tv MSNBC Live With Velshi and Ruhle MSNBC February 20, 2019 10:00am-11:00am PST
online on facebook and twitter at mitchell reports. here is ali velshi and stephanie ruhle, "velshi & ruhle." >> have you looked out the window? >> anything happening out there? >> i think you either have to get back or you're going to be here for a little while. >> i don't think getting back is an option. have you looked outside here and washington? >> there's some good snow out there. stay as long as you like. have a good afternoon. >> maybe we'll all go skating after this. >> that would be fun. there's a rink near here. i'm ali velshi. >> i'm stephanie ruhle. it is wednesday, a snowy wednesday and we have a lot to get to this hour, so let's get right into it. we'll begin with this. the 2020 election is already under attack. you thought i was going to say underway. no, under attack. a new report from politico reveals disinformation campaigns are happening as we speak. and it they mirror russia's ent interference in the 2016 election. politico reporting the main
targets appear to be democratic presidential candidates, kamala harris, elizabeth warren, bernie sanders and prospective candidate beto o'rourke. the attacks are in the form of misinformation posted about the candidates, you guessed it, on twitter and other social media platforms. >> politico reports senator kamala harris is among the most targeted. a tweet attacking the senator with racist and sexist stereo types was seen by 8.6 million people. elizabeth warren's case, politico reports a, quote, false narrative surfaced alleging that a black face doll appeared on a kitchen cabinet in the background of the senator's instagram live stream. this troubling report comes just after -- weeks after "the daily beast" reported on staffing cuts to groups fighting election meddling at the federal level. the task forces were formed in response to russia's election in into -- interference into the election in 2016. >> remember we had asked are they taking these groups apart and replacing them, putting them together? there was no clear answer.
in capitol hill testimony, that stood in stark contrast to president trump last month. the national intelligence director dan coates crystallized just how bad the threats are. >> we assessed that foreign actors will view the 2020 u.s. elections as an opportunity to advance their interests. we expect them to refine their capabilities and add new tactics as they learn from each other's experiences and efforts in previous elections. the kremlin is stepping up its campaign to divide western political and security institutions and undermine the post world war ii international order. we expect russia will continue to wage its information war against democracies and to use social media to attempt to divide our societies. >> all right. joining us now is politico's natasha who wrote that report and nbc's ben collins who tracks online disinformation efforts. welcome to both of you.
thank you for being with us. explain the method behind your reporting. what kind of posts did you see and how did you track them? >> well, we saw posts that really attacked 2020 candidates on a range of issues. but really racially charged posts, sort of a more outright lies, outright disinformation. you mentioned the warren black face doll. that was something we tracked. actually one of the first things we saw. we saw that on one platform and we saw it on a different platform being amplified. but through the course of our work, we worked with a group -- tech group called guardians a.i. out of new york and they are a group of data scientists who did this report last year that showed there was this distinct cluster of accounts that had been involved in the 2018 midterms. well, those were the same, very same cluster is up and running and amplifying negative memes and disinformation related to many of the 2020 candidates, but
in particular the four that we mentioned. >> and i'm not asking you to reveal how you get -- how you trace this back, but in broader terms, yes, we're seeing similar characteristics, similar accounts. how does that take you back to russia? >> well, you know, that part of it i will say briefly that there's no conclusive evidence saying that it's russian interference. there is probable -- patterns that indicate that that is the case. and for that we rely on many different people that we interviewed and this extensive research that the guardians a.i. did, and that was mainly looking at similar patterns that they were finding with spiking, co-spiking around this group of 200 accounts amplified by tens of thousands of other accounts. and they were seeing similar patterns that they had seen and in the digital community had agreed that this was a type of activity and patterns exhibited
by russian interference in 2016. >> so, ben, try and quantify this for us. as natasha said, it's about patterns. given what we know about 2016, what are these patterns indicate and how do you quantify them? >> basically they start off on these really small spaces. they start off on fortunate or discord, online spaces unmoderated. people -- >> take us back. walk us through what for chan is. >> it's an unmoderated website by a guy in japan now. basically it's completely anonymous. people can post whatever they want on there and their user name is a string of numbers and letters. they take it to other platforms, reddit, a little more moderate and seen, those things get blasted out onto facebook and twitter in a coordinated fashion. that can be russia. that can be iran, which has done this before. but it can also just be regular people and can be people jumping
in, you know, what you call useful idiots, pushing a narrative that wouldn't be there, totally artificial. >> natasha was saying and i don't know if you come to the same conclusion, you can't determine where it's from. the pattern looks similar to some of the things that were put forward by the internet research agency, the troll farm, russian troll farm in 2016, but it's not clear where it's all coming from. >> right. they slip up usually. they log into -- they forget to use a thing called vpm which hides where you're coming in from. and they accidentally log in from the internet research agency's actual computers and then twitter and facebook can see that network and pull it down. that sort of thing takes months. that sort of thing happens retroactively. we can sort of sense the feeling of these same things. we can see talking points, we can see syntax, and have that feeling confirmed or denied later on. it's hard to track in real time. this is a problem. we unfortunately need to lean on these networks, twitter and
facebook. >> they have no standards or loose standards. natasha, in putting together this report have you heard from social media platforms? are they saying anything? >> they're very aware of these issues. they're sensitive to what's happened in the past. and both twitter and facebook say they've put in many security measures. they've produced different data sets to make it easier for researchers to look at what they've taken down from foreign actors. i should add that there are definite signs that a lot of this is domestic activity as well. it's not just foreign actors. but certainly both of the two major and facebook, of course, runs instagram. but if you talk to these campaigns, privately they'll say twitter is still in their minds the wild west. they don't feel like they can really monitor what's going on. they feel like there is a lot of suspicious inauthentic accounts
and a lot of behavior already -- i mean, they're already seeing it and we just have started the 2020 race. >> given everything that we know, given everything that facebook knows, given what twitter knows, given what you two know, is there some likelihood that the effect of this is going to be muted in this or amplified? >> both. >> there's so much garbage out there it turns into white noise? >> or maybe people have learned to clean up their feeds. >> i hope so. a lot of this comes at the civic engagement level. >> assuming a lot of garbage. >> if you're consuming a lot of garbage -- we should give up on facebook and twitter are going to help the situation. they are not going to do it in the amount of time we need to do it. we need education at a basic level, not just for kids, but for everybody to say, look twice. really, look twice at these things because facebook, while it does want to stop this stuff, its new initiative is called
groups on facebook. we asked them last week, what are you doing to stop the same problems that you had with news feed last time where all this disinformation was abound? they said nothing. we're not going to do anything this time. and it's like they've learned nothing at all. so we can't -- >> we're not really self-policing, we're not really cleaning up our groups, are we? >> of course not. eight oh, my god, facebook had such a terrible year. no they didn't, they killed this in earnings. they didn't lose advertisers. >> it's not costing them. >> they're kicking it. >> until it actually starts to hurt their bottom line, it's not going to change anything. we need to change things on a one to one level between people. maybe it can force pressure on the tech companies. >> if i could add one thing, if you look at the 2020 campaigns, it does seem just broadly that they're pretty unprepared at this point. >> that's definitely true. >> they don't -- they're focusing on getting their message out. they're focusing on fund-raising
and, you know, these videos with their pets and whatnot. but if you really try to dig in on security and what they're doing specifically to prevent what happened in the past, they are really behind. and educating people individually, you can try that, but i think even studies show that you can present somebody with fake news, tell them what it is and not to pay attention to it and it still penetrates. >> really quickly, brad parscale who ran the digital for trump 2016, he knows how effective it is, it won. there is no equivalent on the left. >> on a personal level, if people see fake news, it supports what they already believe, they suck it in. there's a saying that if "page six" writes something but you, oh, my god, this is a complete lie, right under that, an article, the guy next to you, oh, my goodness. it's just human nature. >> good to know we've learned nothing. thanks to the two of you.
>> that's not true. >> well, they have, but maybe the consuming public, the campaigns haven't. our government has not been particularly aggressive about this. look what the u.k. is doing. europeans are doing about these things. we hold hearings where people don't understand why things show up on their phone. just saying. we have another election coming up. i do seem much taller than you today. >> you know what, you're just a great man. that's what it is. >> or maybe i just have to adjust my seat a little bit. >> next, we're going to look at america's student loan debt crisis and your money, money, money. a new republican plan would have student loan payments come right out of borrower's paychex. we'll break down the argument for and against this controversial plan. >> first, ruling on commerce secretary wilbur ross from the government's top watch dog. the office of government ethics says ross earn ag rattinaccurat hiss stock holdings. he said he thought he sold the stocks in question.
when he realized his error, he disclosed the sale. the stocks were worth $3,700, below the threshold of conflict of interest. >> isn't it stunning, a man who spent 50 plus years as an investment professional continues to basically make mathematical errors -- >> 3700 bucks. this guy is worth, what, 37 billion? he's worth a lot of money a. >> remember, according forbes he was not honest about how much he was worth for years because he was trying to inch his way -- >> he's worth at least $37 million. i'm just saying, small. >> small potatoes. >> you're watching "velshi & ruhle" live on msnbc. itnessed, but i can tell you liberty mutual customized my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ if your adventure keeps turning into unexpected bathroom trips you may have overactive bladder, or oab.
ohhhh... enough already! we need to see a doctor. ask your doctor about myrbetriq® (mirabegron). it treats oab symptoms of urgency, frequency, and leakage. it's the first and only oab treatment in its class. myrbetriq may increase blood pressure. tell your doctor right away if you have trouble emptying your bladder or have a weak urine stream. myrbetriq may cause serious allergic reactions like swelling of the face, lips, throat or tongue, or trouble breathing. if experienced, stop taking and tell your doctor right away. myrbetriq may interact with other medicines. tell your doctor if you have liver or kidney problems. common side effects include increased blood pressure, common cold or flu symptoms, sinus irritation, dry mouth, urinary tract infection, bladder inflammation, back or joint pain, constipation, dizziness, and headache. need some help managing your oab symptoms along the way? ask your doctor if myrbetriq is right for you, and visit myrbetriq.com to learn more. [indistinct conversation]
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.
all right. we're back with your money, money, money and a controversial republican plan to deal with america's student loan debt crisis. this is a very big problem affecting approximately 44 million americans. student loan debt has been steadily increasing over the last nine years to $1.5 trillion. that could reach $2 trillion collectively by 2022. one in five borrowers are in default on their federal loans according to the national consumer law center. now, a new proposal from republican senator tennessee senator lamar alexander calls for an update to the higher education act. borrowers currently have several different repayment options, but this new plan is going to cut that down to just two plans that call for mandatory wage garnishments.
loan payments would be taken directly from your paycheck like taxes, social security, things like that. let's break this down. the first plan would be a standard ten-year repayment plan where borrower's monthly bills could be capped at 10% of their discretionary income. the second is a pay as you earn plan, spreads payments out over the span of a a decade. employers would be responsible for withdrawing the funds from employees paychex and sending those funds to the government. what's the problem here? opponents of the plan believe borrowers should be able to prioritize their expenses and debts themselves, but backers of this plan say it helps borrowers from falling behind on their payments and could lower their risk of going into default. >> oh, goodness. joining us now joanna darcas, attorney at the consumer law center. joanna, help us understand this. why is this so bad for students? those are the borrowers we're talking about here. >> or ex-students. >> we share the senators' concerns with making sure that student loan repayment is truly
easy and affordable for students who had to borrow to get that education. what we are very discouraged about and frankly afraid for is the consequences of taking away from student loan borrowers the right to prioritize their expenses. let's talk about the real cost of living and make sure that we give students and borrowers the ability to feed themselves, to house their families, and to pay for their medical expenses so that they can continue to earn and make money that will enable them to repay their student loans. alma okay, but here's the thing. folks expect when you borrow for something, you pay it back. what's the actual problem with figuring out a way the people pay back their stieudent loans? >> here, the innovation is automatically deducting the student loan payment from wages before the borrower gets their
paycheck. that means that, like taxes, we're taking out a portion of the funds that that borrower earned, that they then must apply to their student loans even before they have the option of paying their rent or their mortgage or buying groceries. that is a very big change to the current system in which borrowers have a whole month to budget, to tarke care of their utility bills, to pay for school uniforms and child care for their children. here, a chunk of each paycheck would be taken. that's very different. so, instead of giving borrowers the option to time payments on critical bills in accordance to when income comes in and when it has to go out, instead, we'd make borrowers forego a percentage of their income out of every paycheck before they
have the option of even applying it to something crucial like feeding their families or paying for life-saving medication. >> so, proponents of this bill, i'm sure they've heard the exact criticism that you've made right there. what's their response to it? >> i think proponents of this bill are conflating making payments affordable with making payments automatic. it's important that we can address the issue of student loan default and, by and large, default is terrible. it has terrible consequence for clients like mine, low-income people who are trying to make ends meet. a disproportionate number of whom are people of color because people of color borrow student loans at a higher rate and often borrow more just to get through college. so it's important that we address affordability without limiting the choices that borrowers have, and that the choices they need to make about what to pay first.
these borrowers want to repay their student loans, but they also need to make sure that they can stay current on their obligations, like keeping the lights on and feeding their families. so here, we have other ways to make student loan repayment seamless for those borrowers and to ensure that their monthly payments are affordable. we should use other tools to accomplish that. >> joanna, thank you for joining us. joanna darcas is an attorney with the consumer law center. >> this is an important thing. please pay attention. the "velshi & ruhle" tax cut tracker. many american companies benefited big time from president trump's tax cuts. we're going to break down how they spent their savings. it's all about stock buy backs. we'll tell you which companies benefited the most. >> speaking of taxes, we are getting more information on the refunds some of america's companies are requesting. it's not that they're paying $0
of taxes. they're getting money back from the government. >> good year, good year made $693 million in profit last year and it's asking for a 15 is million dollars refund. netflix earned an $845 million profit. it filed for a $22.1 million refund. u.s. steel filed for a $303 million refund. i want to say one thing before you go on. none of what they're doing is illegal. it is completely within the confines of the law. >> amazon made more than $11.2 billion, with a b, dollars in profit last year and filed for a $129 million refund. general motors made $11.8 billion, and is claiming a $104 million refund. we're going to keep watching stories like this. >> again, it's not illegal. maybe change the system. you're watching "velshi & ruhle."
we'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure together. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only when you book with expedia. a cfp professional is trained, knowledgeable, and committed to financial planning in your best interest. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org.
march 6th to may 6th. cohen asked for the extra time so he can undergo physical therapy for recent shoulder surgery. he's also expected to be called to testify at three congressional committees the end of this month. today at the vatican a dozen survivors of child section abuse meet with officials to demand transparency and zero tolerance for abuse. tomorrow vatican officials will host bishops from around the world for a summit on global sex abuse scandal. after years of denying it, shares the terror watch list with the government sector, they are allowing them to access the list. it came in a class action lawsuit filed by muslims who say they have problems with travel financial transactions and law enforcement because they have been wrongly added to the list. >> okeydoke. it's time for the "velshi & ruhle" tax cut tracker. we knew this was going to
happen. 2018 was a record setting year for stock buy backs in part thanks to the massive tax cuts signed into law by president trump. u.s. companies announced a whopping $1.1 trillion with a t dollars in stock buy backs and half of those announced buy backs, $460 billion are concentrated in 19 big companies. who announced the biggest stock buy backs last year? alphabet, the parent company of google, announced $8.6 billion in stock buy backs. $10 billion apiece for pfizer, merc and 3m. abbvie, pepsi co. and intel $15 million each. those with $20 million or more boeing, bank of america, oracle, cisco systems, and qualcomm. and the biggest of all apple. they announced a $100 billion total in stock buy backs for 2018. that is a record all on its own. now, the republican tax cut was sold on the promise that companies would reinvest the
money they saved in infrastructure, like new stores or manufacturing sites, or investing in employees by hiring more people or taking up wages. when companies find a way to do both, like apple did, who invested in employees and still had an outside sum left over, it may be a win/win for shareholders, employees and the economy at large. we have to remind people of this, ali. stock buy backs are not illegal at all. it's a ceo's responsibility as a fiduciary to perform. if they decide the best way to deploy capital is in share buy backs, then that's their option to do so. the problem is this tax cut was sold in a way where they said, companies, they're not going to be closing plants, they're going to be opening plants and building plantsz. >> you said every time, why wouldn't they do buy backs? it's a thing companies do. you mentioned as fiduciaries. companies have actual legal responsibility toward their shareholders. some might argue, why don't they
have the same legal responsibility toward their other stakeholders, including their workers and their community and the earth and all that. >> that is not how a fiduciary is defined. if you were a shareholder of a company and that company suddenly said, we're going to spend a whole lot of money masking our building green, but they haven't proven why that's good for the business, as a shareholder, you could sue them. you could say, you want to go green? do that in your own private house. don't do it with my money. >> i'm not sure that isn't worth reconsidering whether companies should do that. legally that is not the obligation of the company. >> but if the company doesn't show their shareholders, here is why it works for a number of reasons, the shareholder could say, that's my money, you're working for me. >> the mistake is all those people who came on the show why won't they use the money for buy backs, no, no, they're going to build plants and give raises and free food to their employees. why would they do that? their legal responsibility is toward their shareholders. >> and the reason they were closing plants or optimizing their business or laying people
off, that was the right thing to do for their business. now, there's a social responsibility component that's not discussed, that's not currently a responsibility. maybe we'll change that. >> let's bring in john harwood, who is cnbc's editor at large. i guess the example is apple, right? they announced $100 billion, as stephanie said, in buy backs and $350 billion in u.s. investments. i suppose using the fiduciary argument, they are able to make the argument to their shareholders that this is good, this will be good for us, this will be good for business. how do -- how would we incentivize companies to do more of that? >> well, there is legislation that's been proposed to make them prioritize other things. the legislation offered by senate democratic leader chuck schumer and bernie sanders who has now jumped into the presidential race, would require companies to meet certain conditions before they could engage in buy backs, which is
paying their employees minimum wage and other terms of their tostephanie's point, on the fiduciary responsibility, that's one of the aims that elizabeth warren has advocated in 2020, is changing the terms of corporate governance by requiring companies to have their boards composed of different ways. trying to alter those relationships. i will say that some members of the administration argued before the tax cut passed -- gary cohn, remember, a conversation with him, said, look, if they do stock buy backs, that's okay because then the beneficiaries of those stock buy backs will invest that money somewhere. and some liberal economists agreed with that as an economic matter. but if there aren't good investments and new plants that are going to be profitable for those companies, it begs the question of why the tax cut was needed in the first place place. >> or are they starting to consider maybe the tax cut was just too large.
it's not just democrats who are pushing back on this. some republicans are. you want to walk us through marco rubio's plan? >> well, i haven't seen marco rubio's plan in detail, but he talks about ways in which -- i mean, he's been somebody who complained before the tax bill passed that it wasn't focused enough on small companies, on paycheck to paycheck workers. so he's trying to put some conditions on the terms of stock buy backs as well. there is democratic legislation that says you can't buy those shares on the open market. you can do tender offers. the sec rules are being talked about. sec granted wide purview for companies to do stock buy back. the last 15 years or so, companies have spent $5 trillion on them. >> okay. he >> so there are proposals in both parties to take some action on this. i think this is going to be a dominant theme or a substantial
theme throughout the democratic presidential field. >> i'd like to be cynical for a moment, though. if these are proposals, and it's a theme, what is the actual political will to do something? i take you back to the last election and i heard on both sides, carried interest, we've got to get rid of carried interest. >> you're right, you heard it from democrats. you actually had -- john was in on some of these conversations with republicans who said we don't need that. >> president trump said it over and over. gary cohn said it, then miraculously when we saw the tax cut, somehow it wasn't in there. over and over we asked on the show, please, any republican who is openly supporting why carried interest should stay in existence, >> come tell us. >> come explain. nobody would. >> zero. >> to your point, stephanie, there is zero political will to do this now. we should point out marco rubio who is making those complaints now, made them before voting for that tax bill. it wasn't enough to cause him to
oppose it. this is something that's not going to happen until you get a new election. if a democratic president is elected and you've got a democratic head of steam on capitol hill, then i think you could see the political will to do this. in the meept, as long as you have republicans controlling one haft of the white house, you'll see companies resorting not to do it. probably won't have much effect. general motors, people like amy klobuchar, democratic senators requested that gm not execute a large stock buy back at a time when they announced some plant closing. so there will be a lot of noise about it. they'll be pressing 0 not companies. i wouldn't expect much action until 2021 at the earliest. >> john, good to see you as always. cnbc editor at large, john harwood. >> carried interest. >> how many times have we said this, make a tape, carried interest going to be there?
>> i'm sure this is going to be a big theme. i don't think we'll see real action because cared from is -- >> you could say, hey, companies, we'll give you more money back, we'll tax you less. there can be this effect, some might call it trickle down. you pay people more and you do good things for the environment. or you legislate higher minimum wages and say, look, don't leave it up to the companies, let's do that. some people say that's anti-market behavior and that's the government getting involved and picking winners and losers. when you give the companies all this money back and middle class taxpayers are not getting this money back and you don't see wages go up and you don't see investments happening, it makes people wonder whether the system is rigged. a system you and i are generally supportive of. we're capitalists. >> ali, as long as there are tax structurers as a job, as long as they have tax departments -- >> which regular people don't have. >> and tax lawyers are among the highest paid lawyers out there. and as long as regular people are doing their taxes on their dining room table next to their kids studying for s.a.t.s.
>> sorry, you're a wage earner, there is only so much you can do. sorry, sucker. >> the rich est people out there, you know what they did, turned themselves into llcs. you know what that got them? a 21% rate. >> we talked about it before it happened and it happened. all right, coming up next president trump is again ignoring evidence on climate change, this time from the pentagon. we're going to break down the military's urgent warnings on the global climate crisis and how climate change, global warming, is going to endanger national security whether or not donald trump understands it, which it seems he doesn't. you're watching "velshi & ruhle" live on msnbc. people. with audible, you get more. two audible originals- exclusive titles you can't find anywhere else. plus a credit good for any audiobook and exclusive fitness and wellness programs. all with our commitment free guarantee and always ad free. the most inspiring minds. the most compelling stories.
the best place to listen. download audible and start your free trial today. even if you're doing everything right, inside, something can be wrong. preventive screenings can help. but if you're not showing any symptoms... insurance usually won't cover them. what then? call life line screening. we make checking for things like stroke and heart disease so quick, easy and affordable, there's no reason you can't take control of your own health. if you're over 40, call to schedule an appointment for five painless screenings that go beyond regular checkups. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke. and 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease are preventable. that's why life line screening uses ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries for dangerous plaque that builds up as you age. it's what's inside that counts. so learn what your body's not telling you and call today. you'll get five screenings for only $149- saving over 50%.
the president is assembling a task force to determine if climate change is a national security threat. the pentagon already spent more than $300,000 studying that exact issue. look at the report and you will see the first line reads, "the effects of a changing climate are a national security issue." pretty straightforward. the pentagon looked at 79 different military installations and the effects of flooding, drought, desert i if i indication when more area becomes desert, thawing and perm a frost. of the 79 installations studies, only two are not projected to face any of these issues in the next 20 years. only two of 79. the rest are going to be affected by at least one of thighs climate changes. some basic math is going to tell
you many of these facilities will deal with multiple inter-related climate threats. for example, an area hit by drought will be more prone to wildfires which destroys the vegetation and soil, then making flooding a bigger risk. these all affect training. there is a severe storm, flooding, excessive heat or wildfire. troops cannot train. it also increases the cost of equipment, of maintenance of equipment, of facilities to repairs, retrofitting, water, dust gumming up the machinery. meanwhile the president is creating a panel to examine what the pentagon spent hundreds of thousands of dollars studying. i mean, at some point, if you don't believe in climate change, stop already, stop wasting taxpayer money studying or affect lots of money has been spent studying and and everybody comes to the same conclusion or at least 99.8% of everybody comes to the same conclusion. >> nbc's hans nichols is live at the white house with more. all right, hans. william happer, this is the die
tapped by the white house to lead climate change. >> reporter: he is a retired professor from princeton university. he's a physicist. he's had some unorkt docks is how i'll couch them, views on climate change. he's very skeptical of the role carbon emission plays in any sort of climate change. he thinks we should be celebrating carbon. so, that's an indication of what direction this panel is going to go and it's apparently clear that they want -- the white house wants to cast scientific doubt on all these studies that their own pentagon has put out. guys? >> can you let him say that one more time? to cast doubt on scientific studies from our own pentagon. >> here's my question, hans. the pentagon -- this is not new for the pentagon. this $300,000 study, the pentagon has for a long time, i've been speaking to people in the military who understand in
particular coastal facilities where water levels are rising. does this task force -- i'm going to withhold from using an adjective, does the task force have the authority to tell the pentagon to stop any of the actual efforts that are underway in countering climate-related damage? >> reporter: no, this gets back to programming authority and who controls the power of the purse. i mean, that's done by congress, right? and in the 2018 defense authorization act, they had provisions in there to study the ten bases, ten military installations that would be most freaked. with all the talk the planning the pentagon has done and the reports and looking into it. there haven't been a whole lot of movement of physical assets in response to that threat. maybe they'll do that down the line. maybe down the line it will be warranted. the pentagon is in of a study wait and see mode. they're raising a larmtz, this is a problem more than just a
challenge. >> this task force, how common is it? give us a little history lesson for an administration to put in place a task force to examine a study that they themselves did, or that current government . >> look, in washington normally you create a task force to stamp something that is already consensus and conventional wisdom. this one takes a slightly different tact. it seems, and there's a lot we don't noef about it. based on reporting that says they're going to be meeting later on to sort of settle and try to stamp this process, the task force is. there's not a lot of task force can do without congress behind them. we've seen dozens of task forces talk about things. they're here one day, there the next. you guys know more than anyone how capricious these news cycles are. so it's unclear whether or not trump will use and seize whatever this task force comes up to make his point, or he'll take it and he'll say this proves what everyone is saying about climate change, which is
it's a hoax. pretask force when the pentagon came out in january. guys? >> thank you, hans nichols for us at the white house. >> next, progressives are pushing the green new deal as a way to curb carbon emissions. it lays out guidelines for american farmers. president trump claims farmers won't be able to own cows any more. we'll break down what the new deal is actually trying to change and how it would affect farmers one way or another. stop what you're saying. it's time for a commercial. you're watching "velshi & ruhle." >> it's interesting. >> stop it, no it's not. ♪ hey, saved you a seat.
. as the president mocks and dries to dismiss climate change, more data shows the threat of global warming is getting worse. we are the warmest on record and national climate warns of more extreme weather and food shortages. new york congressman, acosta cortez and ed markee rolled out what they called the green new
deal. drawing inspiration from president roosevelt's new deal program which lifted the u.s. out of the great depression. the goal is to cut global emissions of 40% to 50% below 2010 levels by 2030 and neutralize greenhouses entirely by the 50s. the plan would also over haul the transportation sector of what they say is america's b biggest source of pollution and invest in electric cars. it proposes a sustainable food system to ensure everyone has access to healthy food and clean water. this is a big sticky point,
ready for it? the cost. in a rally in texas, the president took all of this and he changed it to this. >> i really don't like their policy of taking away your car or taking away your airplane flights, you are not allowed to own cows anymore. a lot of problemproblems. >> okay, that's not true. none of what the president says, taking away your cars or airplanes. we have to discuss with the cow thing. stephanie is intrigued by what the cow issue is. you know what it is? >> it got to do with methane and what cows consume. >> you told me you want to talk about it. >> if it is a snow day and my kids are here, i would say interested. i am not interested in cows. >> we'll talk about that with vaughan hilliard who's our chief agriculture correspondent.
okay, vaughan, i don't see bad on owning cows in this proposal, what is the president talking about? >>. >> reporter: good afternoon you guys, this came from a document, a q&a that alexander cortez put out the day they announced the green new deal. in that document, it says in ten years we are not sure if we'll be able to get rid of cows and pape airplanes that fast. in nowhere of the green new deal is anything of elimination of cows. about 8% of greenhouse gas emissions here from the u.s. comes from agriculture industries. i want to put on the screen of the text of the green new deal of what it says, they want to elimina elimina eliminate pollution and
greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture sector. i want to be clear because we have been on three different operations the last several days, what you hear from farmers and cattle ranchers that we are the ultimate environmentalists, i want to introduce you to brandy, she's a cattle rancher down in texas, this what she told us. >> cows don't fart, they belch. their belching has a small effect on the environment. if someone believes that something that i am doing has a negative impact, i am going do do my best to make sure that people in charge of our policies have the best facts possible and most up to date sicientific dat.
>> reporter: brandy says she's support of the measure because she wants farmer and agriculture to be in the conversation about capitol hill about what they can do forward. >> vaughan, we appreciate another history that's presented by the green new deal and the president. vaughan hillyard. >> thank you, my friend. >> for the first time in history, i have two sons, ages 12 and 10. okay, this is an important story, it is important to me. you can read it. >> okay, it is porimportant to too. a mammal has become extinct due to climate change. the brown rat, they live in austria's great barrier reef. the government announced the extension this week saying it is news to high sea levels and
- want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over 100,000 tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world like new york, from bus tours to breathtaking adventures. tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip monumental. read reviews, check hotel prices, book things to do, tripadvisor.
>> i am stephanie ruhle. i will be back here at 9:00 a.m. >> what's your favorite segment of the show? >> cow farts. >> stephanie wants to talk about cow farts. >> i want to talk about meghan markle didn't inviting us. >> how dare he? >> the first two people meghan and harry saw when they went through the gates through the castle. this young lady here and me. hey, she looked right at us. you know what katy said? >> you think she recognizes us. >> she was very into the news and 2016, i thought maybe she watched the metz. >> she just became the