Skip to main content

tv   The Beat With Ari Melber  MSNBC  March 11, 2019 3:00pm-4:00pm PDT

3:00 pm
that is all for tonight. we will be back tomorrow with more "mtp daily." "the beat with ari melber" start s right now. a lot of stories on "the beat" tonight. nancy pelosi making the news, declaring her standard tonight for what it would take to impeach president trump. she says, quote, this is news. i'm going to be joined live by one of her top lieutenants on that unfolding story from the hill. later, an insider speaks out on the stormy daniels hush money payments and corroborating parts of michael cohen's allegations against trump. also, more news on the campaign from elizabeth warren, including some of the news she
3:01 pm
broke right here on this show on friday. but we begin with bob mueller grinding down two former trump aides. this is a pivotal week in the mueller probe. you've got one federal judge who will issue rulings that will define the fate and possibly the freedom of both roger stone and paul manafort, two former trump aides who've also worked together for decades. and it's through their work on behalf of donald trump that both men are now in position. they both await rulings from amy berman jackson. she is known as a pretty tough federal judge. she is the one who first cracked down on manafort, putting him in jail obviously before his trial. obviously a tougher tack than the other federal judge that gave him a lenient sentence late last week for separate crimes. also, at any moment, roger stone's former lawyers will formally submit their argument to her, to judge jackson, basically trying to convince her that roger stone didn't really violate her gag order. he is something of an instagram
3:02 pm
band did, as you may know, and he had the recent posts which appeared to violate the gag order. she could jail him for that, also this week. as soon as that filing comes in, i can tell you we'll report it out for you. we'll tell you what it means. there are also developments kicking up in the mueller probe this week. wednesday manafort receives that sentence in the d.c. case that could be up to ten separate years in prison. then you have mueller and michael flynn's lawyers providing an update that could determine whether those people are ready for sentencing. then comes the stone day thursday with judge jackson. friday then we'll also get an update over whether manafort's deputy rick gates can be sentenced or whether mueller needs more time with him as well. so that's a lot of action right inside the courtroom. then outside of it, you have president trump reportedly privately hailing manafort for not being a rat or a coward and likening him to a, quote, political prisoner.
3:03 pm
on all of the legalities, i want to begin with two former federal prosecutors, glen kirshner and paul henderson. good evening, jeff. >> good evening. thanks for having us. >> glen, what do you see is important in this big week? >> you know, i'm actually looking forward to the manafort sentencing, because i think judge ellis is really unjust and unjustifiable sentence of manafort so far below the guidelines with really no justification for it. does harm not only to sort of the mueller probe, but really to our criminal justice system. you know, there are a couple of reasons why a judge can depart downward, that is go below what is supposed to be the bottom of the potential sentence for manafort of 19 1/2 years. and the judge actually announced that neither of those things applied. he didn't accept responsibility for his crimes and he didn't substantially assist the government in other
3:04 pm
investigations. in fact, we know judge jackson found he lied to the mueller prosecutors on, among other things, one of the central issues to the mueller probe. so for them to have judge ellis announce that he's going from 19 1/2 down to just 3 years and leonardo months i think really does damage in so many ways to the system. i think judge jackson, who is strong, independent, smart, no nonsense and law and order is going to get the manafort sentence right. and for this former career prosecutor, those things still matter. >> so, paul, i wonder if you could handicap both of these big rulings this week. she is in the center of it. and roger stone's arguments, which we're going report in detail as soon as we get them, they may be a very simple version of outkast, i'm sorry miss jackson, admit responsibility and hope you don't get jailed. what does manafort see happening in both of the proceedings?
3:05 pm
>> i think the hammer is going to fall and it's going fall very severely on jackson. and all of the other reports are only going to make that sentence even worse for him. i think the real issue here, and what a lot of folks have been talking about is whether or not these sentences are going to be concurrent or consecutive. and here these are separate crimes. i think it's clear that this judge is moving in the direction that the sentences are not going to be concurrent. >> you're talking with manafort whether she takes the four that he's got in this other lenient case and adds to that rather than combining? >> that's exactly what it means. is she going to let them run simply or going to run concurrently. i think she is going to let them separately because of all of the disparities we've seen this case and the huge disparity we've seen in the first case with ellis. this is before we even start talking about the huge economic and race disparities that we see in federal sentencing.
3:06 pm
but in this case in particular that is so far below the standard and the guideline that we've seen, i think jackson after this 17 months of dealing with this case and the 500 motions that have been filed back and forth, in addition to breaking his plea deal and the bad behavior both from manafort and his representatives, now is the time to address all of those transgressions in sentencing. all of those are aggravating factors. >> do you expect judge jackson to hit manafort for what happened elsewhere or is she going to stay laser focused on these charges? >> i think she is going to stay laser focused in these charges, but she has to take into account and contemplate some of the bigger picture in terms of what's happening with the mueller probe and what's happening with his co-conspirators because that's one of the charges that he's plead to is here the obstruction of justice and also the conspiracy against the united states. each of those charges he's got ten years each for those charges. so even if she blends them
3:07 pm
together and just gives him the ten years when he is facing actually two decades, i think he is likely to look at a sentence of something like 14 years. but even if she rolls them in and contemplates the mitigating factors which i don't think she is likely to do because of his behavior in this case, i still think it's going to be around 14 years and not the 10 or something lower. >> and, glenn, one of the reasons that the country has been having a big debate over criminal justice inequity since thursday night is a good thing that exposes a bad thing. the bad thing according to many people is the very celebrate important inequities that were revealed in judge ellis' approach. the good thing is that we do have transparent federal courts which means in our democracy, in our rule of law, the citizenry learns in realtime not only the result, but judges have to sit there and explain themselves, and that that can have a positive factor here that can be part of the process of accountability. i mention that looking forward to judge jackson because although she has not been criticized the way judge ellis
3:08 pm
has, that same transparency put her on record as saying no more do-overs for mr. stone. and we all know that now. i wonder how you think that factors in. i'm going read you from what she told roger stone the last time over the gag order. i gave you a second chance. this isn't baseball. you don't get a third chance. do you think her saying that on the record and the nation knowing it really raises the pressure on her to have meaningful punishment for him now? >> that's a great question, ari, because she did put herself sort of in a bit of a box by saying you don't get a third chance. but let me tell you, i think she is going to see stone's transgression here as a bit of a foul tip. i have a feeling she is not yet ready to, as we say in d.c., step 'em back, which is basically take him into custody and detain him pending trial. we saw the post where he said who framed roger stone, which does seem to violate the
3:09 pm
modified gag order that she handed down last time. we did hear that i guess a rerelease of a book is in progress. i just don't know that she's going to see this as enough of a direct transgression of her modified gag order. >> so let me ask you. isn't this the issue with roger is that he parses and petty fogs his way up to the boundary? i think you guys have both dealt with cases where people have done less and already been hit with more. >> absolutely. >> absolutely. >> and he does it for the attention. i think he is getting exactly what he wants. but i have a feeling she is going to treat him like the teenager that he's behaving like. she is going to take his phone. she is going to ban him from social media. she is going to send him to his room, perhaps put him on home detention with electronic monitoring via a gps ankle bracelet, and i think she is going to call this one a foul tip and give him one more chance, and then if he violates,
3:10 pm
step him back. i could be wrong. she no nonsense. she may say you know what? i've already had enough with you. >> stay with the me. i'm going to bring in to our conversation shelby holiday who is not a reporter but sure spends a lot of time with reporters on the story. >> which is fun. i enjoy it. >> if you want to be tough on mr. stone, he's clearly gone up to the line over and over. if you want to be benign about it, you say he didn't go give a speech or do something we would call the traditional violation. he keeps using insta stories as a way to tiptoe around and mess with it. >> he likes to play with fire. when you talk to legal experts, you say this may not be blatantly over the line but he sure as heck is walking very close to it. that's his personality. i think what's to interesting about this week is judge jackson will sentence paul manafort and send a signal to roger stone. that doesn't have to be her intention, but whatever comes of that sentencing will be watched
3:11 pm
very closely by roger stone because he's coming up to the pipeline next. i think with the four years that manafort got last week, a lot of people were frustrated. a lot of mueller watchers and legal experts were frustrated that that sends a signal to others wrapped up in the 3450u8er probe that maybe you don't have to cooperate. maybe you can lie the prosecutors. maybe you can break the terms of your bail, do all of these bad things and still kind of get off the hook. now four years is not nothing. that is a significant jail sentence. >> right. >> what he was facing -- >> it's a slice. it's a tiny slice based on what he did and what he was up for. >> right. >> and then you have all of this rumor mongering about whether his lawyer emphasizing no collusion other than legal denials is an appeal for a pardon. here is the white house responding again to all of these rumors today. >> paul manafort goes for the second half of his sentencing this week. why haven't the president ruled out a pardon for paul manafort? >> the president has made his
3:12 pm
position on that clear, and he'll make a decision when he is ready. >> this is a fascinating -- that was a fascinating point that sarah huckabee sanders made, because even prosecutors note they'd thought paul manafort might be angling for a pardon and therefore refusing to cooperate fully. the president has been very noncommittal on this issue, which makes a lot of people think he will issue a pardon, and some of president trump's supporters want to issue a pardon, but i just think you have to step back and look at the huge range of crimes paul manafort has either pleaded guilty to or been convicted of, and you also have to look at an america first president could potentially pardon someone who conspired against the united states and has yet to even apologize to americans for that. i think that's a big political calculation if the president's really thinking about a pardon, whether or not it's worth it, whether or not it's worth spending that political capital remains to be seen. >> glenn, on that point? >> yeah, you know, this is man who stole from the united states by failing to pay his taxes,
3:13 pm
engaged in bank fraud, engaged in conspiracy against the united states by illegally lobbying, and he committed witness tampering. he tried to urge witnesses to lie so he is disrespectful of the country. he is disrespectful of the american people, handy is disrespectful of the criminal justice system. for the president to come out and say he is not a rat, he is not a coward, he is a brave man, that's the exact opposite of the message that a law-abiding president would be sending. >> and paul, take a listen to how paul manafort spoke about all of this back in the better days when he and roger were toasting each other for their proximity to donald trump. >> roger recommend you for the job? >> roger was one of the two or three people who strongly recommended me, yes. even after roger stopped being the principle political adviser to president trump, he continued to be an important political adviser and is to this day. >> take it all together for us, paul. you see these individuals, one a convicted felon waiting for a
3:14 pm
potential sentence of up to ten more years. the other literally pleading for his liberty before he goes to trial. how does this compare to other legal cases you've been involved in when you see people flying so high, now even on a best case scenario, even the quote/unquote lenient sentence facing real tough times? >> i think that leniency is out the window. and when you hear these please that they're making now to stay out of custody, i think it's going to fall on deaf ears. i think those statements that we heard are all going to come back and bite them. they're all going to be used as statements in aggravation when they're continue plight all of the sentences. i can already anticipate the arguments that prosecutors are going to be making just to get the sentence, and i believe that this sentence is going to be much more harsh than the first sentence with ellis, and i think we're going to see some serious time, and it's not going to matter that this has been a high-flying political insider. what's going to matter is his behavior throughout this trial, his behavior with the plea
3:15 pm
bargaining, his behavior with the association with all of these other folks around him that have engaged in all of this terrible behavior. all of that adds to more years. all of that adds to a not considering a mitigating factor to keep someone or run a sentence that's going to be concurrent. what's going to result here is a heavy stack of sentences and a heavy stack of years i believe for manafort. and we're going see that in a matter of days. my guess is 14 years or more for these charges. and you -- maybe we will see a change in attitude. i will say that i think that's really important that we have not heard an apology. we have not heard manafort come forward and say that he is sorry, that he regrets his crimes that he's committed, his crimes that he has plead to. all of that i think puts the judge in a situation where she's going to show him. >> right. >> that she is in charge.
3:16 pm
>> right. >> she has not appreciated his behavior. >> right. >> he has played gaimt games with her. so that's what is going to happen. >> paul henderson, glenn kirshner and shelby holiday, thank you. coming up, laying down a new marker on how and when the house would ever impeach donald trump. live on that big story later. and later from the hush money scandal, breaking his silence talking about cohen and the motivation, the "access hollywood" tape. plus, some big news from the 2020 presidential race after our 30 rock interview right here with senator elizabeth warren. more on the fourth of july and follow-up from that. and then one of the most creative minds behind curb and sign field. all of that and more. you're watching "the beat" on nbc. this is your invitation to a higher standard of luxury.
3:17 pm
this is the invitation to lexus sales event. lease the 2019 es 350 for $379 a month for 36 months. now thru march 31st. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? most pills don't finish the job because they don't relieve nasal congestion. flonase sensimist is different. it relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. it's more complete allergy relief. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist helps block six key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. and six is greater than one. flonase sensimist.
3:18 pm
when your flight gets in late, it's never too early for coffee. oh no no no. your new boss seems cool, but she might not be sweatpants cool. who is that ready this early? it's only 7 am. somebody help me. close call. not quite ready to face the day? that's why we're here with free hot breakfast and a warm welcome. book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. hampton by hilton. i that's the retirement plan.e, book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. with my annuity, i know there is a guarantee. it's for my family, its for my self, its for my future. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retire your risk dot org. my name is austin, i am a two-time brain cancer conqueror. there are some days when i have my, my downs and then i have to rely on my mom to come pick me up from work. we need to be connected on a regular basis. sometimes i get hundreds of texts from her and i'm like stop.
3:19 pm
i owe everything to her, she's my world. i love you mom. i love you too. (vo) there for you when it matters most. unlimited on the best network now comes with apple music on us. get a free galaxy s10e when you buy the new galaxy s10. only on verizon. i found a companyeans to who believes in me.rt. they look out for me. and they help me grow my career. at comcast it's my job to constantly monitor our network,
3:20 pm
prevent problems, and to help provide the most reliable service possible. my name is tanya, i work at the network operations center for comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome. breaking news tonight. speaker nancy pelosi is declaring something of a new standard on the record for what it would take to impeach president trump. in a brand-new interview with "the washington post" magazine, speaker pelosi says that it's just not worth it to pursue impeachment at this time and says in order to pursue it, she would need compelling evidence and a bipartisan process. she also prefaced her remarks by saying this is news, suggesting for whatever reason wants to put a marker down tonight. and here is one other reason why. politically, as you may have heard, there are growing calls from her own caucus, from her own democratic member saying maybe it is time to consider
3:21 pm
impeachment. >> i rise today, mr. speaker, to call for the impeachment of the president of the united states of america. >> i believe that we have everything that it needs to basically impeach him. >> yeah. >> i believe that. >> bullies don't win, and i said baby, they don't. because we're going go in there and we're going impeach the [ bleep ]. >> i'm now joined by a member of speaker pelosi's leadership team from the house democratic caucus, as well as a member of the judiciary committee, relevant for all these reasons. congressman hakeem jeffries, thanks for joining me tonight. >> good to be with you, ari. >> the bottom line, the speaker trying to make news here and raise the bar and thus the expectations on what it would take to impeach president trump? >> i think what the speaker is doing is drawing a clear delineation in terms of what the house democratic caucus is all about. we didn't run a campaign last
3:22 pm
year and seize control of the house of representatives based on a desire to impeach the president. we ran a campaign on the for the people agenda indicating we were going to focus on drive do you think the high costs of life-saving prescription drugs, increase pay for every day americas, enact a infrastructure plan and clean up corruption and bring our democracy to life. that's what we ran on. that's what the speaker appropriately wants to keep our focus on as we move forward. >> that makes sense. i'm going push you on it, though. i think everything you said is about supporting basically the policy agenda to try to improve working people's lives across america. no doubt there is a record on that. but wouldn't you agree with me, real talk, that the majority of people in your district, the majority of democratic voters already think that donald trump has abused his power, and they were expecting, at least waiting until mueller issues his findings to say whether or not there would be potential impeachment proceedings? >> that's correct.
3:23 pm
i don't think anything the speaker said is inconsistent with that notion that we're going to take a wait and see approach as it relates to the investigation being conducted by bob mueller, as well as the investigation being conducted by the southern district of new york. at the end of the day, impeachment is the ultimate political death penalty. it was leincluded in the consti for extraordinary circumstances. as the speaker pointed out, we should only proceed absent a compelling finding that allows us to make an absolute determination to go down this road. >> congressman, she didn't just refer to the evidence which is what you're calling wait and see. she said as part of the standard this would have to be, quote/unquote, bipartisan. and you know a lot of people look at the conduct of the republicans in the trump era, and they say why would anyone with subpoena power running the house wait on them to make their own independent judgment about what mueller may or may not find? >> well two, things. we're going continue our
3:24 pm
aggressive oversight function as it relates to being a check and balance on an out-of-control executive branch that is our responsibility. with respect to impeachment, as you know, listen, the house fundamentally is the grand jury. the senate is the ultimate jury. >> uh-huh. >> impeachment is like an indictment, and we can indict in the house of representatives if the evidence is compelling enough to move forward. but the ultimate objective presumably of the people who believe appropriately that donald trump has presided over chaos, crisis, confusion, and a culture of corruption is to remove him. and what the speaker has made clear is to get to removal, you will need at least 20 republican senators in the other house of congress. that's reality. >> you're speaking to an intricacy that you may know of because you deal with her daily that wasn't quite in her statement, which is making waves tonight. are you saying that she's basically laying out a position that she's not going to go newt
3:25 pm
and go in with a battle plan that is on a partisan basis in the house without a longer term strategy of what it looks like in the senate, and you would have the build either through the events, the evidence whatever is uncovered about the president, you have to build the support for that being a possibility in the senate, otherwise it's not worth it to get it started at all? >> well, i haven't had an opportunity to speak that directly with speaker pelosi about the context of those remarks but i can interpret them. >> i've heard you guys are tight. that's what i heard. i heard you guys talking about them. >> we're all down with ndp. but attend of the day, i do know that chairman jerry nadler, speaker pelosi on other occasions, myself and other members of the house democratic leadership have made the observation that there is a distinction between impeachment and removal, and that in order for us to proceed, ultimately, if there is a conclusion that this president has presided over
3:26 pm
a cult of criminality and corruption is totally out of control so that the ultimate political death penalty is merited, you have to do it in a bipartisan way if you're going get to removal. we can indict in the house of representatives, but in order to convict, it has to be done with democrats and republicans and the full support of the american people. i agree with speaker pelosi that that is the reasonable way to proceed. >> very interesting, because this is making waves, and she's obviously speaking to a constituency that's got a whole bunch of different views on, again, on what you call the documented corruption of this particular president. congressman hakeem jeffries from leadership, thanks for joining me tonight. >> thank you, ari. >> appreciate it, sir. up ahead, aoc making waves of her own at the south by southwest conference talking about liberals and moderates. but first, the lawyer who stuck on stormy daniels' hush money deal, who was all involved in it, who wasn't speaking, well, he is breaking his silence. we have more on that when we back in 30. we back in 30 ♪ do you love me? ♪ i'm in the groove
3:27 pm
♪ now do you love me? ♪ do you love me now that i can dance? ♪ applebee's 3 course meal. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. introducing zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity, those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win, saved by zero ♪ here is the headline. it was political. that is what the former lawyer for stormy daniels and karen mcdougle is saying about these hush money payments that he originally negotiated. you may remember the name. keith davidson was the lawyer before michake michael avenatti says it was the release of the new infamous "access hollywood" tape that changed everything. >> the "access hollywood" tape was the motivating factor in
3:28 pm
this case actually resolving. it defeats the argument that this was done for purely personal reason and that this was in fact done for political reasons because after the "access hollywood" tape, that something like this could be the straw that broke the camel's back. >> you might say of course it was political or who cares, but this all matters now because it goes back to the crime that michael cohen confessed to. donald trump continues to mount a defense claiming that those payments were personal and not political, meaning you wouldn't get in trouble with campaign law. now cohen's going to jail because he plead guilty to, yes, a campaign finance violation, and this man who was on the other side of the table with cohen, davidson, isn't in the clear either. congress wants to hear from him. he is now on that now famous list of 81 people that the house judiciary committee is investigating. he is also facing separate allegations that he originally colluded against his own clients with cohen. that's a claim he denies. we've covered it on the show.
3:29 pm
but in this new interview, he is dishing on how friendly he and cohen were. davidson says cohen confided in him about being upset that he didn't even get, wait for it, a role in the white house, which of course is also interesting because whatever everyone thinks of michael cohen, this has come up in what everyone thinks about being 100% truthful about. >> he confided in me that he was just beside himself, and in his words, he said can you [ bleep ] even believe it. after everything i've done, he's not taking me to washington. >> can you believe hit? well, many people say yeah you work hard for donald trump, it doesn't necessarily get returned. the house central is "access hollywood" tape. a former fox reporter is also trying to get out of an nda after reports that fox killed the story on that before the election because rupert murdoch was trying to put a thumb on the scale and get trump to win, releasing a statement that quote, the public has the right to know the truth. fox news has denied this.
3:30 pm
davidson weighing in saying the fox reporter called him for comment right after the "access hollywood" tape came out with factually specific details that 3450ig9 have informed that story which didn't originally run. here with me now exclusively is the lawyer for that former fox report, nancy erika smith, a leading civil rights lawyer who also represented gretchen carlson in a sexual harassment lawsuit against former fox news ceo roger ailes. and former chief counsel of the senate watergate committee who knows a thing or two about investigating political crimes. thanks to each of you for being here. nancy, before we get deep into the details, what do you think mr. davidson, whatever his credibility, the core of what he's saying, does that help the case against trump? because it seems like another person corroborating that this was campaign-related. >> it absolutely does, and the timing does as well. when you're talking about mid-october, weeks before the election, you're talking about something that could clearly affect an election.
3:31 pm
obviously trump thought that, and there are witnesses who spoke to jane mayer at "the new yorker"s who indicate that murdoch knew that as well. that's why the story was killed according to jane mayer at "the new yorker." >> although they deny that. >> they deny it, but this is really easy. this is simple. maybe congress should subpoena my client and all of her records, and then we will see exactly what fox news had. >> have you and your client been contacted by say, house judiciary or oversight? >> not yet. but a subpoena will trump an nda. >> so you're making a little bit of news here, which why we like exclusive guests. you're saying that former fox news reporter, whichsy diana falzone. >> until it is validated by the court. >> or until she gets a subpoena. >> which you're saying would override it anyway. >> absolutely. >> so you're saying if we just had a congressman earlier in the show. if one of these congress persons wanted to subpoena your client with the power of the house,
3:32 pm
that would you say deliver what? what value would that add? . that would add -- it would add to the investigation of whether fox is really a news organization or whether it is a campaign arm of donald trump or whether just killing the story was an illegal campaign contribution worth what? obviously they thought it was worth something if it happened. he won the electoral college by 78,000 votes. would 78,000 so-called evangelicals thought differently about him if they knew about an affair and a payoff story with a porn star? possibly. >> i almost get the feeling your like an effective lawyer with a long-term strategy here. >> thank you. >> david, you know your way around the congressional investigative process. nancy knows a lot, but also has a client here, so she has an agenda and interest. do you fundamentally think in your independent analysis that this is a proper and fruitful avenue for the house democrats? what's your reaction to what she just said and the story?
3:33 pm
>> well, absolutely. i think it's a very important part of the picture, and i think it's also a very important part of the picture for the southern district of new york. and i think that's where the action is going to be. for one reason, as a prosecutor, i could get income tax returns. so the southern district of new york may be sitting there with trump's income tax returns. and what's going on, when trump paid cohen to reimburse him for the payments to stormy daniels, he listed that as a retainer and presumably deducted those payments. that deduction -- >> you know i get excited when you start talking about tax deduction. >> well, it's a subject that floors a lot of people. but when it comes to donald trump, it may be part of his downfall because he deducted those payments to michael cohen. >> but is this like -- are you basically imagining an al capone situation where after everything that's happened, he gets in
3:34 pm
trouble for tax deductions? >> perhaps. >> perhaps. >> because for one thing, trump could pardon himself, but he couldn't pardon himself for violating state law. and the income tax returns that he filed on behalf for the state would be false because he presumably deducted the payments to michael cohen. >> well, david, take a listen to the way the white house is handling this, deflecting basically on cohen, a problem that won't seem to go away. take a look. >> why did the president write a check to michael cohen for $35,000 in august of 2017? he testified about this. he specifically accused the president of engaging in conspiracy to engage in campaign violation. >> the president has been clear there wasn't a campaign violation. >> didn't know about the hush money. the story has changed. >> again, i would refer you back to the president's comments. >> david, your view of their struggle to even explain what is corroborated, which is these payments for, again, an nda that
3:35 pm
they literally sued stormy over which was their way of corroborating they paid for it. >> well, i don't really know what they're talking about because the payments are documented now with checks. i think they're doing gobbledygook, as in watergate where hush money was an important part of the picture and ultimately i think was the downfall of a part of the cover-up, i think these payments are going to be very, very important. >> interesting. and that's interesting coming from your watergate experience and sdny. nancy, i do want to make sure we're clear here because this is a dispute. i want to read what a fox executive says about this, which is, quote, daniels and her associates were actually playing a bizarre cat and mouse news game with fox and other news outlets, trying to get their story out, without fingerprints and ultimately without enough proof to publish. isn't that a fair defense for journalistic outlets who said they needed to be sure before they went with something?
3:36 pm
>> journalistic outlets wouldn't have to keep the story under an nda if they wanted the story to come out. and presidential candidates should not be able to hide information from the american public with ndas. >> so you're saying if that defense is true it might be valid, and your formal contention sheer not that they don't have a good argument to discuss, but that they're actually trying to prevent the discussion of that. >> absolutely, that's exactly -- >> that makes a good point. and i think the point you make about the house is absolutely interesting. nancy erika smith and david doris senn, thanks to both of you. >> thank you. >> up next, making waves about what liberal voter thinks of the socialist agenda. aoc sounding off. and later comedy in the trump era and more with the man behind "seinfeld." >> excuse me, i think you forgot my bread. >> bread $2 extra. >> $2 dl2? but everyone in front of me got
3:37 pm
free bread. >> you want bread? >> yes. >> $3! no soup for you. of life into our subaru forester. (dad) it's good to be back. (mom) it sure is. (mom vo) over the years, we trusted it to carry and protect the things that were most important to us. we always knew we had a lot of life ahead of us. (mom) remember this? (mom vo) that's why we chose a car that we knew would be there for us through it all. (male vo) welcome to the all-new 2019 subaru forester. the longest-lasting, most trusted forester ever. about 50% of people with evesevere asthma k? have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine
3:38 pm
or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪
3:39 pm
get your usaa auto insurance quote today. ♪ itreat them all as if, they are hot and energized. stay away from any downed wire, call 911 and call pg&e right after so we can both respond out and keep the public safe. pg&e wants you to plan ahead by mapping out escape routes and preparing a go kit, in case you need to get out quickly. for more information on how to be prepared and keep your family safe, visit pge.com/safety.
3:40 pm
for a huge shake-up in the tech sector. >> it's big and it's bold and it's going to be difficult to achieve. >> could she really force this kind of breakup? >> could she really do it? >> you bet. >> what's the answer? >> the answer is yes. >> yes. that was senator elizabeth warren right here on friday night. she's got a sweeping plan that she was unveiling to try to break up these popular tech giants like google and amazon, and now she is taking her message into something of a proverbial tech lions den because she went to one of the leading tech conferences in the nation in texas, you may have heard of it, south by southwest. and so did five other democratic hopefuls in 2020. let's get right to it, mara gay, editorial board member for "the new york times." nice to see you. >> thanks for having me. >> they all go down there
3:41 pm
because this is one of the new school places to gather. what do you think about senator warren being the one with kind of the toughest tech agenda in this tech space? >> i think it's a smart play for her politically. i think there is a lot of anger over these tech companies being unregulated, and i think they've been making the argument for a long time they've -- they're the big interrupters. they're kind of trying to be good citizens in a way that most corporations don't port tend to be, really. and i think they're kind of asking for it in a sense. and so this is a moment when there is a lot of anger from their lack of action that they took. facebook, for example, in the 2016 election down to amazon having cities compete. >> right. >> to give them, you know, a corporate giveaways. >> and people don't tend to think of most corporations as red or blue. >> that's right. >> but before these -- what you're defining as these 2016 scandals, the tech sector was
3:42 pm
considered somewhat close to the democratic party, was considered sort of new school. amazon was not considered exxon, it's fair to say. as you point out, that may be changing. this is her in rapid-fire when i asked her in a word to define these companies and a few other things. take a look. >> sure. >> amazon. >> too big. >> google. >> too big. >> facebook. >> too big. >> mark zuckerberg. >> too powerful. >> favorite member of the federal reserve board of governors? >> oh, janet yellen. >> your dream running mate throughout history, live organize dead, if you could pick a person that would run with you. >> teddy roosevelt. >> and she cited teddy, who happens to be republican for taking on the big corporations. >> the trust buster. >> that's right. how much of this could be the fault line of the democratic primary? >> listen, it's a warning shot. i think actually that the real fault line of the democratic party is going to be and the central question for democratic voters and other voters is going
3:43 pm
to be how these candidates deal with not just donald trump but also income inequality. and the tech sector certainly plays into that, amazon in some way absolutely. but i don't see this as the central issue necessarily of the election. >> and before i let you go, speaker pelosi saying very clearly we're not on our way to impeaching him. the grassroots and some of the 2020 candidates seem to be striking a different chord. >> look, the case for impeachment should be -- the bar for impeachment, excuse me, should be extremely high. it's a drastic move. but i think when you have michael cohen, the president's former lawyer implicating the president in potentially a dozen crimes, we've cross adeline that demands a serious consideration, and we can wait for the mueller report to see what happens, but i think -- i think, you know, speaker pelosi is going to be in a tough place and she is trying to give herself time, and that's just fine. >> right. as you say, i think what she was saying and congressman jefferie is alluding to this night they
3:44 pm
don't want to be marched into it before they even find out what mueller has. i'm sure there are some people, and we've interviewed them who say she has gone too far in buying time. >> if the president is guilty of system of the things that he has been accused of doing, then some of these allegations are impeachable offenses. >> right. and so the question then as they put it, do they wait for the senate and say we don't have a cause. that's what was jeffreys' argument tonight or do you have an obligation to deal with it. that's a conversation that will keep rolling. . thank you tonight. >> thanks for having me. the man behind "seinfeld" and "curb," and a lot mother sat the table, coming up. table, comp so, we re-imagined the razor with the new gillette skinguard. it has a unique guard between the blades. that's designed to reduce irritation during the shave. because we believe all men deserve a razor just for them.
3:45 pm
the best a man can get. gillette. the way you triumph over adversity. and live your lives. that's why we redesigned humira. we wanted to make the experience better for you. now there's less pain immediately following injection. we've reduced the size of the needle and removed the citrate buffers. and it has the same effectiveness you know and trust. humira citrate-free is here. a little change can make a big difference. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores.
3:46 pm
don't start humira if you have an infection. ask your doctor about humira citrate-free. here's to you. (driver) relax, it's just a bug. that's not a bug, that's not a bug! (burke) hit and drone. seen it, covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, every day can begin with flakes. it's a reminder of your struggles with psoriasis. but what if your psoriasis symptoms didn't follow you around? that's why there's ilumya. with just 2 doses, a majority of people were clear or almost clear. and over time, even more people were clear or almost clear. all with dosing 4 times a year... after 2 initial doses. plus, ilumya was shown to have similar risks of infections compared to placebo. don't use if you are allergic to ilumya or any of its ingredients.
3:47 pm
before starting treatment, your doctor should check for tuberculosis and infections. after checking there is no need for routine lab monitoring unless your doctor advises it. ilumya may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms, or if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. this could be your chance to leave your psoriasis symptoms behind. ask your doctor for ilumya today, for a clearer tomorrow. steven could only imaginem 24hr to trenjoying a spicy taco.burn, now, his world explodes with flavor. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day all-night protection. can you imagine 24-hours without heartburn?
3:48 pm
4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom... is a stroke. 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease? preventable. and 149 dollars is all it takes to get screened and help take control of your health. we're life line screening... and if you're over 50... call this number, to schedule an appointment... for five painless screenings that go beyond regular check-ups. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries... for plaque which builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and cardiovascular disease. and by getting them through this package, you're saving over 50%. so call today and consider these numbers: for just $149 you'll receive five screenings that could reveal what your body isn't telling you. i'm gonna tell you that was the best $150 i ever spent in my life.
3:49 pm
life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. if you watch "the beat," you know that sometimes we try to be funny on this show, which rarely works out. but tonight we're going to get some help from larry charles, the writer for the hit tv sitcom "seinfeld," where he earned an emmy. he also went on the direct larry david's hbo series "curb your enthusiasm," plus the famous documentary "borat" plus now he has "larry charles, dangerous world of comedy" where he embarks on a mission around the world to look at what makes us laugh. >> the world of comedy is not just about comedians, it's also about the people that make it a dangerous world, murderers, terrorist, extremists and what they laugh at.
3:50 pm
we will explore comedy in places where nothing the funny, in places where it doesn't belong. by knowing a country's comedy, you will know its past, present, and future. >> thanks for being here, larry. >> my pleasure. thank you for having me. >> for having me. >> comedy as a window into the soul. >> yes. >> that's something you believe the or just your pitch to netflix? >> kind of something i learned. i came in thinking i would meet people doing what the daily show does here. satirizing corrupt governments and trying to survive. that does exist in great nurms arou -- numbers around the world. comedy also heals. people dying and being wounded and injured. families being destroyed and laughter being used as a tool for healing. >> because seinfeld was so
3:51 pm
beloved. it was one of the last shows that had really the whole country tuning in. its jokes were seen as about every one said nothing. it was more than that but about stuff we can all relate to including the little stuff. what is the deal with airplane food? >> i'm nothing if not hopelessly derivative. you work with larry david. >> yes. >> we are all in politics getting ready to see more larry david because bernie sanders is back. let's take a look at this iconic impression. >> people love me. i have more individual donations that any candidate in history and i don't take from millionaires and billionaires. >> we know. you say it every time you're on tv. everybody knows. >> does that count as an
3:52 pm
impression or is that just larry david? >> i think larry david is so uniquely qualified for that impression it's not much of a leap. bernie is from the same neighborhood as we are. we grew up with guys like bernie sanders all over the place. >> did you ever think one of them would get this far in politics? >> i grew up in trump village. as much as i'm still getting over bernie sanders, trump being president is something i'll never get used to. >> trump village was built by h his father. he was like a 14-year-old kill still in a suit wander around with the hair. he wants to be a comedian. he thinks he's funny and how he has a captive audience which is dangerous. >> before i let you go, i want to play some of your work to do something that no one is asking for which was try to make holocaust survival humorist.
3:53 pm
people have strong opinions one way or the other and you are jewish. >> right. >> let's take a look at this clip. >> have you ever seen the show? >> did you ever see our show? it was called the holocaust. all i know is i was dloclose to that million dollars. every one was trying to kick me off the show. >> i'm a survivor. >> i'm a survivor. >> i'm a survivor. >> funny. >> funny? if it bends it's funny. >> it's not really exploiting the holocaust. >> who is the target of the joke? >> the target is the guy on survivor. the idea that he would have no sense of what the holocaust and have a competitive conversation with the sur vivivor shows how oblivious she. it's completely funny and
3:54 pm
relatable. >> isn't there the old saying, in you're ignorant of history, you're destined to be made fun of on a premium cable show? >> that's how it works. >> i'm asking the questions here. is a tie satire violence. what's more biting than satire? >> you're a bit like andy pmcca. he didn't want to answer, he would repeat the question back or say what are you really asking. >> i'm waiting for mueller report also. >> larry charles, i think you have that in common with many people. when you look a t comet comedy,a
3:55 pm
helpful part to get through of what you call a rough period or just a diversion? >> committ comedy is like breathing and eating. laughter is a crucial part of surviv survival. i think it's very important subject and something we need more than ever now. >> larry charles. we will be right back. >> all right. we will be right back. >> all rig ht that rocking chair would look great in our new house. ht ahh, new house, eh? well, you should definitely see how geico could help you save on homeowners insurance. nice tip. i'll give you two bucks for the chair. two?! that's a victorian antique! all right, how much for the recliner, then? wait wait... how did that get out here? that is definitely not for sale! is this a yard sale? if it's in the yard then it's... for sale. oh, here we go. geico. it's easy to switch and save on homeowners and renters insurance. let's see, aleve is than tylenol extra strength. and last longer with fewer pills.
3:56 pm
so why am i still thinking about this? i'll take aleve. aleve. proven better on pain. oh no. your new boss seems cool, but she might not be sweatpants cool. not quite ready to face the day? that's why we're here with free hot breakfast. book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. hampton by hilton. book at hampton.com for ourthe chili pepper sweat-out. ways to lose stubborn belly fat: not cool. freezing away fat cells with coolsculpting? now that's cool! coolsculpting safely freezes and removes fat cells with little or no downtime. and no surgery. results and patient experience may vary. some common side effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. ask your doctor if coolsculpting is right for you. and visit coolsculpting.com today for your chance to win a free treatment. stimulant laxatives forcefully stimulate i switched to miralax for my constipation. the nerves in your colon. miralax works with the water in your body to unblock your system naturally.
3:57 pm
and it doesn't cause bloating, cramping, gas, or sudden urgency. miralax. look for the pink cap. ♪ now i'm wondering if yourool i loves still strong. ♪tayed too long. ♪ ♪ ooo baby, here i am, signed, sealed, delivered, i'm yours ♪ applebee's 3 course meal now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown
3:58 pm
to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. you should be mad they gave this guy a promotion. you should be mad at forced camaraderie. and you should be mad at tech that makes things worse. but you're not mad, because you have e*trade, who's tech makes life easier by automatically adding technical patterns on charts and helping you understand what they mean. don't get mad. get e*trade's simplified technical analysis.
3:59 pm
we told you it's a big week
4:00 pm
in the mueller probe. richard painter, the former white house ethics lawyer will be here. along with a former lawyer who has faced the mueller probe. it should be interesting. that's all the time we have. hardball with chris matthews is up next. should democrats impeach? let's play "hardball." >> good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi drew a clear line many the sand for her party and the country when asked about impeaching president trump. in a wide ranging interview, she said i'm not for impeachment. this is news. i'll give you some news right now because i haven't said this to any press person before. impeachment is

35 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on