tv MSNBC Live With Velshi and Ruhle MSNBC March 14, 2019 10:00am-11:00am PDT
and here now, ali velshi and stephanie ruhle. feeling a lot like 2020 today, doesn't it, guys? >> it absolutely is. new candidates, you just had a great interview with kamala harris. we'll keep it going. have a great afternoon. hello, everyone. i'm ali velshi. >> and i'm stephanie ruhler. let's get smarter. after months of speculation, beto o'rourke announces he's running for president. >> i could care less your party persuasion, anything less than we are all americans, we are
august human beings and bedo everything within our power for one another, for this great country and for every generation that follows. this is democracy. >> look, every single american should want to ensure that whoever is president is successful. because our success depends on that. but a president who has caused so much pain for so many of our fellow americans could not be allowed to continue another four years in office. >> i think beto would be a good president of the united states. i think we have a lot of candidates who would be good presidents of the united states, and certainly there's not one of them who wouldn't be an extraordinary improvement over the incumbent. >> republican revolt. the gop led senate set for a show down with president trump over his emergency declaration today. president trump insisting he's ready. either way. >> this is not a choice between border security and the wall. everybody's for border security. i don't know anyone in congress
who's not for border security. but we want smart border security. >> roger stone, beginning a key hearing in d.c. federal court. his next stop could be jail if that ticked off judge decides to send him there. >> we have eight months where roger stone has to be on his best beheaviayer behavior to av remanded to custody. based on his past behavior that seems like a high bar to meet. born to do this, that's how beto o'rourke described his decision to do this. >> baby he was born to run, is that what he's saying? >> he said it to vanity fair on a piece published on the heels of his presidential announcement. the congressman is on his way to his third stop of the day in iowa after officially launching his presidential bid with a campaign video this morning. >> he will spend three days in the early voting state visiting more than a dozen counties including eight that went for barack obama in 2012 before
flipping and siding with donald trump in 2016. this morning, in his first conversation with hawk eye voters, o'rourke focussed on a message of unity. >> i'm looking forward to the conversation, to hearing what's on your mind, to answering your questions and even better, if you want to pose the solution to your question from your perspective from where you live, from how you see things, i'm all ear right now. any single democrat running today, and i may not be able to enumerate every single one of them right now, would be far better than the current occupant of the white house. if you think that a little more than 300,000 immigrants and asylum seekers apprehended on the southern border is a problem, and i don't necessarily think that it is, the kind of migration, and refugee flows that we will see when entire bands of this world are no longer habitable will be a crisis of a different magnitude all together. but these challenges i am absolutely convinced will bring
out the absolute best in every single one of us. >> i'm going it take my sweater off real quick. and it's not because he asked about marijuana. >> i will remember this forever, every single one of your faces and what you were wearing, what you had to drink. >> you know what i learned today, first he had on a jacket, he took it off, then the sweater, maybe he's sweaty, that was my take away. >> i didn't understand what it was. >> or a sweater and marijuana. >> he's good with a crowd. >> without a doubt. the question is how will the former texas congressman fare in a crowded democratic field and is he going to have better luck on a national stage than he did in texas. remember, he raised an enormous amount of money but he was running against a polarizing character in ted cruz and now there's a lot of democrats. >> some would say he did pretty well in texas, all things considered, given what he was up against. >> without a doubt. let's go first to garrett haake.
here's in burlington, iowa, where beto started his three day tour. you were one of the first people to see him this morning. people in the coffee house were excited. any big players standing up with beto. >> reporter: ironically for a guy who largely eshooed endorsemented when he was running in texas, being associated with the democratic party doesn't doz esn't do you ton of favors. he had three women, three colleagues in the house, veronica escobar come out and endorse him, former maryland governor, martin o'malley, o'malley had called for o'rourke to get in the race in an op-ed back in i think january in the "washington post." saying there needed to be a generation shift, younger candidates running. he said he was pleased to answer the call. told me in a tweet in fact that was his endorsement. it's going to be folks in iowa, these retail stops that make the difference, and o'rourke, i can
tell you, was extremely well received in that coffee shop this morning. there's quite a crowd gathering here at the bean kouncounter in burlington, iowa. >> he's entering a crowded field as we mentioned. how does beto stand out. you covered him for a long time. how does he stand out in this existing field? >> reporter: well, you touched on one of them in the intro. his ability to raise money will make a big difference. he raised $80 million, the most raised and spent in a senate race in history in that texas senate race. that will help. i tried to ask this question. it's interesting, he really is trying hard not to veteranly draw contrast -- overtly draw contrast with the rest of the field. when i pressed him on it a little bit, he gave this response. take a listen. >> it's not about me. it's not about trump. it's not even about the other candidate. it's about people. i put myself before the people who will make this decision. i allow them to come to those
conclusions. listen to what's on their minds, share with them my perspective, where i'm from, what i have seen, what i'm excited about, what concerns me. >> reporter: what then do you uniquely bring to the table. >> you're asking me to define myself in contrast to other people. it's not the way i work. i only share with you that i come from the u.s. mexico border at a time that this president has successfully trained the focus of you and the rest of the country on the u.s. mexico border and i have a profoundly positive story to tell. i come from a red state where we were already spoken for, written off. it wasn't worth the competition or the effort and we were able to put texas in play. >> reporter: now, o'rourke won't be the only texan, he won't be the only border state person in this race but his upbringing many el paso certainly relevant. he has used that in a way when we had the split screen rally when the president came to el paso a few weeks ago, o'rourke was there. he might be able to take a
progressive message to red state voters is something we'll hear as a possible selling point forward, and a contrast point when and if joe biden gets into the race. that's something he'll be selling, too. mark that space here, the idea of o'rourke as a progressive messenger in some of these redder states. i think that's going to be something interesting to follow in the weeks and months ahead. guys. >> garrett haake for us in burlington, iowa. we want to bring in a dear friend of ours, nbc national political continue steve kornacki. hello, steve. yes, it's already a crowded field but what does beto jumping mean. >> it's an interesting question. the big issue with beto o'rourke is then versus now. the world was introduced to him as a political phenomenon, if you will, last fall. these were the kinds of headlines you were seeing when he was running in texas. these are the top democrats in the country last year running for office who raised the most office. it wasn't all these incumbent u.s. senators.
it was a challenger in texas, beto o'rourke, and it wasn't even close. we say he raised a ton of money in the fall. that's why. remember, we say then versus now. every democrat has been dreaming for a generation of flipping texas. ted cruz is one of the most unpopular republicans with democratic activists. beto o'rourke, in the brains of democratic activists he hit a lot of pleasure centers last fall in the race against ted cruz. as you say, he came up short. what's he up against now. he's not running against ted cruz, he's running against democrats and in the early polling, single digits, you got biden, sanders, harris, you got him clustered in with a bunchovbunch of candidates. he's not popping immediately. we'll see if that changes. favorable, unfavorable and these are democratic candidates with democratic voters. beto o'rourke is popular with democrats, so is cory booker, elizabeth warren, so is sanders, biden. think of the that 80 million
bucks that o'rourke brought in last fall. who to say a big chunk did come from people that like cory booker, and elizabeth warren, and he's got an opportunity. certainly getting plenty of media attention. we'll see if he comes close to the sanders 24 hour fundraising effort, a lot of comparisons between him and obama in 08. i'll tell you one thing, this is not where obama in 08 started out. >> where did he start out? >> he started out strongly in second place, 20%, established as the prime challenger to hillary clinton. >> how many people were in there? >> why were fewer candidates in 08? was it because obama had strong initial support and cornered that market and kept other candidates from running. does the fact that beto o'rourke doesn't immediately get that kind of support encourage other candidates to get in the race. >> so smart, every time you come, so smart. >> steve, thank you my friend.
beto is not the only 2020 contender on the trail. ali vitali is at a conference on economic justice where cory booker and kamala harris are both speaking. >> reporter: this is an economic conference focussed on how the economy can grow and change without exacerbating that income inequality gap that is so well known in washington and that is central on the campaign trail. cory booker and kamala harris come at these campaigning issues from an optimistic place and look at it through an optimistic lens. for cory booker that was true today. what he had to say stemmed from a lack of empathy being the source of the problem. it's also something that could be part of the solution. take a listen to what he had to say. >> the poverty that i'm most worried about is poverty of compassion, poverty of empathy, a poverty of action. being bold to me means aggressively saying enough. i will not allow this comfort with injustice to continue.
>> now, ali, and steph, this was a question and answer format. immediately kamala harris and cory booker had two different conversations on the stage. cory booker talked about this through a lens of a policy perspective, trying to give people an opportunity through education, through access to better housing. kamala harris focussed on education and the tax code as a way to kind of decrease that income inequality gap. those are two of the approaches we hear on the campaign trail. this is a hot issue. a lot of voters want to hear about it. this is something we're going to hear more about as we go forward. this is kind of a place that's a starting point for them. >> you have been on the trail with a number of 2020 contenders. i know you're with kamala harris and cory booker, but the news today is clearly that beto has entered the race, how does it shake things up and are people there buzzing about it? >> reporter: people are definitely interested. i think that's been the consistent point throughout my time on the 2020 campaign trail,
even over the course of the past three months. there is a wealth of options and voters recognize that. i think steve kornacki hit on a point about the difference between beto in 2018, and the difference in 2019 and 2020. he doesn't have ted cruz as his immediate foil anymore. he has a group of other democrats, a dozen plus other democrats, all campaigning on similar issues and ideas and it's going to be a question of if he's the right messenger for progressive policies that he espoused in 2018 in texas. it's going to become more about the policy and how he would implement what would be a beto o'rourke vision for the country and how he would ultimately go against beating donald trump than how he is as a transparent voice on social media. i think it's going to be interesting to see how these candidates start differentiating themselves between each other because they want to keep it amicable. many are friends in the senate, they have all campaigned with each other throughout 2018. it would be helpful if they kept
it that way throughout the course. and kamala harris mentioned it when he was on with peter alexander just last hour. take a listen. >> i probably have not studied him as much as you have, but i will tell you that i think we have an embarrassment of riches among the democrats who are running. we have incredible public servants who are smart, whose voices are important, and i think it's going to be a robust and a very healthy process. the american public is smart enough to make decisions based on who speaks their truth, who has a proven record of producing, who knows how to fight for fernnerns and america people, and it's on that basis our country will elect its next president. >> i think the thing we're going to hear about consistently on the trail is a lot of economic issues we have heard about here, health care, all the conversations that we have been having on our network, going to
keep having them on the campaign trail. >> we can only help you're right, the issues and economic issues will be front and center on this issue. president trump is vowing to veto any bill newscathat's goin block his national emergency declaration to block his border wall. he's probably going to have to use the veto pen because the senate is expected to vote on measure very soon and it is expected to pass with at least eight republican senators now saying they are supporting the bill. we've got the latest from capitol hill. and if president trump gets his money for the wall, the government will likely try to take huge swaps of private land through eminent domain to build it. we're going to meet with one texas family who's fighting back. you're watching velshi and ruhle right here on msnbc. t here on m. limu's right. liberty mutual can save you money
by customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh... yeah, i've been a customer for years. huh... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ 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. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask your doctor about humira citrate-free. here's to you.
aren't doing well enough without this rule, president trump again -- president t welcome back to velshi and ruhle. we have breaking news as we await the senate vote to vote on president trump's emergency declaration which is expected to take place at about 2:15 today. already eight republicans have voted against president trump. senators romney, murkowski, collins, tillis, alexander, lee, toomey and paul join democrats in a rebuke to campaign's marquee campaign issue, border security. mexico was supposed to pay for the wall and i have to make something clear. we said border security. it's not that people are against
border security. >> they're against the emergency declaration because they feel it weakens the article one powers to give congress the right to make these decisions. >> there are members on both sides of the aisle, the need for a wall. what these eight republicans and what the democrats are voting against is specifically president trump's great big beautiful wall. >> that's a very very very very important matter because the president has been tweeting all day, and he continuously does this, if you don't agree with the way he does it, then you must be against border security. >> it's not just him. i watched mick mulvaney on tv, the president stands for border security. >> i stand for border security. i think we all agree there can be improvements made. the president says if this gets to his desk, which it will, he's going to veto it. >> i don't know what the vote will be. it doesn't matter. i'll probably have to veto, and it's not going to be overturned and we're going to have our -- the legal scholars say it's
totally constitutional, it's very important. it's really a border security vote. >> it's not a border security vote. >> let's head to capitol hill where nbc's kelly o'donnell joins us. the president is trying, kelly, he's trying to lobby republicans back to his cause on this one. but it almost seems moot at this point. >> reporter: well, what we have been told by senior officials is that the president is frustrated that there is not republican unity on this issue when democrats are certainly united and they have conflated what you've described here, the white house making this about border security when it is a much more complex issue, and one where republicans who will be among those expected to vote yes at approximately 2:15, the eight senators who have said they would cast a vote against this use of national emergency power, it's really about the constitution. it's about the separation of powers. it's about having a legislative check on the executive branch
and not so much about the underlying issues. then you've got a mitch mcconnell, the leader of senate republicans who will not be among those rebuking the president, saying it's really a moot point because the president would use his first ever veto, and then there are nonsufficient votes it appears in the house or senate where you would need 2/3, so 67 senators to override, not overturn, mr. president, but override the veto, and we will end up where we are right now with the president being able to exercise this use of power by taking money that's been apropuated by congress -- apro pr -- appropriated by congress for other purposes. not only what it means today with the use of this power but what it could mean down the line, and you often find on capitol hill that there are people who are institutionalists standing up for the protections
in the constitution that were meant to avoid these circumstances, and it is a rebuke of the president, that is notable when it's coming from republicans, and that's the thing that white house officials and the president are clearly frustrated by that they have not been able to hold, the president has not been able to hold republicans on this issue. he is right around the corner from where i am right now having lunch with the irish prime minister, the speaker of the house. it's the friends of ireland luncheon, a cordial atmosphere in the annual event but in a matter of an hour, the president will get a real slap from fellow republicans here on capitol hill. >> do you know how to say the irish prime minister's title, is it teshook, the gaelic term for prime minister, like having tea and we shook hands. kelly o'donnell on capitol hill. there you go, in case you have
to say it. did you not say it earlier today? here's a topic you and i have spent a lot f time talking -- of time talking ab t about. eminent domain, this is going to come into play in texas. hundreds if not thousands of property owners along the u.s. mexico border would face eminent domain. it allows the government to take ownership of private land or property and convert to public use. in general, the government has to pay market value. you can imagine that the seller of that land sometimes doesn't agree to the price that the government wants to pay, and the government can only exercise this power if it provides just compensation to the property owner. eminent domain is most often used by the government to take land for buildings and other facilities, highways and railroads. president trump argues eminent domain is necessary for his border wall, and you can bet that lawyers are gearing up for the ensuing legal battle. in 2009, a department of homeland security report found the effort to take private
property for border fencing was quote a costly, time consuming process. let me show you how costly and time consuming. according to the texas civil rights project, there were 334 eminent domain lawsuits filed in south texas during the bush administration with approximately 60 to 70 cases still pending from a decade ago, mostly regarding payouts. trump's plan to construct a nearly 2,000 mile wall would mean more money is required to cover the just compensation payments to each owner, meaning that the wall's $22 billion price tag. this is why stephanie and i always say this. when people say it's $22 billion. we say at a bare minimum, it could be double or triple that. >> that's why 5.7 was a joke. >> correct. if you had no eminent domain to worry about, you're paying 22 billion. >> i would talk to people inside the administration and they were unable to articulate why they needed the wall but they would say stephanie, 5.7 billion in
the context of government spending is nothing. it's chump change. let it roll. we're not close to 5.7 billion. 22 doesn't cover it. >> it's $5.7 billion of your tax bill every year. think about that. it feels less like chump change, that's what you work every day to give the government money for. we have new fallout from the college entrance bribery scream. i don't know about you but everywhere i go, this is what people are talking about. >> this is the only thing people are talking about. two stanford students are filing a federal lawsuit saying they should have their application fees returned. >> they did get into stanford. >> the latest in the scandal next, you know what you're watching, velshi and ruhle. , yoe watching, velshi and ruhle your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered...
in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. even if you're doing everything right, inside, something can be wrong. preventive screenings can help. but if you're not showing any symptoms... insurance usually won't cover them. what then? call life line screening. we make checking for things like stroke and heart disease so quick, easy and affordable, there's no reason you can't take control of your own health. if you're over 40, call to schedule an appointment for five painless screenings that go beyond regular checkups. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke. and 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease are preventable. that's why life line screening
uses ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries for dangerous plaque that builds up as you age. it's what's inside that counts. so learn what your body's not telling you and call today. you'll get five screenings for only $149- saving over 50%. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more.
welcome back to velshi and ruhle. we have been talking a lot the last couple of days. very unusual for us to have major stories that aren't necessarily politics but the 737 story and this college admission story. it is wild. i think you and i both agree there are structural problems with the way people gain admission to college in america that favors some groups over others. >> this goes back to the story that was broken yesterday around a scandal, really, around a group of ultra wealthy parents working with what was known as a
private college adviser to get their kids into school, except of course as we learned, they were potentially or allegedly -- >> and there are lots of college advisers, and they are legitimate, what's good on the applicatio that because they charge on an hourly basis and it's expensive. most are not breaking the law. >> and this was a massive sting operation, the largest we have seen in terms of college application fraud or the department of justice has. >> paying people off. bribi bribing proctors. >> photos of children pretending their students were athletes, getting on the teams and schools as athletes but never participating in a sport. joining us now is someone who knows about this subject, matthew stewart, the author of nature's good, the heretical origins of the american public. you talk about something, the tales of three classes in relation to the college admission scandal.
walk us through the three classes and where they are today. for all of us, the college admission process back in the day was about being 16 or 17 years old, thinking about what the world meant to you, where there was fire in your belly and where you might want to live for the next four years. things are a little different now. >> yeah, that's right, and let me be clear, first, just to say that the people involved in this case clearly crossed a line, and they crossed several lines. >> if you take that aside, there's real problems. >> that's right. so at the root of the problem is rising inequality, and usually when we talk about that, we think we're talking about the super wealthy, the people who kind of fly private jets off their private islands but they're actually a really small number. it's a important problem politically but they in fact represent about .01% of the population. only the bottom 90% of the population lost out. in between, you have this 9.9%
that's actually doing pretty well, so if you think of the economy as a kind of ladder, it's that the runging of the ladder have been spreading apart, especially at the top. it's harder to make that jump from one rung to the rest. >> you write about people who are extremely well, .1 of the population. this is criminality, the stuff we have seen, fraud and criminality. even if these colleges and they have sent wholly inadequate letters outside, i got two kids who got letters from the collegi colleges saying we had no idea this is happening. you had an idea that the rich are having a better time getting into college than the poor. >> now the admissions process is about metrics and data, and those admissions officers need to get their metrics, they need to get the most amount of applications and trying to lower the amount of kid that they let in, so the whole game is
different. >> right. but if you look at numbers a little more deeply, what you can see is that the 9.9%, the wealthy are actually winning. you have a small number of people from lower levels in the economy who are brought in to make it look nice. if you're in the top 1%, you have 77 times greater chance of being in the ivy league. >> say that again. say that again. >> if you're a child in the top 1% economically, you have a 77 times greater probability of being in the ivy league than if your parents are in the bottom 20%. >> has that changed in the last ten years? >> or 20 years, or whatever? >> for people who are worse in the middle or lower income. >> it's gotten worse. the trend is unmistakable. if you look back 20 or 30 years, sure the wealthy were overrepresented but not to the extent they were now. there's more of an opportunity for the middle class. we have created a system where
you have the prestigious universities that they have a small amount of people let in to represent the university and a large number of wealthy people and the ones losing out are the ones in the middle, and the very big middle. >> why? >> why are they losing out? >> this has happened throughout history. as the ladder of the economy, as the rungs stretch apart, it gets harder to move from one end to the other. everyone has a rubber band representing where they start in life, and as this expands, the people at the top, especially who worked really hard to tighten those rubber bands because they don't want to fall down and they don't want you to come up. the families at the top often without breaking the law, our o with the best intentions, they take steps that over and over again, ensure that they can be locked into place. use their resources to lock people in. >> steps poor people can't take. >> middle class and poor people can't take. how many of our listeners are going to be out there, you know,
running off to join the sailing team or the squash club or the other, you know, fencing team or whatever it is. >> or the sat training courses or expensive college counselors or all of these things that students in public schools without means at lower incomes can't get. >> and all the public school funding that's been cut over the last 20 years ago they cut guidance counselors, they don't even have access to guidance counselors. >> wealthy students have good guidance counselors and private counselors they can use. >> the one thing we haven't noted is because of the internet, there's a lot more access to information. when you were going to college or i was going to college -- >> is the internet an equalizer on that front, where they can learn about how you apply to these schools? >> i think it helps, and also the spread of information helps. people need to be aware of these
problems. these stories are great. they draw attention to these issues for many people, and hopefully more kids are applying. there's a lot of blame to go around, and let's pick on the colleges, too, they have not responded to the rising inequality, i think in a sensible way. they have decided to restrict or rather not grow, which is what they should have done, and so they have made themselves into little prestigious boutiques which are finishing schools for investment bankers or finishing schools for the children of investment bankers now. they need to do a lot more. they need to expand. they should probably drop their athletic preferences, which is affirmative action for wealthy kids. this college counselling business needs to be cleaned up. it should be turned into a public service perhaps. there's a lot that can be tone, and hopefully this will be an opportunity for people. >> there's a lot to talk about. we have to have you back to take thin slices at a time, and say how do we change this particular one. thank you for joining us for this conversation.
matthew stewart is the author of nature's god, the heretical origins of the nation's repub c republic. we needed a reason to have this conversation writ large. >> it also makes you think about the students, the people in the middle who aren't going to get a huge am of support and aid and their parents cannot afford to send them to school. and cannot afford sport. the heat is on to make the mueller report public, in a rare bipartisan effort. everybody voted for this. house republicans and democrats took a major step to make that happen today. we're going to talk about whether it's going to do any good, whether you're going to see that mueller report. you're watching velshi and ruhle on msnbc. g velshi and ruhle on msnbc thank you clients? well jd power did just rank them highest in investor satisfaction with full service brokerage firms...again. and online equity trades are only $4.95...
i mean you can't have low cost and be full service. it's impossible. it's like having your cake and eating it too. ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs. how am i going to explain this? if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management.
even long hair and pet hair are no problem, but the one thing i won't have to clean is this because the shark's self-cleaning brush roll removes the hair wrap while i clean. ♪ - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself. president trump leading capitol hill right now after attending the friends of ireland luncheon with ireland's prime minister. >> what do you call it? >> ireland's prime minister. roger stone is back in federal court this morning, a november 5th trial date was set to face charges for obstruction, witness tampering and making false statements. stone has managed to avoid additional penalties after potentially violating the potential gag order because he released an updated version of his 2016 novel. >> i would dare say current
confidant as well. another big move in the russia investigation in a rare show of overwhelming bipartisan support, the house just passed a resolution to make robert mueller's final report available to the public and congress. >> how much of a vote was it, how much did they win by? >> 420 to 0 vote. >> no one voted against it. no republicans voted against it. joining us msnbc legal analyst, danny se val danny cevallo. let's talk about amy berman jackson's reaction to the roger stone gag order. >> she's a busy week. >> she's had a very busy week. how about those judge assignments. here's the thing, i don't think her view of the gag order is latilen yent. she's probably kpas per rated --
they -- first amendment freedom of speech and the defendant's right to a fair trial. it's a strange thing that roger stone by violating the gag order may be violating his constitutional right to a fair trial and the judge's duty is to safeguard that trial. >> i think this is interesting. when we think about gag orders, we think about curtailing someone's rights to speak. >> that's exactly what it is. and the argument you're making is that sometimes the gag order protects someone's right to a fair trial. >> it only protects roger stone's constitutional right to a fair trial. >> why, because that additional information will taint a jury? >> exactly, if you go back to the samuel shepherd case, that's the genesis of this rule at the supreme court, which is the doctor, the movie the fugitive, the tv show the fugitive, the idea is that if you have a pretrial circus of media activity, that can fatally prejudice a jury and result in a violation. >> no one will investigate,
unless you live under a rock and our point is not to find jurors who live under rocks, it's to find your peers. >> that's also verbatim what the supreme court has said. it's okay that a trial is high profile. it's okay that a defendant is the celebrity, but if it rises to that rare level of a complete circus as it did in the shepherd trial, then the constitutional right to a fair trial may be violated. so really, it's the judge's duty to safeguard this, ultimately, however, she probably would rather just move on with the trial and not nitpick at what roger stone is doing. if she finds a violation, she's going to have to jail him, and what will that lead to, a bigger s circus. >> i don't know if we have the video we can air. >> i don't have a view one way or another on protesters. >> there's a guy who walks behind him be a sign that says. >> this is a sign. >> and that speaks to, watch this guy, this is a sign. >> i saw him yesterday, and it says it on both sides. >> this is the thing.
circusy enough. that guy looks like a clown, and he's carrying a sign that says this is a sign. one could argue roger stone is not uncomfortable with this. he's not uncomfortable with crazy suits, with all of his press statements and the republishing of his book. at some point, his lawyers can never make the argument that his rights were violated because -- >> he loves the show. >> we said this weeks and weeks ago. i wrote a column about it, when the judge issues the gag order and she did, that roger stone would probably willingly, lovingly, and intentionally violate that gag order because it's the one weapon in his quiver that really works for him, and that's manipulating the media. >> quickly, 420-0, overwhelming house vote to make the mueller report public. bipartisan. i had my form ready.
>> i wonder who might have broken it. >> what's going to happen next? >> that's not the bipartisan one. >> what happens next? >> i'm waiting for the bipartisan horn. >> fail. >> the senate, ire respective of what the senate does, they may shoot it down. it's ultimately a resolution. it doesn't change the doj regulations. it acts more as a symbolic gesture to get ag bar to release the mueller report, to induce him to release the mueller report, and if he doesn't, representative nadler has indicated he might subpoena it anyway. >> nadler yesterday, by the way, after our show said that acting attorney general matt whitaker when he was acting attorney general did not deny the president had called him to discuss the cohen case. the department of justice has pushed back on that. they have issued a statement saying we disagree with representative nadler's characterization of the conversation consistent with his prior testimony mr. whitaker said he could not discuss prior
conversations with the president and the president never directed him to do anything to affect the nvpgs. this seems like -- investigation. this seems like parsing of words on both sides. >> he didn't not deny it. there are too many negatives to keep track of what whitaker did speak to and didn't speak to. this is what we're seeing when you put this kind of scrutiny on congressional testimony, you have to ask yourself is this something that is a material and intentional misstatement, such that it rises to the level of perjury or a false statement to congress, which doesn't have to be sworn. so sworn, unsworn, it doesn't matter. >> not with green eggs and ham, you cannot lie to congress. >> all right. danny, thank you, as always, danny, cevallos, or nbc legal analyst. i've deleted the bipartisan horn from your phone during commercial break. >> i still can't find it. >> i will just not win. right now, another rowdy vote on brexit in the uk, see
this makes us look like we're in tiptop shape. but this time it is whether to delay britain's departure from the european union. a delay could mean brand new problems. we're going live to london, next. what happened to my horn? what hn i have a vision correction number, but i'm more than a number. when i'm not teaching, i'm taking steep grades and tight corners. my essilor lenses offer more than vision correction with three innovative technologies for my ultimate in vision clarity and protection together in a single lens:
the essilor ultimate lens package. so, i can do more of what i love! buy two pairs of essilor's best lenses and get a $100 back instantly. see more. do more. essilor in your gut, you feel confident to take on anything. with benefiber, you'll feel the power of gut health confidence every day. benefiber is a 100% natural prebiotic fiber. good morning mrs. jonhson. benefiber. trust your gut.
welcome back to "velshi & ruhle," president trump next to the irish tea shop commenting on brexit for the first time in months. the debate is going to hit a fever pitch today. >> the current deadline for brexit is just 15 days away but that seems unlikely as parliament failed to reach any form of agreement on a plan of withdraw. lawmakers rejected prime minister theresa may's plan twice. she suffers another blow. it plunges the u.k. deeper into a political crisis. >> if that was hard to follow, that's understandable.
on march 29th, brexit has to happen and parliament said you can't leave without a deal but there is actually no deal. here is our bill neely. >> so i said it and you could not understand it and he said it, you could not understand it. hey bill, good luck. >> reporter: there is not one vote happening in parliament right now. there are five. a lot of people in that parliament, you know, think it is just what they decide that can't. many people would say britain has not been negotiating with the european union, what the european union says really does matter. the guys in there what they are doing is voting for permission if you would like to ask the european union to extend brexit.
please count on brexit on march 29th and the e.u. indicated today that it is willing to pick another date to extend this. donald tusk, the european counsel president says we can actually let you delay brexit for a long time. the chief negotiator is saying please guys, just come up with something, tell us what you do want and not what you don't want. that's a big problem. they still have not come up to an alternative to theresa may's deal which have been defeated with a heavy majority twice. >> bill, 15 days to go and no plan as to how one of the world's biggest trade agreements may start to fall apart. bill neely, we'll be right back. we'll take a break. ight back. we'll take a break fun. mini was born to do the only thing we ever wanted to do. drive. to hit start and just go.
fast and far. around town and around hairpins. to leave everyone in the dust, and leave rubber on the road. because mini was born to drive. drive for yourself at the mini born to drive sales event. special offers at your local mini dealer. but when i started seeing things, i didn't know what was happening... so i kept it in. he started believing things that weren't true. i knew something was wrong... but i didn't say a word. during the course of their disease around 50% of people with parkinson's may experience hallucinations or delusions. but now, doctors are prescribing nuplazid. the only fda approved medicine... proven to significantly reduce hallucinations and delusions related to parkinson's. don't take nuplazid if you are allergic to its ingredients. nuplazid can increase the risk of death in elderly people with dementia-related psychosis and is not for treating symptoms unrelated to parkinson's disease. nuplazid can cause changes in heart rhythm and should not be taken if you have certain abnormal heart rhythms or take other drugs
that are known to cause changes in heart rhythm. tell your doctor about any changes in medicines you're taking. the most common side effects are swelling of the arms and legs and confusion. we spoke up and it made all the difference. ask your parkinson's specialist about nuplazid. [laughter] ♪ ♪ "i'm okay." ♪ ♪
what were you going to say? >> katy just said that's why you don't look on twitter. >> it is a torture one. >> if you go to twitter for what you are doing right or wron wrong -- yes, that's correct. >> this morning at 9:00 a.m., i am showing beto o'rourke on tv and my twitter feed -- at the beginning oh, beto is coming up but my panel is talking and twitter was like stop talking, we don't want to hear you and your panel and put him on tv. we put him on tv, suddenly, what
is it? it is a free advertisement? i can't take it. >> you will never win on twitter. >> all the candidates you will show on your screen, could somebody criticize me? why do you always put them on and list them in alphabetical order? why are we fighting this? >> i don't know. i am sorry for all this. >> we are headed over to you and i will see you in an hour. now you know what we talk about during break. >> pull the curtain back. >> we are talking about shampoo and they were talking about shampoo. >> velshi has great shampoo suggestions and hair curlcurler. it is 1:00 p.m. in iowa, today beto o'rourke announced will he or won't he speculate. the congressman kicking off his campaign with a three-day swing through iowa where he