tv MSNBC Live With Velshi and Ruhle MSNBC February 12, 2019 10:00am-11:00am PST
facebook and twitter. i will be heading to europe to warsaw with the vice president and the munich security conference and reporting from there. here's velshi and ruehl. >> thank you, and a great trip. i'm ali velshi. >> i'm stephanie ruhle. it is tuesday, february 12th. let's get smarter. >> a verdict has been announced in the trial of mexican drug kingpin el chapo. >> just now hearing he was found guilty on all ten of the counts. that he was being tried for. this is a huge day forever the prosecutors. >> breaking news right now. nbc news exclusive reporting on the senate intelligence committee. their investigation into russian election interference. >> the senate intelligence committee has not uncovered any direct evidence of a conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. >> a big decision on the president's plate. does he sign the deal and keep
the government running or hold out for wall money and risk another shutdown in three days. >> i have to study it. i'm not happy about it. it's not doing the trick. but i'm adding things to it. it's all fgoing to happen. we're going to build a beautiful big strong wall that's not going to let criminals and traffickers and drug dealers and drugs into our country. it's very simple. it's very simple. >> it will keep the government open. it's a compromise. >> i hope the senate can act on this legislation in short order. >> any republican that supports this garbage, you'll have to explain. >> i care about people. i care about this nation. because of that, i've decided that i'mlaunching a campaign for united states senator.
>> now we're starting with some new breaking news. guilty verdict in the trial of the notorious drug cartel kingpin joaquin el chapo guzman. >> the jury found guzman guilty on all charges in federal court. guilty on one count engaging in criminal enterprise. guilty on one count international drug manufacture and distribution. guilty on two counts, cocaine distribution. guilty on four counts international cocape dine distribution. the drug lord and escape artist now faces life in prison and seizure, are you ready for this, of $14 billion, with a "b," $14 billion worth of assets. the verdict brings the 42nd day trial and years long pursuit of
justice against el chapo to conclusion. >> nubsnbc news danny ceval l and rehema ellis. what was going on in the courtroom? >> once the verdict was' nounced, el chapo, we're told by our producers, that he was stoic, stone faced, as the jury's verdict was announced. and then afterwards, he looked at the jurors. when each one of them was asked to announce whether or not they agreed with the verdict. just before he was let out of the courtroom, i'm told he palted his heart and looked at his wife, nodded his head, before he was led out. this courtroom where jurors deliberated for 34 hours and in their sixth day on these ten counts. the judge in this said that he wanted to comment td the jurorsr their work.
he says he'd never seen a jury that was more committed to the details. they asked 15 questions in their deliberationings. no wonder they had an eight page verdict sheet. ten counts. the first count, which was very important to prosecutors. it had 27 considerations that they had to go through. they found him guilty. on this count, this count alone, they could see that el chapo could face life in prison without the possibility of paro parole. 34 hours, six days of deliberation, 56 prosecution witnesses, detailing the cartel's action, shipping of drugs into the united states and reaping billions of dollars in profit. and the defense called only one witness. it seemed the defense in this case was basically saying that everything that the prosecution was presenting against el chapo was false and not to be believed
but this jury believed it. what happens next? 90 days from now, on june 25th, these parties will go back into this courtroom for sentencing and, again, as i say, el chapo could face life in prison without the possibility of parole and be confined to a maximum security federal prison where they hope he would not have any chance of escaping. >> that's remarkable. el chapo's been in prison before and wasn't supposed to escape. what happens this time? what are his appeal optionings? >> he hasn't been in a federal prison in the united states. he's been in prison -- >> -- subject of having people bribed to let you go? >> even if it what el chapo's main threat is tunnels, hiding in laundry carts. el chapo's been able to escape before. but not from federal prison in the united states. he's escaped from prison in mexico. he has an entire team of
tunnelers and other co-conspirators who have spite him right out of prison. they will eventually file a writ of habeas corps purus. but for now, el chapo will be in custody. his sentencing date will go forward. he faces mandatory life in prison. he is, as elliott and i were talking about just before we got on, he is charged under the super continuing criminal enterprise provision. which requires when this is a massive drug operation 10 million or more in gross resets. requires a mandatory life in prisonment. el chapo was hit with $14 billion in the indictment.
slightly more than the $10 million threshold. >> $14 billion. >> billion. >> don't give me your dr. evil. >> billion. >> elliott, what does this mean for the federal prosecutors and federal law enforcement to get a conviction? >> one, on danny's point, not only has he never been in an american prison, he's never been in a super max, really high level prison. he'll be like at leavenworth, one of the really, really tough -- >> what does that mean? >> a prison you can't break out of. most prisons in the u.s., these are super high -- he ain't getting out. high, high, high security prisons. when i worked at i.c.e. at the beginning of the obama administration, chapo was the specter looming overhead. he was controlling so much of the work of the cartel each when he was locked up in prison. law enforcement regarded this person as a particular threat. as somebody who, you know, this evil puppeteer.
it is great for the morale of law enforcement. my defense attorney friend here might disagree with me. most prosecutors aren't hot to just lock people up. they want justice. for someone like this to be sort of a fugitive from justice and breaking out of prisons and paying off not just law enforcement but elected officials, this is a really, really bad guy. this is just a rotten individual. i think it's great for law enforcement, for the people who worked on this. >> it's easy to say now that we have the verdict that this was a layup for the government. in the past few days there were doubtings. after all, this is a classic case of using cooperating witnesses. almost the entire government case was built on criminals, bald guys who came in and pointed their finger at the defendant. these were people who were not there because they're good, they were there because they made a deal with the government. >> the u.s. attorney who was involved in the conviction is speaking now.
>> the jury found that guzman led the cartel, one of the largest and most dangerous in the world, and he's responsible for violence, includie ining mu and the smuggling of massive amounts of narcotics into the united states over a period of decadings. his conviction we expect will bring a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. it is a sentence from which there is no escape and no return. this conviction is a victory for the american people who suffered so long and so much while guzman made billions pouring poison over our southern border. this conviction is a victory for the mexican people. who have lost more than 100,000 lives in drug related violence. this conviction is a victory for every family who has lost a loved one to the black hole of a
addicti addiction. there are those who say the war on drugs is not worth fighting. those people are wrong. every day, we lose american lives. every day harm is inflicted on this country by drug addiction. every seizure, every arrest contributes to a noble effort to save american lives. this conviction was brought about through tremendous team effort within across and beyond the justice department. i first want to thank this remarkable trial team. remarkable and resilient trial team. made up of eastern district assistant united states attorneys gina parlevieko, patricia natapalas, hira meta, southern district of florida assistant u.s. attorney adam fells and trial attorneys amanda liscum, anthony nordozi and
brett reynolds from the narcotics and dangerous drug section in washington. together with partner ins in the dea, fbi, they gathered and presented overwhelming evidence of guzman's guilt. i would also like to thank the parallels, melissa bennett, eileen risoto, angela jimenez and others who skillfully supported the prosecution team. we'd like to thank our colleagues in the united states attorney's offices in the northern district of illinois, the southern district of new york, the southern district of california, the western district of texas and district of new hampshire for their tremendous contributions to this effort. i would like to extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to the united states marshal service, the nypd, court
security officers, dhs and federal protective service and others who protected courthouse and surrounding area on the 24/7 basis under challenging circumstances. this trial has pulled back the curtain on international drug dealing in a way that no other trial has. gusm guzman was responsible for hundreds of towns of heroin and methamphetamines and marijuana into the united states. at the were it also revealed endemic corruption. this is unacceptable and it will end. this is a day of reckoning. there are more days of reckoning to come. we would like to thank judge for a fair and efficient trial.
we would like to thank the jurors for their commitment, their patience, and the careful attention they paid to the evidence throughout this trial. i'd now like to give you next presenter, acting dea administrat administrator weedham dylan. >> we're going to continue to listen to the prosecutors in the el chapo case talking about the prosecution. i'm still with danny and elliot williams. elliott, there were so many interesting things about this case and about this man el chapo. but one of the asides here is the degree to which we learned about how real drug smugglers get drugs into the united states across the border. it wasn't through all those places that donald trump always talks about. this guy had them in the middle of trucks that had other things in them. going through ports of entry.
>> helicopters, plane, through ports of entry, through coming in. people crossing in trucks and boats and all kinds of things. >> and tunnels. >> that's how he got out of prison. >> the one thing that's not in there. >> is the guy with the backpack of cocaine walking across the bord border. i would never say that, you know, we need, you know, without any sort of barrier on the southern border. but the idea there's this wave of people coming across with carrying the drugs by hand like even steve king said he saw kids with kids carrying bags. it's just not true. it's a fiction designed to make people afraid. >> it's its own problem. a problem i think most thinking people should agree needs to be solved. >> yes, so is cargo screening which could do as much to comb
battle the problem of $14 billion of drugs coming into the country. that's the issue. >> to the, stent that there are a type of criminal like el chapo. there are these international cartels and criminals of that nature. that's got to be something that the government is proud of. that we're going to get you. because this el chapo is on a short list of people who it was hard to get. >> it's an interesting concept. the idea that the united states like any other country can enact laws that apply only within its own borders. but this is an example of applying territorial jurisdiction in our statutes. where our congress says, hey, these crimes are bad enough and they have enough of an effect within our borders that that authorized us to go reach out beyond our borders and bring them back to the united states
and subject them to prosecution here. it's an interesting concept. it requires essentially going into another country where we don't have jurisdiction and simply saying we do have jurisdiction and extraditing those folks back here to face charges. even if they never set foot personally in the u.s., the crimes that they committed had an effect in the u.s. that's the basis for jurisdiction against people like el chapo and others that are surely around the globe watching this case with very, very much interest. >> what an interesting case. it's worth for those people who weren't following, it's worth going back into it and following it or reading the books written about it because this is truly fascinating and a remarkable end to the story. >> overlay that with president trump and talk about the importance of a border wall and then put into perspective a person who has just had $14 billion worth of assets seized who was mostly using an
intracats tunnel network. >> yes, yes, all right. we'll take a break. >> danny, elliot, thank you. rehema, down at the courthouse outside in brooklyn. when we come back, nbc sources say there's a deal that could avert another government shutdown. i have a feeling a bipartisan horn is coming up after the break. >> it doesn't include this, by the way. the wall demands. in fact, it's got less money than what negotiators agreed on l.a. year for a wall. the question of course is the president going to sign it. 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.
will you sign congress' border deal? >> i have to study it. i'm not happy about it. it's not doing the trick. but i'm add things to it and when you add whatever i have to add, it's all -- it's all going to happen where we're going to build a beautiful big strong wall. m. >> president trump reacting in today's cabinet meeting. that congressional negotiators have reached a deal to prevent another government shutdown. with the president demanding $5.7 billion for his wall, let's see how this deal stacks up against the bill the president signed, then criticized half the year. okay. last time, congress gave him
$1.6 billion for border fencing but with caveats. most of it would go for secondary fencing or pedestrian fences along border areas. only $38 million was allocated to the border barrier design and planning. this time, nbc news has learned the cop fence commnference comm only authorize $1.3 billion. no wall. as for the president's 200 miles of barrier, back in 2018, congress authorized a little more than 39 miles. this time, it's up to 55 miles. like last time that would be geographically limited. the 2018 fencing was added to existing structures in san diego and the rio grande valley in texas. this time, it's expected to be limited to just the rio grande valley. the president did get closer to his number on i.c.e. detention beds. up about 2,000. about 40,520 now. the cap the democrats asked for
is not in this new plan. still falls short of what the president's request was, which was for 52,000 spaces for detainees. d is funding is up overall about $1.7 billion more than the 2018 appropriations. although that number includes a lot of nonbarrier border security. >> when you say that the plan, the deal, what kind of deal is that? >> what do you mean? >> the deal they put together? >> oh, it's a deal that involves different groups. >> what kind of groups? >> different political groups. >> so would you say like republicans and democrats who are in congress? >> yes, that's what i would say. >> would you call it a bipartisan deal? >> i would. >> just wondering. just checking. joining us now -- >> why did you drag kacie into this? >> i wasn't planning on using it today, but ali has insisted on talking about bipartisanship. i had no choice.
>> alan gomez, immigration reporter alan gomez has fall noon this morass with us. >> we're like you have no choice. mitch mcconnell, sounded positive on the deal. what's the sense? do republicans hope to pass this thing? >> it seems right now there's a certain amount of caution among republicans we're talking to in the hallwayings. but the reality is we do expect mitch mcconnell to put this on the floor. we do expect republicans overwhelmingly to support it or at least to support the idea of preventing another shutdown. i mean, really, really do not want that. everyone here is sort of waiting on tender hooks to see what the president is going to do. we heard from him earlier today. i would just like to point out that, you know, the president can't just add things to a bipartisan deal that's already been struck and expect for it to hang together. excuse me, i'm not used to your
rituals. >> you know what, move it away. i was excited. i'm sorry. i did not use profanity. i'm sorry. >> i forgive you. anyway. so the reality is, again, everyone up here wants this to get done. they agreed on it. there are some in the caucus who are urging the president not to do it. the hope is even if there is anger on the right and we see it in conservative media as well, that the president will come up with another solution that allows him to say he won. and pass it through congress without shutting down the government again. >> isn't that backup plan kind of silly. we've heard of that -- i think maybe it was from lindsey graham's camp. accept this deal and then use alternative measures to find the other $4 billion for the wall. if they take that route, then truly the last shutdown was for fault because they could have done that all along. >> if they pass this deal, why -- they shut down the
government before. this is close to where they were. on the overall appropriations bill. yes there are a few of those, but chris murphy was saying the same thing in the hallways. why do we do that if this is where we'll end up. people on the hill have known that all along. you know, one of my -- i coverledcove ered a lot of government shut ydowns. it's never usually the president who, you know, feels immediately the political effects. nobody like congress. they're kind of fine with that. okay. but in this case everybody agreed. which is considered to be remarkable. and it was the president who threw this last-minute wrench in. i think that's really what you're feeling right now. it is republicans who they went in pretty early to their lunchings. they haven't come out yet. we'll see mitch mcconnell here in a couple minutes. we may have a better sense after
that. i think they're waiting, probably playing, that the president doesn't screw it up again. >> politics aside, i sort of tried to explain what's in this deal compared to the last time. if you don't follow this very closely, it's unclear as to who this is a win for and whether this goes any distance towards actually fixing what's broken with our immigration system. ways yo what's your take? >> 50 miles of a fence is not going to fix the problem. let's focus on who's winning and losing here. i've been really shocked to hear conservative media sean hannity talk about this being a garbage compromise. i don't want to question your big board, but one thing missing from it was the $5.7 billion allocated in that first go-around, that would only have funded 110 miles of new wall. >> oh, let me just point something out. that was not on a.mli's big boa
but please know this guy has been ringing the bell for weeks. >> it's not even a corner of the wall in the best scenarios. >> quite literally, democrats met the president in the middle here. remember, back then, they were -- republicans had to give up. for that wall, what they had to give up was protections for 800,000 dreamers. those three-year protections from deportation. protections for 300,000 people with temporary protected status. that's all gone in this compromise. that's completely out of the way. they're getting 55 miles of additional wall. they don't have to protect any undocumented immigrants or amnesty. still they're complaining. i guess if they didn't get exactly what they asked for, they were going to be upset. >> the president last night in el paso was still -- he's got a new slogan, which is finish the wall. >> why, because the wall was never started?
>> the bottom line is the president remains committed to getting the wall built. >> i mean, obviously we've been hearing about the national emergency powering powers. it's hard to understand what's going on in the president's brain. is 55 miles enough? is that enough for him to declare victory and say, okay, i get my new wall. he probably puts a plaque on it. which he already did with some replacement fencing. is that enough for him to feel comfortable that he goes back to voters and say i got 55 new miles, or does he feel he has to go above and beyond that? >> wait, did he put his name in a plaque on replacement fencing? >> yes, the southern border in california. dhs secretary nielsen went down there for a big care mope. th ceremony. they bolted a plaque on a wall. a replacement fence that was funded under the obama administration. >> you can't make this stuff up.
kacie, thank you, alan gomez, thank you. sorry about my bipartisan horn. >> i'm sorry. >> don't apoeapologize. >> you know what that means? it means she likes it. >> another breaking story we're following. an nbc news exclusive. the senate intelligence committee's almost at the end of its investigation into the 2016 election. we're going to tell you what the committee's up covered after two years and 200 interviewings. >> first, you know it, we know it, it is black history month. that means it is time to celebrate nbc's blk recognizing black women who are providing leadership in their communities. today we want to acknowledge tiffany lofton, director of the naacp youth and college division. she brought more than 1,000 students to march for our lives last year. she's an advocate for gun control and the importance of black voices. >> i work with all folks who are under the age of 35.
most recently, worked out clemency for this person. we use marches like this. >> they kill us. this is about all the young black men. >> every black woman. >> those are great vignettes. all month, you can check them out. more stories at nbc news/shethrives. ws/shethrives. you might take something for your heart... or joints. 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.
insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company might be the right choice for you. a free decision guide is a great place to start. call today to request yours. so what makes an aarp medicare supplement plan unique? these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp because they meet aarp's high standards of quality and service. you're also getting the great features that any medicare supplement plan provides. you may choose any doctor that accepts medicare patients. you can even visit a specialist. with this type of plan there are no networks or referrals needed. also, a medicare supplement plan... ...goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u.s. call today for a free guide.
and accessoriesphones for your mobile phone. like this device to increase volume on your cell phone. - ( phone ringing ) - get details on this state program call or visit breaking news from an nbc news exclusive report. the senate intelligence committee is wrapping up its russia investigation into the 2016 election. according to democrats and republicans on the committee, the end is nearing without uncovering any direct evidence of a conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. >> joining us now is nbc news national security reporter ken dilanian who broke this story. what's the story? we're toward the end of the investigation? >> not completely but getting closer. >> people on both sides of the investigate, democrats and republicans are saying -- >> that's right, that they don't have direct evidence of a
conspiracy. if there was an intercept of a russian intelligence officer discussing it, they would know this, right. they're saying that doesn't exist. what they disagree on is this pattern of contacts we've seen between senior trump campaign officials and the russians and what this adds up to circumstantial evidence. you may end up with a report six to seven months from now once the investigation finishes that says look, here's what happens. we can't say whether this was collusion. american public, you decide. >> if there's no evidence of a conspiracy what has come out of the investigation? >> they've done some really good work. they had an interim report -- >> i'm not honking the horn because i honked it one too many times in the last segment and i feel bad about it. if i hadn't had that, i'd be honk zbl hor
honking. trust me, in my mind, there's a hom honk going on now. >> they confirmed that russia interfered. they realized reports detailing how russia interfered on social media. eventually, we will see a report where they lay out what they found on these russia contacts. >> disconnect these dots. we've already seen guilty pleas and indictments from people who are part of the trump campaign. how do you marry the two? >> what's very important, this is not a criminal investigation. they don't have access to what robert mueller has. they don't have criminal subpoena power. they can't serve a warrant on people. they weren't aware manafort turned over polling data. robert mueller is going to have a final say in whether there was a conspiracy. >> when the mueller investigation was either in danger or the fact the house intel committee was not doing its job, its investigation,
everybody was depending on the russian investigation because it was bipartisan in nature. >>mueller files a con fa deconfidential report, t will not file charges but explain what happened and who in the trump world was guilty of negligence or something else. >> ken dilanian, thank you. nbc news intelligence reporter. american astronaut mark kelly running for senate in what could be one of the hottest r e races in 2020. an advocate for gun safety after his wife was nearly killed in a fatal assassination attempt. >> fatal? >> excuse me, failed. i'm having a tough day. a failed assassination attempt. is mark kelly the best democrat to take on republican mcsally.
he's a pretty centrist guy and think about the campaign, she was all trump all the way. e waye grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why at safelite, we'll show you exactly when we'll be there. with a replacement you can trust. all done sir. >> grandpa: looks great! >> tech: thanks for choosing safelite. >> grandpa: thank you! >> child: bye! >> tech: bye! saving you time... so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪
>> partisanship and polarization and gerrymandering and corporate money have ruined our politics. it's divided us. i care about people. i care about the state of arizona. i care about this nation. so because of that, i decided that i've launching a campaign for the united states senate. we've seen this retreat from science and data and facts and if we don't take these issues seriously, we can't solve these problems. so please join us. and the torpedoes. >> full speed ahead. >> before we dive into his political platform, let's look at his career. mark kelly was a navy pilot during operation desert storm also known as the gulf war. he flew 39 combat missions. he half ts a degree in engineer
and he's a retired nasa astronaut. now how about the issues? we know where kelly stands on guns. his wife survived an assassination attempt. he formed the organization giffords, aimed at fighting gun violence. he also highlighted climate change. affordable health care. stagnant wages, jobs and the economy. kelly is a major recruit for the democrat party in what will be would be of t one of the most hotly contested races of 2020 and this could signal a tough road ahead for republicans who are trying to hold on to the senate majority. with the current makeup in the senate, democrat als need to pi up at least three seats to regain control. the states with the best chances of flipping blue, georgia, north carolina, maine, arizona. mcsally currently holds the seat. he also served in the military. specifically, u.s. air force with similar backgrounds. so the big question, ali, is
going to be who is better for the state of arizona and based on what kelly has said in that video, he sounds like a pretty centrist candidate. he might face a primary challenger. >> let's talk about this with eugene scott. good to see you again. how does this shape up in a race against mcsally? >> it's playing pretty well so far. democrats are, specifically, that they just had in the senate, they had sinema, one of the first democrats elected to the senate from arizona. what they learned is they put forward a centrist candidate, they can win a lot of independent voters or even republican voters who would have backed someone more conservative and who are looking for more checks and balances in washington and they see kelly as someone who can do that. >> all right. how crucial is this race though? when you think about democrats
and republicans in 2020, i mean, the fact that just three seats could be a game changer for democrats. >> it's incredibly crucial. there's policy that the left wants to get past and push back they would like to see happen that they just haven't been able to do because they don't have the numbers. if they could turn this seat democrat, they can make more gains related to some of the policy ideas we know mark kelly is putting forward in terms of the economy, in term also of the climate change, in terms of health caring. that the democrats are having trouble getting forward now. >> eugene, at some point, has this created some worry for republicans? this was always going to be a tight race. >> certainly has. they've seen some losses. not just national but in the state. quite a few republicans who have been hesitant to back liberals but are just really frustrated with what's coming from the white house and want to see if
they can put forward a republican candidate who will be a check on trump. they just haven't seen that with mcsally. they feel like kelly can be something that would be attractive to independent voters. >> eugene, thank you. eugene scott, political reporter with the "washington post." >> next, we're talking about your -- >> money, money, money. >> we heard a lot about government deficits and the debt on the campaign trail but some say you don't have to balance the budget or worry about debt or deficits. how exactly is that going to work? that's next. >> we're watching markets here. a live look at the dow. >> can we just talk about this? one of the reasons is because the market loves the idea there's a bipartisan agreement and the government shutdown. so hold on, what's more important to the president, the president calls himself mr. market. he loves seeing the market up almost 400 on the day. what's more important, the 400, or the six hours --
>> the wealth being created for all sorts of people. >> or six hours from now when sean hannity is on tv calling it a garbage deal. >> we'll talk about debt and deficits when we come back. ome k and i don't add up the years. but what i do count on, is staying happy and healthy. so, i add protein, vitamins and minerals to my diet with boost®. boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals your body needs. all with guaranteed great taste. the upside- i'm just getting started. boost® high protein be up for life. gimme two minutes. and i'll tell you some important things to know about medicare. first, it doesn't pay for everything. say this pizza... is your part b medical expenses. this much - about 80 percent...
medicare will pay for. what's left... this slice here... well... you have to pay for that. and that's where an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company comes in. this type of plan helps pay some of what medicare doesn't. and these are the only plans to carry the aarp endorsement. that's because they meet their high standards of quality and service. review aarp medicare supplement plans and their rates in this free decision guide. call united healthcare insurance company or go online. visit aarpmedicaresupplement.com to request yours. even apply online... any time. oh. speaking of time... about a little over half way and there's more to tell. like, how... with this type of plan, you'll have the freedom to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. great for staying with the one you know... or finding... somebody new, like a specialist.
there are no networks and no referrals needed. none. and when you travel, your plan will go with you anywhere in the country. so, if you're in another state visiting the grandkids, stay awhile...enjoy... and know that you'll still be able to see any doctor who accepts medicare patients. learn more with this free decision guide. call or go online to request yours. tick, tick, tick, time for a wrap up. a medicare supplement plan helps pay some of what medicare doesn't. you know, the pizza slice. it allows you to choose any doctor, who accepts medicare patients... and these are the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. whew! call or go online and find out more.
bike, wheels, saddle. i customize everything - that's why i switched to liberty mutual. they customized my insurance, so i only pay for what i need. i insured my car, and my bike. my calves are custom too, but i can't insure those... which is a crying shame. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
an unconventional economic theory is gaining some traction thanks to the policy teams of alexandria ocasio-cortez and bernie sanders. it's called modern monetary theory, mmt. stay with me for this one. mmt suggests that governments don't have to worry about debt because they print their own money. if we need to spend more money on government programs, we print more. but too much money in the economy could result in inflation. mmt suggests that we use taxes as a relief valve, pull money out of the economy before it overheats from having too much money in there. supporters of the theory say the government should stop trying to balance the budget, period. they go so far as to say policies aimed at balancing a budget hurt the economy by forcing cuts to programs. in fact, they think a budget surplus should be avoided at all costs. a government holding on to money instead of funneling it into the economy is more harmful than piling on debt in the long run.
this is a very different approach than the pay as you go proposals from democrats or the massive program cuts suggested by republicans over the last few decades. and it's a total departure from mainstream economic theories, one that hasn't been discussed a whole lot until now. policy proposals from the progressive left, like medicare for all or the green new deal from ocasio-cortez, often raise the question of how we are going to end up paying for it. one of the answers is we can just print more money. joining us to talk more about this is the former chairman of the council of economic advisers for president obama. austin, that's a hard one to lay out. i've tried as best as i can. what's your thinking on modern monetary theory and its place in the way we approach budgets and debt and programs? >> well, i thought you did a good job summarizing their views. i guess i'd say as it applies to our politics, i kind of agree that in a world where each time
the republicans take over, they completely disregard that tax cuts needs to be paid for and they run the deficit up. it's unrealistic and unfair to say to democrats, oh, well, if you want to do something important for the country, you have to pay for every cent we can't increase the deficit. that said, the mmt as a theory, as an economic theory, is confused, kind of a mishmash of things that don't make sense or else are completely obvious. so i wish they would spend less time talking about theory and more time talking about what's reasonable. >> that's a lot for an economist, to say that. help me understand this then. bill gates recently took exception with mmt, calling it crazy talk, but at the same time, he conceded that you can raise debt to 150% of gdp before you reach a problem point. is he right? >> look, i think the argument
that the u.s. has a higher debt capacity than our current debt level, nobody's going to argue with that. yes, we can't -- that's why the markets don't freak out as the deficit has gotten bigger. the problem with deficits, of course, is that you have to pay back the money. and it crowds out other priorities that we have rising debt. >> because there is interest. it's not free. >> yeah, it's not free. that said, we can't afford it. and it's not really about mmt. mmt as a theory is confused. the argument that the u.s. can afford to run deficits, especially if it's for investing in things that are going to have a future payoff, you know we can do that because we've been doing it for things that aren't even investments. we have now for the last two republican presidents had massive increases in the deficit
for tax cuts to high-income people. so we can afford to do that. >> we've decided that's okay. >> and here's an issue. i'm thoroughly confused, yet we have seen a whole bunch of democrats already, those in the 2020 races, sort of eyeing this or at least getting themselves closer to an economist named stephanie kelton. she helped popularize mmt. if that's where democrats are going, is this thing going to be a bigger talking point as we head into the primary race? >> i don't know. look, it might be, but truly, it's confused. there's one part that's obvious and one part that's confused. the part that's obvious is, yes, if you run up debt in your own currency, you could print money to pay it back. that would, as ali said, lead to significant inflation. that's monetizing the debt.
and then their second conclusion is, well, we can prevent the inflation by raising taxes. but if you raise the taxes, you eliminate the deficit. we know that you could afford more government spending in the long run if you had a lot more tax revenue. the question has always been, how much more tax revenue do we want to have? so that's why i think the theory is a little bit muddled, but the basic point -- if their basic point is why should we have to never run -- increase the deficit to make investments when the republicans repeatedly run up the deficit to cut taxes for high-income people. that makes perfect sense. that's totally reasonable. >> if you're investing in things that will offer you a greater economic return over the long term than you're paying in interest, that can be a reasonable transaction. we're building infrastructure. >> exactly right. >> the issue is we've sort of lost sight of thinking about that. >> they are correct on that. >> all right.
austin, thank you for working through this with us. this one is a little tricky. former chairman of the council of economic advisers. >> my goodness. i mean, i do wonder, do people remember what helped president trump get elected? it's time for monumental americans. today it's captain rosemary mariner, the first woman to become a navy fighter pilot and the first woman to command an operational air squadron in the navy. mariner was born in texas in 1953 to an air force pilot and navy nurse. she washed planes at civilian airports to earn money for flying lessons. she entered the navy's first flight training class for women. >> mariner earned her wings in 1974 and became the first female pilot in the navy to fly a jet attack craft. in her career, she flew over 3500 hours in more than 15 unique aircraft. she was a leader on the ground,
too, and worked to lift bans on women in combat. mariner passed away last month, and to her honor at her funeral, the navy performed the first ever all-female flyover. all eight women in the formation were combat veterans. >> that's amazing. thanks for watching "velshi & ruhle." i'll be back at 3:00 p.m. eastern. >> i'm going to watch him at 3:00 p.m. eastern. i'll be back here at 9:00 a.m. eastern tomorrow. right now we hand off to our friend and colleague, miss katy tur. >> hey, guys. thank you very much. it's 11:00 a.m. out west and 2:00 p.m. in washington where there's another deal on the table to avoid a government shutdown, but will president trump buy it? >> sir, will you sign congress' border deal? >> i have to study it. i'm not happy about it. it's not doing the trick. but i'm adding things to it. i don't think you're going to see a shutdown. i wouldn't want to go to it. if you did have it, it's the
defendants' fault. >> it includes $1.735 billion for 55 miles of fencing, not wall, plus another $1.7 billion in new funding for border security. in exchange, democrats dropped a demand to restrict the number of beds for immigrants at detention centers. both parties are spinning the deal as a victory, but again, no one is definitively ruling a shutdown out because the president remains as he always does, a wild card. trump had originally asked for $5.7 billion for a concrete wall he said would span more than 200 miles. this deal falls way short of that. and some of the president's most avid supporters don't want him to sign it. in a tweet this morning, freedom caucus chair mark meadows suggested that trump had no choice but to take executive action. and there was this message from the president's informal adviser. >> by the wa