tv The Last Word With Lawrence O Donnell MSNBC March 4, 2019 10:00pm-11:00pm PST
asking about the possibility of a pardon. just posted tonight by "the wall street journal." see you again tomorrow. that does it for us tonight. now it is time for "the last word" with lawrence o'donnell. >> once again, i'm learning my >> in the crossover, sorry. >> yes. no, i need to hear it and so if you need more time to expand on this "wall street journal" report, this is new ground. this idea that the pardon was being dangled in front of michael cohen. obviously, something happened to that because michael cohen has clearly given up on the pardon strategy. >> yeah, so michael cohen gets there and in his opening statements as i would not seek or accept a pardon from trump, that gave rise to these really interesting reports over the weekend that what he has was talk about behind closed doors at the intelligence committee is the prospect he was being dangled a pardon around the type the fbi and sdny was taken. this "wall street journal" story sort of casts that the other way around saying that cohen came looking for a pardon through his
former attorney steven ryan. i think a lot of, you know, all of this reporting will depend whether or not rudy giuliani is the source for the story. this is very hot territory in terms of potential legal jeopardy for the president. >> certainly is. thank you very much, rachel. >> thanks, lawrence. >> there is sometimes a method to donald trump's madness, the method and madness were on full display at the conservative political action conference. the president clearly had a mission on saturday and it was to teach his audience his followers the one word he really wants them to say when the mueller report comes out or when the house judiciary committee votes on articles of impeachment and that's a common profanity that you have never heard the president of a united states dropped into a major speech to an audience of thousands of
people and a tv audience of millions of people. it's a word that i can't say on tv because this industry considers that word beneath the dignity of an anchorman, an on passion played in the movies by will ferrell. we are going to show you the president saying that word at the end of this hour. it will be unedited. you'll hear him say it a couple times because he said it a couple times and i'll explain why i believe the president said that very deliberately on saturday and why i believe that specifically is the word that president trump wants to drive into the heads of his followers now and why this is not just another instance of a performer whose brand is outrageous. it was more than that. it was a choice by donald trump in the management of his relationship with his followers. here is a taste of the madness that was on display on saturday. >> you know, great friend of mine from new york he's a stone cold killer.
he's a brutal man. he's actually not even a good friend of mine because he would turn on me in two seconds. >> okay. that's new ground for a presidential speech. the speech rambled on for two hours so it had a lot of new ground for a presidential speech. >> you talk central casting, these guys, you can't -- it's incredible. they had a master sergeant there. i can take him right now, bring him to hollywood, make a military movie and he's the star of the movie. that happened once before, you know, that did happen once before. remember, they brought a man in, a sergeant, a drill sergeant to teach some actor how to be a drill sergeant. the drill sergeant was so incredible that he ended up starring in the movie and he should have gotten the academy
award, by the way but he didn't because hollywood december criminates against our people. you know the movie i'm talking about, right? was that movie? you know the movie. >> "full metal jacket" 1988 and for once and possibly the only passage in that speech, donald trump is right. that is the most accurate string of sentences that donald trump assembled in his speech on saturday. lee emery was a marine drill sergeant who stanley ended up casting as a drill sergeant in "full metal jacket." there has never been a better portrayal of a drill sergeant by an actor and lee ermy was not a trump supporter in 1988 because nobody was and he did get a much deserved golden globe notary public nomination but very tough field for best supporting actor that year because sean connery was in it and sean connery won the oscar for his part in the "untouchables" but on saturday,
sean connery did not deserve that oscar over an actor whose name donald trump couldn't remember because of some kind of liberal hollywood conspiracy. that is what donald trump and cpac have become. that's where their madness goes. congressman eric swalwell will join us tonight. we'll get his reaction to president trump's new defense offered on saturday. his new defense about his public attempt at collusion with russia during the presidential campaign. >> russia, if you're listening, i hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing. >> on saturday, donald trump mounted the joke defense. >> if you tell a joke, if you're sarcastic, if you're having fun with an audience and having fun with millions of people and 20,000 people in an arena and if
you say something like russia please, if you can, get hillary clinton's e-mails. please, russia, please. >> katy tur was on the scene and he did not use the joke defense. >> do you have any qualms about asking a foreign government russia, china, anybody to interfere to hack into a system of anybody's in this country? >> that's up to the president. let the president talk to them. >> no, no, you just told us a moment ago -- >> first of all -- >> you said the russians -- >> no respect. >> i welcome them to find the 30,000 -- >> they probably have them. i would like to have them
released. >> does that not give you pause. >> gives me no pause. >> no paws, no joke defense. "the washington post" counted 104 lies the president told in his speech on saturday and came close to a lie a minute in what was 122-minute speech. a piece by jane mayer published online today the making of the fox news white house. the article describes the relationship between fox news and donald trump and explains why the 104 lies the president told on saturday will never be exposed by fox news. one conservative commentator quoted will be among our first guest tonight. jennifer ruben. she told the new yorker that fox news has morphed into something that is not everyone news. it's a mouthpiece for the president repeating what the president says no matter how false or contradictory.
before the 2016 election, a foxnews.com reporter named dianna had proof that donald trump had an affair with stormy daniels and michael cohen was negotiating a proposed hush payment but quote the story didn't run. it keep being passed off from one editor to the next. at last heard from ken lacorte the head of the foxnews.com and told colleagues lacorte said good reporting but rupert wants donald trump to win so just let it go. jane mayor reports that trump said he has ranked the loyalty of many fox reporters on a scale of 1 to 10. brett bayer is a sixth, hannity a solid ten, steve the co-host of fox and friends so adoring trump givers him a 12 and jane mayor reports and who can argue
with the rankings, by the way? jane mayor reports a pair of fox news insiders and a source close to donald trump told her they believe then fox news chief roger ailes informed donald trump's campaign in advance about a debate question from megyn kelly at a fox news debate in 2015. >> you've called women you don't like fat bigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals. your twitter account -- >> only rosie o'donnell. >> joining us now, frank rich he's also an executive producer of hbo and jennifer ruben is with us opinion writer for "the washington post" and msnbc contributor. we have season to suspect the rosie o'donnell line, which is an ugly and vicious line was actually rehearsed by trump and ready to go because roger ailes had given him that question coming up in the debate. >> look, everything that trump
is guilty of, he's accused someone else of doing so he can accuse hillary of having all the questions when he had them. he accused, you know, barack obama playing golf all the time when he plays golf all the time and many worse sins than that. so it's par for the course. none of this really surprises me and certainly doesn't surprise me that murdoch would kill a piece that might hurt donald trump or i would add any republican candidate including when ail was around. i don't think fox news was ever a news channel. it's a state propaganda organ now but wasn't a news organization then. they had window dressing with a liberal co-host but a propaganda for murdoch and the republican party. >> jennifer ruben, this is an article in the new yorker about fox news that by the time we get to it and read it, it is telling us things that we know but. you know, i've known what you
said in the new yorker but i don't have the proof of it in the way that you do with your experience having dealt with fox news and never have stories about fox news spiking and killing the stormy daniels story even though the reporter had it at a crucial time. that's excellent reporting. let's make a note of that. that someone was doing excellent reporting that's someone higher up at fox news was saying no, we're not going to use. these specifics of roger ailes or spiking the story, that's all new information we never had before. >> right. the beauty of the reporting that jane has done is that it combines the things we do know and trump goes on sean hannity show for softball interviews, that he watches fox daily for hours on end. those are the sort of things that we already knew and combines it with specifics to show how you correctly said that relationship is and that they not only supply him with his information rather than having an administration expert, his military provide him with information, they do but that he will follow them so slavishly that when they make an error, he
will pick up on it, so if they put up a card on air that incorrectly states crime statistics, he will repeat that when they come up with a bogus story about white farmers lands being seized in south africa and being murdered, he will repeat this. it is a real question what is leading whom here. is it ails old operation that is leading trump around by the nose or leading them around by the nose. >> frank, to this expansion of the judiciary committee investigation of the president, this really now has a kind of shades of watergate going on. in watergate, there was the watergate committee doing this
kind of general investigation before there was ever a house judiciary committee having an impeachment investigation and considering around kills of impeachment. this is a special committee assembled to do that. here it is just the house judiciary committee doing the most expansive investigation possible which happens to be the same place where impeachment begins. doesn't this feel like the beginning of what can with basically the flick of a procedural switch in the committee become the i'm impeach process? >> i guess so. i don't believe there can be impeachment if you have loyal republicans in the senate where the trial would happen, i feel they won't convict him and it's important, all of that is true but i think it's important to remember that in the case of nixon, we never got to the
impeachment trial. the weight of the evidence and major republicans, establishment republicans did him in and, you know, he was in until he wasn't. after the watergate hearings, polls show that americans were sick of watergate. they felt they sort of agreed with nixon that enough already. so i feel the evidence is enormous. i think whether it actually leads to him being impeached, i find dubious. i don't think he'll be out because of an impeachment trial. >> might there be the possibility as evidence develops that it is so convertible and powerful that the committee ends up with basically what feels like no choice. if they don't take some kind of stance in articles of impeachment, they will have left a record forever yes, you
absolutely could engage in campaign finance crimes federal prosecutors in new york call a crime against the united states. you can do all of that and in the modern presidency, you will suffer no price. there will be no impeachment process. >> i tend to agree with frank that this is so volume there are so many avenues, this is going to go on for a year or more. the watergate hearings, went on for 14 months, which is about the time between now and the election. this is going to go on for a very long time and the purpose of this is to investigate and educate the american people. i don't think there is any amount of evidence out there that will convince enough republicans to remove him and as such, i don't think the democrats are going to bother frankly to impeach him because it will be seen as a vindication for him.
the game plan here is to expose all the things republicans have been covering up and let the american people in the i electoral process decide. maybe there will be a smoking gun and republicans will decide they had enough. >> thank you both for starting us off tonight. appreciate it. when we come back, we have breaking news from the wall street journal as rachel mentioned about pardon discussions between michael cohen's lawyers and president trump's lawyers. we have one of the reporters who just broke that story and will join us and eric swalwell requested documents from 81 individuals, companies and government entities tied to the widening investigation of president trump. he'll ask him if this is really the committee's beginning of an impeachment investigation and
later, mitch mcconnell has given up on trying to save president trump's emergency decoloration, in the senate. the democrats have enough votes in the senate to win the vote on the resolution to eliminate the president's decoloration, of emergency and at the end of this hour tonight, a special comment on why the president says things in front of cameras that even i cannot say here on television. breaking news, the wall street journal is saying michael cohen's attorney raised the severe little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur.
tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ready to treat differently with a pill? otezla. show more of you. ready to treatand relief from withsymptoms caused by feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin. over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. [ dog whimpering ] i'm off to college. i'm worried about my parents' retirement. don't worry. voya helps them to and through retirement... dealing with today's expenses ...while helping plan, invest and protect for the future. so they'll be okay? i think they'll be fine. voya. helping you to and through retirement.
i can customize each line for each family member? yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need and still save hundreds of dollars. do you guys sell, other dogs? now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. get $250 back when you pre-order a new samsung galaxy. click, call, or visit a store today.
breaking news, the wall street journal is saying michael cohen's attorney raised the pardon after a federal agent raided mr. cohen's properties in april according to people ma familiar, the president's lawyers including jay and rudy giuliani dismissed the idea of a pardon at the time but one of them left open the possibility that the president could grant mr. cohen one in the future they said. we're joined now but phone by one of the reporters who broke this story. an investigative reporter for the wall street journal. michael, what is your finding in terms of when the last contact might have been about pardons? >> well, this would have been, so the raid was in april and then this would have been in the couple of months after that because things started to erode with michael cohen and the president probably about mayish
and then i think in july is when he went on george stephanopoulos and said i'm going to protect my family and i'm -- they are the ones i'm loyal to. by that time, the discussions were obviously over. and -- go ahead. >> but why wouldn't michael cohen's view of protecting his family include getting a pardon from the president? >> well, i mean, what we're reporting is that he was largely rebuffed or there wasn't immediate commitment made in the conversations between his lawyer steven ryan and the president's lawyers that, you know, as you noted, the most possibility was held up by rudy giuliani who said we're not going to have any discussions right now about a pardon but maybe down the road if the president wants to do it, but that would have been way after cohen had to go to trial
and make decisions about whether he wanted to plead guilty. so that just wasn't what he was looking for. >> do you -- does your reporting find any sense of whether michael cohen gave up hopes for a pardon based on his own knowledge of donald trump and his interpretation of what he was hearing through his lawyers or whether michael cohen's lawyers in effect advised him to not basically play for the pardon? >> i don't know what the conversations between him and his lawyers were, but essentially he did -- that lawyer steven ryan after they reviewed the documents seized, cohen got a new lawyer, criminal lawyer to handle that case pres presumably, ryan would have conveyed to him that, you know, the president's lawyers were not offering any kind of a pardon and so cohen felt like he had to -- he felt like he was loyal to the president for a really long time and wanted something in return and but it wasn't forthcoming and that's when he turn against the president. >> were there -- in your judgment knowing what you know about the case at this stage, were there any magic words the president could have conveyed to michael cohen that would have held on to michael cohen's
loyalty to the president? >> that's hard to say. i mean, whether some kind of, you know, ambiguous potential promise could have been held out. the issue is really obstruction of justice and that's something that, you know, congress is looking at and michael cohen testified at the house oversight committee last week and now the house is requesting information about pardons, potential pardon discussions from various other people associated with cohen and mr. trump. so they are looking into that and not just with respect to cohen but paul manafort in terms of whether anyone dangled pardons which could potentially be obstruction of justice. >> michael, you teed it up for our next guest. michael with tonight's breaking news. thank you for joining us on this important story.
appreciate it. thank you. we're joined by eric swalwell of california. a member of the judiciary committee and intelligence committee in the house. congressman swalwell, your reaction to this "wall street journal" breaking news story, lawyer for cohen approached trump attorneys about pardon. >> good evening, lawrence. what i think is most striking is that they didn't shut it down if the story is true. we're going to get to the bottom of this. we have mr. cohen coming back on wednesday but, too, why can't donald trump just come out and say i'm not going to pardon paul manafort. i'm not going to pardon michael flynn or michael cohen? he won't do that because he is trying to do anything he can and not above doing anything to keep them loyal to him. michael cohen is testifying anyway.
he has no life jacket. he's got no cooperation agreement with the southern district of new york or mueller team and not getting a pardon for donald trump. i think that actually makes his testimony even more credible and if you believe what he's saying, it's very damming for the president and it gives us the responsibility to put back in place the rule of law in our country, which is a wrecking ball taken to it in the last two years. >> do you expect this "wall street journal" report will lead to a new series of questions for michael cohen the next time you speak to him? it's going to be at the intelligence committee behind closed doors. >> the issue of whether the president is offering pardons or whether there are discussions is something that we should definitely run to ground and explore not just with michael cohen because i think there are other witnesses who are similarly situated who the president is probably done this with and of course, showing that he has no loyalty to the pardon process when he gave sheriff joe arpaio without a background check. that's something we need to explore and make sure the american people know whether the president is corrupted and using this process in an inappropriate way.
>> congressman, you're one of the key players on two of the most important committees investigating the president now, also the judiciary committee where chairman nadler has sent out 81 requests for documents from individuals. >> that's it? >> companies. yeah. only 81. government entities, individuals, companies. this really looks like the groundwork for what could be an impeachment investigation held in exactly the same committee. >> yeah, well, 81 sounds like a lot if compared to zero. and zero is what we had over the last two years. and zero was what the american people was fed up with because there was zero accountability on all of these abuses of power. yes, we're looking at obstruction of justice. we're looking at abuse of power by the president and looking at public corruption and we have reason to look because of the way the president is cashing in
on access to the oval office and the way he's allowing foreign entities to stay in his hotel across the street from the white house and the way he attacks the free press and attacks the rule of law and as long as we can demonstrate to the american people we're interested in making sure the rule of law stands because if you don't have it, you lose a free press. as long as we can a articulate that, they will be with us and we'll keep looking. >> presumably, these document requests could obviously lead to more document requests and more requests for witness testimony. >> yeah, and certainly, you know, this is just the beginning but these are individuals who in what little we learn from the intelligence committee investigation, what little we learned in the minority in the last two years and a lot from free press reporting show there may be corruption. his businesses and inauguration and campaign may not have operated above board as we expect. we have very good reasons to
look and again, we'll do this not with donald trump justice but with the rule of law guiding us every step along the way. >> congressman, we heard a new defense from the president this weekend to the charge that he openly asked for russia's help during the campaign asking russia to find hillary clinton's e-mails and make them public. we just showed the video of katy tur at the time asking the president about that and he stood by it and very serious. his defense is that that was all a joke. what do you make of that defense? >> there are a lot of people who can make jokes but donald trump is not one of them. this is a guy who literally tweets on sunday morning at "saturday night live" and calls them fake news. second, if it was a joke, russia wasn't joking because they followed his instructions and kept hacking. and third, i would ask the president, were you joking when you told lester hold that you
fired james comey to get rid of the russia investigation? were you joking when you said i love wikileaks as they continue to release hacked and stolen e-mails and joking when you sided with vladimir putin over the u.s. intelligence committee? donald trump may be a joke but he was not joking when he did all of those. >> congressman eric swalwell, thank you for joining us. >> my pleasure. coming up, mitch healthcare reform drk mitch mcconnell had given up and the president said things in public this weekend that we can't say on television. you will hear him say it. he will not be bleeped. there is a very important point to make about what the president was doing on saturday in trying to lower the public standards for the presidency. public standards for the
just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. so even when she grows up, she'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only with expedia.
select hotels to your existing trip. driven each day to pursue bioplife-changing cures...ers. in a country built on fostering innovation. here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... and a new therapy that gives the blind a working gene so they can see again. because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that.
the one with the designer dog collar.(sashimi) psst. hey, you! wondering how i upgraded to this sweet pad? a 1,200-square-foot bathroom, and my very own spa. all i had to do was give my human "the look". with wells fargo's 3% down payment on a fixed-rate loan and a simpler online application, getting into my dream home was easier than ever. get your human to visit wellsfargo.com/woof. what would she do without me?
president trump is going to lose. there are enough votes in the united states senate so end president trump's decoloration, of emergency to build a border wall. the resolution has already passed the house of representatives and awaiting a vote in the senate. rand paul announced that he would vote with the democrats against the president's unconstitutional use of an emergency decoloration, to build a wall, rand paul brings the declared votes against the president in the senate to 51. but there could be many more republican votes against the president by the time the senate votes. >> i do believe that there is at
least ten republican no votes. we'll see. possibly more. my reason for speaking out now is i think we need to think this through before we get too far down the road. >> here is what mitch mcconnell said about the resolution today. >> i think what is clear is there will be enough votes to pass the resolution of disapproval which will then be vetoed by the president and in all likelihood, the veto will be upheld in the house. >> we're lucky to be joined by sha a former senate staffer to worked a counsel to will be boert and the last great senate, and sam stein has been covering it in washington if many years and yet to write a book about the united states senate. he's the politics editor of "the daily beast" and political analyst. we've never seen an emergency decoloration, and therefore we'll see a vote in the senate that we haven't seen before. unless you can find one
somewhere in your history of the senate that compares to this but here we have mitch mcconnell publicly acknowledging the president will lose this vote. >> we do, lawrence. it is important that a number of republican senators and not just a small number could potentially vote against the president on this. i mean, it's wonderful when susan collins and lisa and rand paul step forward but i'm looking at the many other senators who have expressed their view that the president is misusing the emergency power. they should put their vote to work and not just express concerns. >> sam stein, it seems as though many of these republicans were maybe hoping that a federal court would step in and issue an injection quickly that could
make their vote a little bit more academic on this but it looks like they will have to face a real decision on this. >> yeah, i think for a certain number of them, they actually would welcome this decision. the outcome is well-known. there won't be two-thirds to over ride the veto so this will be decided in the courts and so for a few senators who are in tough spots in the 2020 cycle, this is a way to both show your independence from president trump, come out as not incredibly conservative on immigration policy and also strike a tone of a sort of a strict constitutional conservative so for corey gardener up for a very tough reelection fight in colorado with a fairly descent hispanic voting block, this might be a welcome sign that you get to register disapproval with this emergency decoloration. >> let's listen to what the president said on saturday. >> i watch good people, friends
of mine were very concerned with setting president. that's precedent, not president. the democrats will do whatever they do if they get into power and won't have a damn thing to do with whether or not we approve our national emergency. >> and there is no record of the democrats doing anything like this in the united states senate and i for one am not convinced that the senate won't turn out actually a veto proof majority. the republican vote on this could surprise people. >> well, i'm hoping that, lawrence, i mean, frankly, my fear for a long time has been the diminished senate weakening over a long period and particularly in the last decade would not be strong enough to
stand up to a potentially over reaching and now dangerous president. this is a pretty good test case right now because the constitutional issues are clear but frankly, this is a day at the beach compared to what it might becoming later in the year when the senate has to really consider the full nature of the president's conduct. >> and sam, that's a good point that here we are on something that is a very clear constitutional issue and if we ever got to the point where something was being reported from the house in terms of articles of impeachment, that is another level of the game that these senators are not everyone, i don't think they are even beginning to contemplate that. >> no, and i would argue that in fact by the smaller accusation the senate gave donald trump, they have actually made it harder to stick up to him on the
bigger stuff should impeachment come. you see it all the time so-called institutionalest like mitch mcconnell, judicial nominations process. i remember we had a government shutdown for 35 days because mcconnell wouldn't bring a bill his members agreed to to the floor again. these are acts of the senate and congress as a whole. it's difficult to see them standing up to trump on huge matters that involve the future of his presidency when they can't even stand up to him on matters of keeping the government open for a bill they themselves support. >> i for one am very surprised. i've been surprised for two years at mitch mcconnell's conduct because during the presidential campaign, i didn't think donald trump would win but would say if he did become president, he would discover paul ryan and mitch mcconnell have strong powers over him but mitch mcconnell refused to ever use those powers and we're seeing not just an institutional
collapse but up close, we're seeing an actual personal collapse of dignity for mitch mcconnell and a collapse of the male ego in which, you know, you and i saw chairman and majority leaders and congressional leaders wanting and somewhat ego way to show their powers over a president. >> well, lawrence, i don't fully agree with that in the sense that while people say that mitch mcconnell is enabling donald trump, i think mitch mcconnell has also used donald trump when it suited his purposes. donald trump didn't run on repealing the affordable care act. that was something mitch mcconnell wanted to do. so it has gone both ways and i think that mcconnell has been enabling trump but also been using him when it's been appropriate. he clearly doesn't like the current situation. mcconnell doesn't believe in government shutdowns and he doesn't believe in this national emergency but he still will not stand up and cast a vote against it.
>> ira has much more senate history in his head than i ever will and sam stein. appreciate it. >> thank you. when we come back, the dangerous case of donald trump was on public display at the conservative political action conference and he very deliberately took his language to a new outrageous level. naysayer said no one would subscribe to a car the way they subscribe to movies. we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪
need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites - even our competitors - so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. kayak. search one and done. what do you look for i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪ conventional wisdom says you can't make a 400 horsepower sedan, that's also environmentally conscious. we don't follow conventional wisdom. ♪ ♪
all of you. how you live, what you love. that's what inspired us to create america's most advanced internet. internet that puts you in charge. that protects what's important. it handles everything, and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi, this is xfi. simple. easy. awesome. xfinity, the future of awesome.
the dangerous case of donald trump was once again on public display at the conservative conference. the dangerous case of donald trump is a best selling book in which 37 psychiatrists and mental health experts assess the president of the united states. those 37 mental health professionals began taking notes on saturday before donald trump opened his mouth at cpac. >> what was that hug about? this book explaining it. this book catalogs trump's
serious mental impairments that are untreated and most likely not for treatment and explains what he did. "the washington post" recorded 104 lies the president told on the stage and that is an invaluable accounting of dishonesty of the speech but this book and plains why donald trump can lie to his followers so easily. it includes four characteristics of the followers of leaders who have lied their way to admiration by the followers. two, the followers blindly believe the leader's statements. three, the followers unconditionally compile with the leader's directives for action and four, the followers give the leader unqualified emotion for support. a professor of psychiatry, he wrote the cia profile in this book. he writes, trump has a mirror hungry leader personality which feeds on the adoration of his followers.
>> there is so much love in this room, it's easy to talk. there is love in this room. talk your heart out. it's easy. [ cheers ] >> according to the psychiatrist that is studying donald trump and all the public evidence we've seen, the place donald trump goes for love is the cpac stage and the trump rally stages where he stands out there alone surrounded by thousands of strangers who he believes loves him and do indeed appear to love him and donald trump has never suggested that he looks for love anywhere else, listen to his description of his new year's eve. >> so i stayed in the white house. and i'll tell you what, i told my wife go to florida. enjoy your christmas. i stayed for thanksgiving. i said -- i mean, i was in the white house for a long time, months. months.
i had cabin fever in the white house. but if you got to have cabin fever, that's the place to do it. but i was there, i don't know, for a number of months through christmas, i spent my new years all by myself. don't cry. >> in a two-hour speech, donald trump talked about his wife and love but never in the same sentence. at no point in his presidency or before his presidency have we ever seen donald trump hug his wife the way he hugged the american flag on that stage on saturday and he hugged that flag not because he loves the flag but because he loves his audience's reaction to him pretending to love the flag. donald trump has changed his supporters at cpac and literally changed what they think and how they think and has done that by wearing down their resistance of what he thinks and says and most importantly, he's eliminated
their resistance to what they used to think was think was un-presidential. after this break we're going to show you donald trump's most un-presidential language at cpac. it will be unedited. you will hear him say a word i'm not allowed to say on tv. it was a word donald trump's followers didn't think he should use on tv publicly.
you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. you can barely feel. i but i can tell you i 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 you want to know why people you have to start by asking... could listening to audible help you find the secret to a stronger relationship? sometimes it doesn't take anything at all for us... just say "alexa, give me my free audible book," and your first pick is on us. if you feel like you spend too much time in the bathroom with recurring constipation and belly pain talk to your doctor and say yesss! to linzess. ♪ ♪ yesss! linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess can help relieve your belly pain and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. linzess is not a laxative. it works differently to help you get ahead of your recurring constipation and belly pain. do not give linzess to children less than 6,
and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18, it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach-area pain, and swelling. so say yesss! to help for recurring constipation. yesss! to help for belly pain. talk to your doctor and say yesss! linzess.
20th and 21st century. that was donald trump insulting the intelligence of his cpac odd audience and they loved it. and donald trump has won. stupidity reigns at cpac now and has every day of the trump era. the very first keynote speaker at had very first conservative political action conference in 1974 was ronald reagan, and they loved him and they loved the reagan presidency. ronald reagan was a typical anti-tariff republican on his era and he began the groundwork of what became the north american free-trade agreement, work continued by george h.w. bush and completed by bill clinton. cpac used to be opposed to tariffs. cpac used to understand only americans pay american tariffs. the trump tariffs are not paid in foreign countries by foreign countries. the trump tariffs are paid in america by american consumers. the trump tariffs are taxes,
something that cpac has always opposed. donald trump's tariffs are increases, in effect, in sales taxes on products sold in america. cpac used to oppose that vehemently. >> and everyone said, oh, it's a tax on our -- it's not really. >> yes, donald trump wouldn't dare finish that sentence. you know everyone said, oh, it's a tax on our -- and then he stopped. our what? our people, our consumers. that's who's paying the trump tax in the form of trump's tariffs. president trump is so confident in the stupidity of his cpac audience that he said this. >> you know i'm building the wall, we're finishing the wall. we've got a lot of money. >> everyone who can read facts knows that donald trump is not building the wall. there will never be a trump wall, but donald trump can still
reduce a cpac audience to mindless chanters about building a wall that will never be built because he has worn them down. he has brainwashed an audience of followers eager to be brainwashed. since world war ii psychiatrists and social psychiatrists have been intently studying the relationship of leaders like donald trump and their followers. in the dangerous case of donald trump, the book that i mentioned former cia psychiatrist writes the relationship between trump and his hard line followers represents a karsmatic leader-follower relationship wrab aspects of the leader's psychology unlock like a key aspects like his follower's psychology. and having unlocked them like a key, donald trump is now putting in their minds the words he wants them to say when michael cohen publicly testifies about donald trump itcoming crimes or when the mueller report comes out, or the democratic committee continues to pileup incriminating evidence against the president trump. there is one word that donald trump needs cpac and his followers throughout the country
to say at all times, and he said it to them on saturday. he said after the republicans lost the house of representatives in the last election the new democratic chairman of the house who have been there a long time are all of a sudden trying to take him out. and here are the exact words that the president used in saying that. >> now we have people that lost, and unfortunately, you put the wrong people in a couple of positions, and they leave people for a long time that shouldn't be there. and all of a sudden they're trying to take you out with bullshit, okay. >> that's the word donald trump wants people to scream the day the mueller report comes out. and yes, that audience -- in
that audience are some of the people who were outraged that president obama wore a light colored summer suit in the summer because it was for them a grotesque departure from what they believed was a presidential norm. now, they did seem to forget that ronald reagan wore the same kind of suit in the summer. trump followers used to be a very harsh border patrol protecting what they believed was presidential decorum before donald trump came along. they were eagerly ready to attack a democratic president for using un-presidential language or wearing the wrong colored suit. and now? they are ready to learn a new chant. a new one word chant that donald trump began teaching them at cpac. donald trump is getting them ready to go with that one word that i can't say on tv because it is beneath the dignity of an anchorman, an occupation played in the movies by will farrell.
donald trump has found a place below that in his speech and every time he has said and done something previously offensive to them if someone else had said it. they have followed donald trump to that new low. those followers of donald trump are lost. believing things they didn't use to believe. approving of things they didn't use to approve of. unless the impeachment process catches up with donald trump, trump followers will remain lost in trumpism until a majority of americans who have always opposed donald trump and trumpism turn out in full strength in the next election and do an intervention for trump followers that removes donald trump from office.
and breaks their addiction to trumpism. that is tonight's "last word." "the 11th hour" with brian williams starts now. williams starts now. tonight, the most significant move yet since democrats took over the house. we have details of the sweeping congressional investigation into the people around donald trump and seemingly all things related to trump. plus seems like we just said this, but once again the week before us could be consequential. with a lot of moving parts to watch that could determine the fate of some well-known names. and we've narrowed down what you need to see from the saturday morning speech that clocked in at over two hours and left us a lot of material to choose from, some of it not suitable for children who might still be awake as "the 11th hour" gets under way on a monday night.