been, types of questioning that she would receive. and so, look. there's a microscope on the trump administration coming to immigration immigration, border security. some of the policies may have
exacerbated the conditions that could potentially lead to health risks and other dangers for these immigrants. and so, this is not something that's going away. certainly not something that the trump administration is taking this sort of rhetorical or policy steps to make go away. >> julia, is the communication being lost between cpb and washington? is that what's happening here, that the health concerns that are happening to these my grants coming into the white house is not communicated correctly to the white house? >> the message was received after that hearing and today they held a press call with reporters to talk about the latest death and had that number, the secretary wasn't able to answer and said six deaths in total of 2018. of people in customs and border protection. that doesn't include i.c.e. and then, of course, includes two children this month. i don't know why they wouldn't have had that at the beginning and sending secretary nielsen to the border to look at the health
concerns so the message is now being received at least in part. it may be a little too little too late but they're starting to see the pushback and felt that i think very personally during that hearing. >> yeah. i think it's important to remember we're having a massive immigration crisis in the country causing a government shutdown and losing the lives of very young children because of it, as well. hans, garrett, julia, ken, thank you for joining me. coming up, preparing to leave. how defense secretary mattis is spending his last days in office. and his message to our service members this holiday season before he leaves. and we'll keep a close eye on trading as the stocks turn in a strong performance right now. the dow up just around 411. we'll be right back.
welcome back. more fallout from the president's decision to yank troops out of the middle east with the special envoy when's been coordinating the fight against isis. turning in his resignation. just days after defense secretary jim mattis resigned. telling the president in his resignation letter, quote, you have the right to have a secretary of defense whose views are better aligned with yours. and mattis told u.s. troops, quote, in this world awash in change, you hold the line. what was supposed to be a smooth transition is turning into a
bitter end of the year split leaving americans with major questions about the security and our foreign policy and our position abroad. joining me, former undersecretary of defense for policy and former chief of staff for president obama's national security council. now senior director at the penn biden center for diplomacy. welcome to you on this day after christmas. very much appreciate you joining us today. >> thank you. >> how huge are these departures for the trump administration? >> well, it's a big blow to our policies in the middle east in particular. secretary mattis was very much trusted by our partners in the region and brett mcgurk whose name is not known to most americans is a critical civilian in building the counter isis coalition and worked for the last three presidents going back do george w. bush and he has relationships that in the near term cannot be replaced. >> let's go with him.
he was the point man really for isis as you brought up and then the president now saying that the fight with isis is over. we have flattened them. they no longer -- we defeated isis. >> president's wrong about that so he's either ignoring the intelligence he's being given or just making up facts. we have reduced the territory that isis controls to a very small pocket. but there are still over 10,000 syrian -- excuse me, 10,000 isis fighters in syria alone and also some in iraq. and they will continue to pose a threat to the united states and western interests so he's declaring victory prematurely. >> do you think the president's decision to pull out of syria was a bad one? >> i think it's a mistake. both as to the substance and as to the timing. first on the substance, as i said isis is not dead yet so we still have some more work to do and our small ground force in
syria of 2,000 or so people gave us eyes on the ground and helped us to enable the people who are doing the actual ground combat, the syrian democratic forces, the timing was terrible in terms of just launching an impetuous tweet without telling allies and partners we are getting out. we are leaving our partners holding the bag and number of european and middle eastern countries. in the broader counter isis coalition and those that face the potential of an attack from turkey and so they may have to look around and divide how to protect themselves and their towns and their people. and not be fighting isis anymore. >> i mean, the fear in syria, correct me if i'm wrong, by pulling the troops out of syria, it could create a vacuum as it has in other countries like iraq where isis could regain more footing once again and also
leave open power to be gained by both iran, russia and by turkey. >> certainly a danger of a vacuum without the on the ground presence. we will i think, i hope, still have some overwatch from the air and from time to time take air strikes against isis tar gets but that's harder to do without having boots on the ground and the syrian civil war is not resolved. there are different pockets of the country controlled by different players and having our forces in there with the syrian democratic forces in eastern syria gave us substantial leverage over the end game in syria because that's where the oil and gas resources are. assad has resource in that part of the country and so if we're walking away we are doing so at some peril to our interests and security. >> what about patrick shanahan, mattis' temporary replacement? from what i understand he
doesn't have foreign policy experience. >> he doesn't have much from the service in the private sector with the boeing corporation. he's gotten some experience with foreign policy parts of being the defense secretary by virtue of being the deputy. i'm sure he's seen a lot of foreign partners and leaders but doesn't have the deep experience particularly in the middle east that secretary mattis had. >> brian, thank you for joining us. appreciate it. coming up, a secret subpoena of foreign government and the supreme court. the mysterious case that appears to be connected to bob mueller and has now reached the highest levels of our justice system. my experience with usaa
has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today.
welcome back. tus supreme court is now involved a legal battle that appears to be connected to the special investigator bob mueller investigation. we don't know much about the case but here's what we know. the case involves an unnamed company owned by an unidentified foreign government. the company was held in contempt of court and refined after refusing to comply with a subpoena for information, it's been fighting the subpoena
claiming immunity under a 1976 law that limits the ability of foreign nations to be sued in u.s. courts. last week, a federal appeals court rejected that claim. but on sunday, chief justice john roberts order add week long pause in the fight while the high court decides whether to take any further action. so basically, a big unknown. as to a lot of what's going on here. joining us to talk more, danny cevalos and welcome to you. danny, why all the secrecy? >> it's the same assy grand jury matter. there must be secrecy. what's different in this case is the magnitude of the secrecy. you may close a federal courtroom if there's a grand jury proceeding or a matter before it. however, it is exceedingly rare to close down an entire floor and even perhaps more rare for an entire supreme court
proceeding to be sealed in its entirety. you may have redactions. you may have sealed documents but to have the entire case sealed from public view is a rarity, indeed. maybe unprecedented. >> jessica, this has a lot of people guessing as to what this could actually be about considering the rarity of it all. what do you make of it? >> what i make of it is exactly what you said in the introduction. the scope of what we don't know is much broader than we do. >> what is it? >> exactly. we are waiting for this with more anticipation than most kids on christmas eve. so what is it? i mean, there's wild speculation. is it deutsche banc? is it a russian-controlled technology company? what -- you know, what is going on here? why, again, as danny said, this push of secrecy and unprecedented in that you don't close a federal court floor and so the truth is we actually might not know. what i expect to see from the
supreme court and, again, i should probably get out of the game of predictions because i was talking about president hillary clinton on election night but i expect to see basically two lines from the supreme court, maybe not signed that says, we have reviewed the information. we reject the application. and essentially go back to the lower court for incorporation and comply with the subpoena. >> is there a possibility we could never know? >> there is a possibility we could never know in part because this is under seal. and so, the grand jury investigation as danny said, that by statute has to be secret. this level of secrecy is not what we have seen before but if they comply with the subpoena, go back to the lower court, talk to the grand jury i think there there's every chance in the world we don't know unless there's leak, who they were owned for and one of the kind of greatest mysteries potentially surrounding the mueller
investigation. again, we are not even 100% sure this relates to the mueller investigation. >> go ahead. >> secrecy on the one hand is very interesting but perhaps equally as interesting, maybe more so, the foreign sovereignty immunity's act and the attempt to claim immunity. the law says generally other countries are immune from being sued or brought into the courts. you say north korea fall into an exception last week. now you see a foreign owned company falling within another one. the commercial activity exception. so this is going to be an interesting case in that it fleshes out the contours of to what degree can mueller's drag in companies? >> why did the lower courts reject that argument? >> because -- because two
reasons. first, the company said you the court you don't have jurisdiction over us. period. and the court said, that's not true. and when it comes to criminal jurisdiction, the federal courts have jurisdiction over any and all cases under the federal laws, includes potential entities and sovereigns abroad and that was one reason it rejected it. the second one is what i just said. the courts said we'll assume the act applies in this case. however, there is an exception to that rule and that exception is where a company engaged in commercial activity and then it can be sued and can be dragged into an american court. >> jessica, final thoughts here on this? >> oh, final thoughts here on this is i would expect to see a filing on new year's eve and that i would expect that chief justice roberts probably will refer it to the whole court and within his discretion and i would expect that unfortunately we're all going to be terribly disappointed and if we talk
about this in about a week i'll say, yeah, unfortunately we saw those two lines and as danny said there's an interesting legal issue here of foreign corporations that do business abroad and have a quote/unquote direct impact on the united states and so there's both obviously this huge political intrigue and then there's really interesting statutory interpretation and i hope that we learn more about it. >> i have a feeling -- i'll make a prediction to learn more about what this actually involves. just saying. >> that would be great. >> i have a feeling. >> save the tape. >> wishful thinking. save the tape. wishful thinking. thank you both. want to give an update on supreme court justice route bader ginsburg. doctors removed two cancerous growths from the lung on friday. the court says there is no evidence of any remaining disease. she has been up and working in the days since her procedure. justice ginsburg already survived colon and pancreatic
cancer and never missed arguments before the court. all right, everybody. democrats are talking 2020. and waiting for the big chips to fall. so when will the staring contest end? and when will we start seeing concrete plans for presidential campaigns? we are watching the markets having a strong day today in the middle of a rough month. the dow is up around 443 points. ♪ ♪ the new capital one savor card. earn 4% cash back on dining and 4% on entertainment. now when you go out, you cash in. what's in your wallet?
welcome back. 2020 democratic hopefuls appear to be in a staring contest coming to declaring a potential run. nbc news senior political reporter reports this. everyone's watching the three bs, bernie, biden and beto as the nominating contest is wide open and goes on even as more than two dozen democrats are considering a run for the party's nomination, no major
candidate has signaled definite plans to jump in. die-hard activists have been slow to commit to any potential contenders and donors are keeping the checkbooks closed for now. charlie sykes and theron johnson, welcome to you both, on this 26th of december. theron, i'll start with you. joe biden, bernie sanders, they have name recognition and likely waiting to make the big announcements. does this sort of wait and see approach for big guys like that hurt or help the democrats' chances in 2020? >> well, i think it helps and i would tell you this. a lot of us who worked in the 2012 campaign to re-elect president obama and also a lot of folks that i know worked in the 2016 campaign with sanders and clinton are all getting calls and while the candidates have not officially come out yet
and declared they're running, a lot of their people are calling to make sure they got key operatives in key battleground states coming up. the other thing you mentioned that's so important is a lot of big donors, the folks are keeping the checkbooks close and keep the powder dry and going forward those big three you just mentioned are so important to really decide what they'll do and i think at least another dozen out there that are actually getting ready to run that are putting together the infrastructure and the campaign to make their announcement very soon, as well. >> charlie, we know that money is an indicator of the front-runner here. what do you think is going to be the first person on top to raise the money needed? >> well, obviously, people like joe bide n and beto 0 rourk hav an advantage out of the box and talking about whether it's early or not, it's december of 2018. >> i know. >> it is a permanent campaign
but we need to understand there was once a time when, you know, candidates were getting going in the next year. but -- >> no longer this time, charlie sykes. i don't know what you're talking about. we were talking about this the day after the president was elected president. we were talking about 2020. >> absolutely, absolutely. my one caution is this has kind of a deja vu feel for what the republican field felt like in 2016 where everybody was in. it was incredibly crowded. very, very unpredictable and as a result of that, you know, odd things can happen. weird things can happen. you're already seeing some sniping, a little bit of civil war. bernie folks attacking o'rourke. even though donald trump is in the process of melting down and unraveling, understand that democrats can blow this thing. there's a lot of ways of doing it. i think there needs to be sobriety. one thing that saves donald
trump is that binary choice no matter awful he is, the base will think that the democrats are even worse if they begin firing at each other, setting each other on fire too early. that becomes easier for donald trump. >> theron seems to think that's funny. lets's throw you a poll. we have a new poll from the hill finding president trump trailing joe biden in a hypothetical 2020 matchup beating o'rourke by 7 and losing by 1 to senator bernie sanders and so talk to me about the president's vulnerability. who do you think is the best matchup for the president? >> well, what charlie's right. listen. it is very early and fund raising is paramount looking at where we are right now and i slightly disagree. if you look at the poll cited and the momentum and with the american people electing democrats to lead the house of representatives, i think it's too early to say which
particular candidate she or he best goes up against donald trump. if president trump continues on the downward trajectory seeing the poll numbers across the country just tanking and even some of these key battleground states that he's doing well in the last six to 12 months, that's a good position for democrats but also, again, i think that charlie's right. listen. we have to make sure that the primaries remain about the policies and about jobs and about education, health care. yes, we will have enough ammunition and hopefully enough documentation to really talk about how bad this president has been as far as the ability or inability to govern but the other thing i think is really important, too, getting to the calendar is you look at -- yeah, iowa and new hampshire, white states. nevada, heavy hispanic population and south carolina and pay attention to super tuesday with four southern states on there like virginia, north carolina, alabama, tennessee.
so an m mcauliffe of virginia a beto and castro of texas and a marathon and not having a clear cut decided nominee out of iowa and new hampshire and go to the convention like the last two times. a lot of folks remember barack obama, hillary clinton had a very slim lead going into the conventions. >> want to talk about trump strategy. now tying the building of the wall to 2020 saying it will be built to 2020 tying it to the re-election campaign. what do you think of that? >> well, i think he understands if he doesn't build the wall he will have a real problem with his base and apparently defining the base as whatever ann coulter and rush limbaugh thinks. on the other -- and of course, if he does get that wall, that will be the centerpiece of his campaign but i don't know that that is the issue that is going to get him over the top. you know, there is a limitation as we found out in the midterms to playing just to your base. you know, yes, he is focusing on
that base, that base will be strong around the wall but he's not going to win re-election if he doesn't get the middle, disaffected republicans, as well. he may face, by the way, a republican primary challenge as well as the democratic field. >> i agree. >> wow. charlie, theron, thank you both. all right. a big nuclear test on the world stage, everybody. this time from russia. the strategic weapon vladimir putin just unveiled. ay the price for loving you? you'll make my morning, but ruin my day. complicated relationship with milk? pour on the lactaid, 100% real milk, just without that annoying lactose. mmm, that's good.
welcome back, everybody. fears in indonesia this hour of a second tsunami after one hit over the weekend, killing hundreds of people. authorities are warning people along indonesia's coast to move at least half a mile away from the water, fearing a still-active volcano could trigger deadly waves, like it did on saturday, across the java and sumatra islands, killing 430 people. rescue teams continuing to search for more than a hundred people who disappeared when the surge hit. saturday night's tsunami also displaced some 20,000 people. some incredible images coming out of there. really sad time. all right, also overseas,
russell tested a new missile system today. hypersonic nuclear capable missiles that russian president vladimir putin says he's going to deploy next year. you're looking at russian government video of this testing. and putin called the new system invincible and a big victory. nbc news' foreign correspondent lucy kavanaugh is joining me now. lucy, what more do you know about this? >> hey, yasmin. what we know about this is what the russians have told us, which is why this news needs to be taken with a big grain of salt. russia has been trying to develop hypersonic weapons for a while now. folks at the pentagon concerned, but also skeptical about their ability to do so. back in march, putin had that big press conference where he unveiled a bunch of new weapons systems, including this avant-garde missile, which is what the russians are calling it. it's nuclear capable, travels 12 to 20 times the speed of sound, the russians say.
it was launched this morning from a military base in the southern ural mountains. i want supposedly hit a target nearly 4,000 miles away. russian state television showed the footage you're seeing right now something being launched. they released video of putin watching this test from moscow. the russian president, as you point out, said it was a complete success. they said the new system will be deployed in russia next year. he said, and i quote, it is a big moment in the life of the armed forces and the life of the country. the significance of this type of weapon is that the u.s. doesn't have any defense systems to protect against it. there was a u.s. accountability office report issued this month, warning of the lack of existing countermeasures against these hypersonic weapons. but again, yasmin, it's just not something that we can verify. what we can say with certainty is that this is an escalation in tensions in russia. putin has been acting out in a lot of regions, including in ukraine. and i can tell you that the russian president will be looking very closely to see how
the trump administration reacts to this, yasmin. >> all right. nbc's lucy kafanov, thank you. we'll be right back, everybody. . we'll be right back, everybody is now in session. and... adjourned. business loans for eligible card members up to fifty thousand dollars, decided in as little as 60 seconds. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. you're in the business of helping people. we're in the business of helping you. business loans for eligible card members up to fifty thousand dollars, decided in as little as 60 seconds.
the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. 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
this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. welcome back, everybody. donald trump is the first president since 2002 not to visit u.s. troops at a hospital or a military base on christmas. the president did not serve in the military during the vietnam war, he received four deferments for education and a medical exemption for bone spurs in his heels. in 2016, trump told "the new
york times" it was a, quote, minor malady with no meaningful impact. in the same interview, he said he received a letter from a doctor to give to draft officials, but he could not remember the doctor's name. well, today, we may know who that doctor was. b pediatrist larry bronstein's daughters told "the new york times" that his father often talked about how he did a favor for trump's fathers. the doctor's office was in a building owned by fred trump. his daughters say they have no paper evidence to back up their claims, though. the doctor who bought bronstein's practice told "the times" he was not aware of any documents related to trump. and the national archives says most government medical records related to the draft no longer exist. so a lot of questions, but maybe some clues into the bone spurs controversy. that wraps up this hour of msnbc live. my colleague and friend, chris jansing, takes over from here. >> thank you so much, yasmin. great to see. we were just talking about the kids and christmas. >> my kids are way too young to appreciate anything i did for
them on christmas. >> and you're exhausted as a result. >> exactly. >> and they slept beautifully. thank you so much. good day, i am chris jansing. we're now into day four. it is the first official workday of the government shutdown, no end in sight. there are lots of closed federal officers today, as 800,000 federal workers are not getting paid, even though about half of those, people whose jobs are considered essential, have to show up for work anyway. but president trump isn't backing down. he's refusing to sign a funding bill unless money for a border wall is included. here he was in the oval office, speaking to reporters on christmas day. >> i can't tell you whether government's going to be open. i can tell you it's not going to be open until we have a wall, a fence, whatever they'd like to call it. i'll call it whatever they want. the only way you're going to do it is to have a physical barrier, meaning a wall. and if you don't have that, then, we're just not opening. >> wellth