Skip to main content

tv   MTP Daily  MSNBC  July 17, 2019 2:00pm-3:00pm PDT

2:00 pm
watching. that does it for our hour. i'm nicole. "mtp daily" with steve kornacki in for chuck starts right now. ♪ if it's wednesday, it's "meet the press daily." good evening. i'm steve kornacki in for chuck todd. and buckle up because we have a wild hour ahead of us. democrats in washington raging against president trump and his administration. we are witnessing what could be a major moment specifically for democrats in the house. we are chekting a series of votes in that chamber very soon that will include this house's first vote on impeachment. the house is also going to vote to hold two top administration officials including the attorney general of the united states in criminal contempt of congress. so let's set the stage here. we are one week away from bob
2:01 pm
mueller's testimony. the pro-impeachment democrat al green has basically forced action on the impeachment question in response to what he is calling president donald trump's racist comments. now we are not sure yet what exactly the house is going to be voting on with regards to impeachment. there are a number of procedural possibilities here. they may still be being hashed out as we speak. but we are going to find out probably within minutes. the house as we say also going to vote on holding the attorney general william barr and the commerce secretary wilbur ross in criminal contempt of congress for this refusal to turn over documents related to the administration's ultimately unsuccessful efforts to add a citizenship question to the census. and of course all of this happening in the wake of yesterday's vote in the house condemning the president in a resolution citing, quote, racist comments. we are going to hear from the president in just a few hours at a campaign rally in north
2:02 pm
carolina. and we just got word that trump is actually taking questions from the press right now as he departs the white house for north carolina. campaign officials are telling us that tonight he's going to keep slamming that group of congresswomen he originally said should go back to where they came from. the biggest question right now is whether these votes to condemn, to impeach, to hold in contempt, whether they will become a turning point for democrats and for their approach to this president or whether they will be merely a series of symbolic roll-call votes. nbc's kasie hunt has been covering this. kristen welker has new reporting on the white house's strategy. kasie hunt, let me start with you. we set it up there, we put the contempt perhaps aside for a second and just this question of impeachment. you've got a congressman who has the right to force the house to do something with this call for impeachment. what is your sense in terms of what exactly the house is going to be voting on here and when
2:03 pm
this vote's going to happen. >> well, steve, we're actually in a moment of pretty significant expense here on the hill about what democrats are going to do. we know that they have been planning this 5515 vote series on a whole bunch of things including that contempt vote that you mentioned. but we also know that they have been planning to deal in some way with this impeachment issue that congressman green has put forward. as of right now, we just don't have an update on how exactly democratic leadership is planning on doing this. we are trying to figure out is there a chance that the vote might be delayed. and we're also trying to figure out exactly what it is that leadership wants to do here. they have a couple options in the past when this came up under a republican speaker, the vote has then been to table the measure which means essentially shunting it aside, and that's what's happened in the case when you have republicans controlling the house of representatives. but this is a tricky dynamic for
2:04 pm
democrats because there are so many who do support opening impeachment proceedings. now, most of those people have said that in the context of the mueller investigation. today this is impeachment on the grounds of racism based on the president's tweet. so it's a little bit different. but at the same time, you know, if they lose so many democrats who are favoring impeachment proceedings, is it really an incentive for republicans on the house floor to bail out democrats, or is it a potentially a potential problem here? so right now all of those questions seem to still be live. so that, you know, means there's a certain amount of risk. now, of course, it's possible we could see this easily and quickly resolved behind the scenes and we just haven't gotten an update on that yet. but certainly going to be something to way for the next hour or so, steve. >> okay. we'll keep in touch with you certainly as this all plays out. kristen welker, let me go to you. meanwhile, the president expected at that rally in north carolina tonight also leaving the white house, apparently
2:05 pm
taking questions now. this in the wake as we say of last night the house of representatives voting to condemn his remarks as racist. >> reporter: and, steve, he's trying to make this an ideological battle. let me read you some of the rough notes that came in just moments ago from those questions that he answered from reporters. again, i want to stress these are the rough notes that we just got moments ago answering reporters' questions, making it very clear he is digging in, taking fresh aim at the squad, those four freshman congresswomen of color. he said this. i think they're not espousing the views of their country. they said horrible things when you look at some of the things they said they're unthinkable. what is he talking about? he's talking about some of the controversial comments that have been made by one of those congresswomen business rational that were, by the way, condemned by her fellow democrats. so he's really trying to flip
2:06 pm
the script here, put the focus on that. he also said there's a lot of -- well, let me read you a different part telephone. i'm not relishing the fight, i'm enjoying it because i have to get word out to american people and i enjoy what i do. they're wrong, they're absolutely wrong. so, this is a little bit of a preview of what we're going to hear here tonight in north carolina, steve. this is a state that president trump won back in 2016 by a very narrow margin. he wants to recapture it again. with this fight that he is waging with the so-called squad, he's essentially energizing his base. he's also forcing democrats to defend those four freshman congresswomen who are self-proclaimed progressives. but the president is trying to paint them as so-called socialists. now, of course that is not the case. they are not socialists, but he is trying to make that argument. some campaign officials reiterated that based upon my conversation with them. so, steve, i think that's a
2:07 pm
little bit of a preview of what we're going to hear from president trump. what we know, we know it is something that energizes his core supporters. we know that it's something that could help drive turnout. but the question is does it help him expand the map? and is that even what he's trying to do? he made a surprise call into the daily mail earlier today. he said i'm not unhappy with this fight that he is waging. and of course he's no stranger to entering into these race and culture wars. we saw him effectively use that same strategy in 2016. looks like he's trying to do something very similar in 2020. but, again, will it help him win some of those states that they're trying to pick up in some of my conversations with campaign officials they want to not only win by a bigger margin here in north carolina. they want to pick up a state like new hampshire. is that going to be possible with this type of rhetoric? that's what remains unseen. steve, a little bit of just background. remember, this is the day that special counsel robert mueller was supposed to testify on
2:08 pm
capitol hill. this was going to be a little bit of counter-programming. mueller would've been his foil. now the president has a new foil in these four fresh ran congresswomen. and again the president speaking right before boarding marine 1. and we will hopefully get that audio out to you as soon as possible. >> kasie hunt, we will be returning to you i'm sure throughout the hour. at least ahead for you, thank you both for joining us. as kristen mentioned, the president caulkitalking to the at the white house. we will show you what he has to say. and, again, in the house, the other end of washington, d.c. there, the other end of pennsylvania avenue. let's get a look from democratic leadership joining me now. assistant house speaker congressman ben ray luhann of new mexico. let me start with you and see if you can clear up what is going
2:09 pm
to be happening properliy there tonight. is there going to be action? is there going to be some kind of action, some kind of vote in relation to this privileged impeachment resolution that was offered by al green? will there be an action? will there be a vote, and what kind of vote will that be? >> well, steve, first, good to be with you this afternoon. we are still trying to see exactly what will be happening this afternoon. so there is action that will be required based on the privileged resolution that was offered by my friend from texas, mr. green. and action must be taken by tomorrow. so while there is still conversations and debate taking place, there may be action this afternoon. or there will be action required by tomorrow. >> congressman, i'm actually being told, and you can't see this, but we can in the lower right-hand corner of our screen, you can see from the cspan camera there that, there it is, this is the roll call vote being taken in the house right now. so i'm glad we have you here
2:10 pm
because i'd like you to explain this to people here. it says motion to table. so let's explain to folks what's going on here. al green, democratic congressman from texas, as a member -- a privileged resolution force you to take action? the action you and democratic leadership apparently have decided is a motion to table, a motion to put it aside, not to proceed with it. is that -- >> so there are a few tools that were available today. one of them being a motion to table. the other motion of referral, which would have sent it back to committee. but a motion to table essentially puts this on the speaker's table. it's a way for members to come together to still take action on a provision. it doesn't always necessarily kill something, but i'll tell you as speaker pelosi has put together the important strategy associated with these investigations of making sure that we're getting to the bottom of answering questions for the american people and presenting the facts to the country, that's
2:11 pm
something that will continue to take place in addition to the work of the judiciary committee where the special counsel will be testifying. >> congressman, i'm sorry to interrupt you, but i hope you'll stick around. lots of news, we have the president right now. this just moments ago as the house votes on tabling an impeachment resolution. here's what the president said moments ago. >> about what? [ inaudible question ] >> no. if people want to leave our country, they can. if they don't want to love our country, if they don't want to fight for our country, they can. i'll never change on that, no. [ inaudible question ] >> what? >> do you think you're winning this political fight? >> i do think i'm winning the political fight? >> why? >> i think i'm winning it by a lot. >> why? >> i think that they are not espousing the view of our country. the four congresswomen. i think that they've said horrible things that the press doesn't cover. i think you should try covering it. when you look at some of the things they said, they're unthinkable. if somebody else or me or anybody else said things like
2:12 pm
that, eh, it would be historic. so you ought to look at some of the horrible statements because there's never bee statements like that. >> about the anti-israel trend of the democratic party. how do you think that all began, and is there any one in particular you blame on that? >> well, the democratic party is really going in a direction that nobody thought possible. they are going so far left they're going to fall off a cliff. so i think they are making a big mistake. but, who knows, that's up to them. >> -- american principle to be able to criticize your government? [ inaudible question ] >> well, there's a lot of talk about the fact that she was married to her brother. i know nothing about it. i hear she was married to her brother. you're asking me a question about it. i don't know, but i'm sure that somebody would be looking at
2:13 pm
that. well, i think the story last night was that 187 republicans voted in favor of trump. and four voted against. i think that was the big story. that seems to be the story. there's great unity in the republican party. it's very unfair what's happened with respect to the way i would say republicans are being treated, frankly, but certainly the way this president has been treated. in the history of our country, there's never been anything like this. this should never be allowed to happen to another president again. should never be allowed to happen. despite that, we've created the greatest economy in the history of our country. we are doing things like nobody's ever done. we have the best job numbers in the history of our country. african-american, asian-american, women, hispanic
2:14 pm
american, best job numbers we've ever had. and i have to go because i see it's starting to pour. [ multiple questions ] [ inaudible question ] >> i'm not relishing the fight. i am enjoying it because i have to get the word out to the american people. and you have to enjoy what you do. i enjoy what i do. the key is -- it's not a question of relishing. they're wrong. they're absolutely wrong. that's not where our country wants to be. we are not going to go and we're not going to be a socialist country. it's not going to happen. >> mr. president, should people be allowed to criticize the government, sir? >> senator rand paul to iran, sir. >> okay. that was the president there as we said leaving the whouchlts that was just a few minutes ago. it took a little bit to turn the ticker on. meanwhile, the drama that began
2:15 pm
in the house just before we showed you that, you can see it in the lower right-hand corner of your screen. that is the floor of the house of representatives. the vote is underway right now. this is a motion to table an impeachment resolution. the impeachment resolution offered by a democrat, al green of texas. al green calling for impeachment on grounds related to the president's comments on twitter about those four democratic congresswomen, and other provocative comments around race that the president's made throughout his tenure. you can see the vote. this is a motion to table. this is a motion to set it aside. so right now early on in the vote there, you see a yae vote means put it aside, don't consider it, don't consider this impeachment resolution. you see all 17 republicans who have voted have voted, yeah, let's put it aside. six democrats saying put it aside, nine saying no, presumably let's move forward with debate over resolution. do we still have ben ray luhann
2:16 pm
with us? >> i'm here with you. >> congressman, thank you very much for sticking by. and i appreciate your understanding as we showed the president there in his comments before heading to north carolina. let me ask you, we just explained what the votes mean in this. how are you voting on this? >> so i will be voting with speaker pelosi today to table this motion as well. and i think that's what you'll see from quite a few of our colleagues. understanding that about 90 have come out in support of an inquiry of impeachment as of today. but what we want is the strong yes case that we can put forward for the american people. and so that's where you'll see this vote break along those lines as well, steve, while we continue to have this important conversation with the american people and while the important work continues to take place within the committees of jurisdiction and with our distinguished chairs of those particular committees. >> let me ask you to respond directly to what al green said today. i'll play this, but he was talking to kasie hunt earlier today about why he felt the
2:17 pm
urgency to introduce this right now. this is what he had to say. >> we cannot wait. as we wait, we risk having the blood of somebody on our hands. and it could be a member of congress. >> congressman, i'm not sure if you could hear -- he said the case for doing this is -- he said if we don't, we risk having the blood somebody on our hands and it could be a member of congress. what's your reaction to that? >> look, as i said earlier, mr. green is a friend of mine. i'm a friend of his, someone that i respect immensely. but on this particular resolution, i disagree with the timing. i think that we have to continue working with the important work that is taking place from an oversight perspective carrying out our constitutional oversight responsibilities, getting answers to these questions, subpoenas that are still out there, many more that were recently released and making sure that we're presenting the strongest case to the american people. but, again, i certainly agree
2:18 pm
with mr. green's assessment that the president's actions including those taken on sunday morning while i was actually on another talk show are absolutely appalling. and that's why we took the action we did last night calling out this president for the racist tweets that he's continued to engage on, rather than spending time solving problems for the american team. >> so you're talking about it proceeding on another track there in terms of these committee hearings that are already taking place. do you want those committee hearings, those committee investigations to result in pursuing impeachment? >> look, i think everything is on the table. i've said that from the beginning, and i continue to believe that. but, again, we have to continue to work with the diligence associated with the oversight hearings, understanding that next week's testimony by the special counsel and going over his report is only one of the areas that we are currently looking into. there have been many pieces of this information that have been
2:19 pm
made available or have been sought after including the allegations associated with tax evasion or money laundering, which is why we need to get our hands on the financial documents, whether it's with deutsche bank or even understanding what's in the president's tax returns. >> so you're noncommittal on that question. you are voting to table this impeachment resolution right now that we're, again, watching that vote right now. critics of you and of democratic leadership who support impeachment, who support moving to impeachment against the president right now might say that you and democratic leadership are trying to run the clock out here, that congress is going to be going off on an extended recess, its august recess very soon. yes, you have mueller next week, but right after that, folks leave town. if you haven't started it before they leave town, they're not back till september. you and leadership have effectively run the clock out. what do you say to that? >> steve, that's absolutely not the case. as a matter of fact, i would argue that the critics that are
2:20 pm
making that the central part of their argument are missing the fact that there will be a six-week recess, and i think that it's incredibly important that when these hearings are taking place that they are available for the american people to watch, to be able to tune in, to be able to get the questions that they have answered. and so the timing of this, rather than starting before an august recess, looking at what that would mean with the absence of those hearings taking place, i think actually counters the argument that you just presented. >> um, and, again, as we continue to watch the vote there, you do see this is lopsided. all republicans who voted right now for tabling, democrats about split. so you can see where this looks like it's headed. we are going to continue to keep an eye on that though. congressman, let me ask you about the other major piece of business we are expecting you folks there in the house to deal with tonight. that is holding the attorney general and the commerce secretary in criminal contempt of congress.
2:21 pm
that vote is also expected tonight. obviously, if that passes and presumably democrats have the votes to do that, that kicks it over to the department of justice, which is run by the attorney general, which is run by bill barr. the presumption -- does the vote tonight effectively, as dramatic as that sounds, is that effectively in the matter? >> look, i don't think there's anyone that takes pride in having to bring these votes to the floor that we will be taking tonight as well and holding officials like the attorney general of the united states of america in contempt. but, again, we have a constitutional oversight responsibility to carry out. and when we see the obstruction that continues to come from this administration, and in this case the attorney general barr as well as a few other officials, shows the action that we must take. so while this is an action to hold the attorney general and a few others in contempt from a
2:22 pm
criminal perspective, it's a tool that we have in addition to using every other option that we have on the table to bring the attention to the american people as to what's happening. and the concern that we have with this administration including the attorney general. who, by the way, prefers to act as the president's personal attorney than the independent department of justice and the attorney general of the united states of america. >> all right, congressman, assisting speaker member of democratic leadership, really appreciate you taking time here as this vote plays out and again staying with us as we play the president's comments. with me now here on set, we have amy, a senior political correspondent for the hill. john, editor at commentary magazine and an msnbc contributor and michelle goldberg, new york times columnist and an msnbc contributor. we are looking at that vote on the screen right now. it looks like there's one republican now who's actually crossed over and voted no on this. no meaning, no, i don't want to table this, presumably. let's have a debate about the resolution of impeachment.
2:23 pm
29 democrats also voting no. we do have a point of reference we can compare this to. al green, the congressman who's introduced this resolution. he's done this a few times before last year in early 2018. he also introduced an impeachment resolution. there was also a vote to table in that vote. the number of nos from democrats was 66. so you see it's 30 right now. that's one thing to keep an eye on, does it go north of that number. you can see democrats about split on that. michelle, i don't know if you could hear what we were putting in place there, but a member of leadership making the case for the democrats to table this and also noncommittal on the broader question of impeachment around obstruction, around mueller, around those issues. what did you make of what he was saying? >> i think he's right on the first and wrong on the second, basically. and so i think it's important to understand why even a lot of people who very strongly support beginning an impeachment inquiry into this president are not in favor of this resolution because, basically, this is a
2:24 pm
resolution to impeach the president, whereas what i think most democrats, most of the 80 democrats have come out for impeachment want to see is an impeachment inquiry, which is a very different thing. then the impeachment resolution is at the end of that process. so i completely understand congressman green wanting to put this on the table because this president is so manifestly unfit and demonstrates that daily and defiles the office and, you know, he kind of wants to do something to get people on the record about it. but this is not the right way. what you need to do is you need to have a long series of hearings putting, you know, kind of weaving together the narrative of this president's corruption. >> uh, amy, how should folks interpret a vote like this, talk at least before trump sent these tweets out is there is that there was this growing descension. you see clearly democratic
2:25 pm
leadership they want this to be tabled. republicans are certainly going to provide a ton of votes right there. but how should this vote be interpreted in terms of the -- >> they were splintered. they still are splintered. they will be splintered going into 2020. but i think on this resolution at least, they are very much -- you are seeing like a split divide. but i think in terms of how he treated these four congresswomen, i think they're very much united. and that's sort of where they wanted to be right now. but i think the problem is going forward, as i said, when you look at 2020, when you look at how this plays out, it's not helpful to the democratic party. it's not helpful. you know, republicans want them obviously to fight and continue fighting. and so i think they want to see -- they want to kind of unify obviously. but it remains to be seen if they'll do that. >> and, again, we know what congressman green has put in this resolution, this impeachment resolution, it's not about obstruction, mueller, the
2:26 pm
things that are often talked about here. this is specifically about the president's comments on twitter about these four congresswomen. he's introduced these in the past. he's talked about the president's comments on charlottesville, a lot of this having to do with his comments about race and immigrants, the immigration ban that he tried early in his administration. i bring that up because there was an interesting piece that caught my eye, and i want to ask you, john, what you think of this. john ward at yahoo news wrote about the president's strategy potentially. and basically he wants to be called a racist by democrats. the idea is not so much that trump's offensive racial remarks will inspire americans to vote for him. rather, it's that trump supporters will be outraged by the label racist and then vote against democrats because of it in 2020. does that make sense to you at all? >> i mean, it's possible that this is the strategy that has now become the strategy after
2:27 pm
the response to the tweet storm that led to all of this, which is to say there has been a lot of talk on left and right that this is some evil machevellian plan. and therefore the democrats were now going to be a far left squad, and he would be able to be the moderate and win. i think this is nonsense. i don't think he had a strategy. >> this was impulsive, you're saying? >> this was impulsive. it was sunday morning. everybody said, oh, my god, what is the matter with you. because now democrats have to defend the people -- the moderate democrats have to stand with the left. he's, like, that's, that's my strategy. i am going to make them call me a racist, and that's really going to make me win. nobody including republicans, even racist republicans, want to
2:28 pm
vote for somebody affirmatively because he's called a racist. that is like corkscrew logic. you want to feel good about the person you're voting for even if you want to defend them against what you think is an unfair charge. that's not the way you get somebody to vote for you. so i think this is all post-hoc justification that the whole world didn't fall into line and the republicans didn't all run away from him the way they did after the "access hollywood." >> we have misha also at the white house, msnbc contributor. mish, willet me bring you in on that question we're talking about right now in terms of this debate about is this all strategic on the part of the president or was this the president just getting antsy on sunday and tweeting? and then everything is sort of justified after the fact? >> well, the president on the white house lawn just now said
2:29 pm
he feels like he's winning this political battle. he also said that he thinks democrats are making a big mistake by picking this fight. this is the kind of fight he likes to have. he likes to talk about who's an american, what the american ideals are, what he sees as american values versus what these four congresswomen are talking about, which he sees as unamerican. that said, this is another instance where the president is being called racist, and there's another instance where republicans are put in this position where they have to take a position on something that is seamingly indefensible. comments which was over the weekend when he was telling these congresswomen to go back to their countries. instead the white house has been saying, no, what he really meant is you can leave the country which is of course a completely different thing. so i think even as the president is relishing in this fight, they are realizing that they have to change the conversation just a bit. and of course also the white house just now had an event with
2:30 pm
some 27 religion leaders, and the president there was talking about religion freedoms. so he's also been trying to pifb yet about whether or not this is a case or not about anti-semitism. >> and, again, you can see there now we're going full screen on this. this resolution here, the motion to table the impeachment resolution, the magic number in the house of course for anything is 218. well over 218 yes votes. this is not official. i know the clock there says zero. they will hold this open for an indeterminant amount of time there, let some of those folks who haven't vote yet get a chance to get on the record. but effectively now this motion to table has passed. more democrats voting for it than against it. all republicans voting for it who have voted -- there was that one lone republican. that might've been a mistake and that one independent. so it looks like al green, democratic congressman, his
2:31 pm
resolution for impeachment looks like the house right now well on its way to putting that to the side. amy, john, michelle, stick around. we are going to have a lot more, a big moment in the house on impeachment, on contempt, on where democrats are going from here. we've also got a 2020 candidate up our sleeves. stick around. up our sleeves stick around rade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪ but i can tell you liberty mutual customized my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
2:32 pm
our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. most people think a button is just a button. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination.
2:33 pm
most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer. plus no payments for up to 90 days. ♪work so hard give it everything you got♪ ♪strength of a lioness tough as a knot♪ ♪rocking the stage and we're never gonna stop♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... just in case you forgot♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... ♪no no no sweat... did you know congress is working to end surprise medical billing? that's when patients are hit with medical bills they thought would be covered by insurance. the problem is big insurance companies want a one-size-fits-all approach that lets them decide
2:34 pm
what they'll pay doctors for yocare. letting insurance companies decide means it could be harder for you to see the best doctors when you need them the most. tell congress, "end surprise billing, and don't let insurance companies put profits over patients. paid for by physicians for fair coverage. welcome back. we're continuing to monitor capitol hill. it is turning out to be a wild hour there with this
2:35 pm
democratically controlled house voting for the first time on a matter of impeachment against president trump. it's about to vote also on whether to hold the president's attorney general and his commerce secretary in contempt of congress. the vote you see on your screen right now, they are in the process, the house is, of tabling of putting aside, of not taking any further action on an impeachment resolution that was offered by democratic congressman al green from texas. the yes votes are for tabling for putting it aside. all republicans who are voting are for this. most of the democrats who voted are as well. but there are 87 democrats who say, no, they don't want to table this. with me now is congressman tim ryan. you're there on capitol hill. that's where all the news is and all the action is this hour. how did you vote the motion was to table to put it aside. did you say put this impeachment resolution aside, or did you say, no, i want to consider it?
2:36 pm
>> i voted to put it aside for now. i am for impeachment, but i don't think we should bring it right to the floor, steve. this is a big deal, and it needs to go through the committee process. i understand that emotions run high, but the reality of it is if we're going to do something this big, it needs to go through the proper channels and it needs to go through the committee process. that's why i voted to table it. >> so you say you do support impeachment. what made this resolution, besides the fact this was a privileged resolution bringing it straight to the floor, what also made this resolution different than a lot of the conversation we had about impeachment was that congressman green rooted this impeachment call in the president's rhetoric in his public words about race, about immigration. so much of the conversation's been about the mueller report and obstruction. do you think that the items that are cited here by congressman green should be -- if you're for impeachment, should it be part of the articles of impeachment ultimately? >> probably not. i mean, this president, we're
2:37 pm
talking about high crimes and misdemeanors here. we are talking about obstruction of justice five, six, maybe more counts, pretty clear in the mueller report, i read it twice. so i think we should stay focused on that. we're all obviously very appalled with what the president has done, what he continues to do. it's a black mark on the country, a black mark on the white house. but the impeachment should stay focused on the obstruction of justice, and it should go through the proper channels. i do support it going through the proper channels. >> what about the calendar on this? the house is going to be in recess in august. mueller comes next week. that's a big deal. but then everybody goes on vacation. they're not back till labor day. the clock is ticking here. you're for impeachment, when would it start? >> yeah. i mean, that's the story of a legislative body. you're always running against the clock, and, you know, hopefully soon. i mean, i am encouraging people to get this thing moving. i think we need to move on it. we need to go through the proper
2:38 pm
channels. but, yeah, it probably won't happen next week, so i'm hoping as soon as we get back in september that that's when we start the process. >> do you think leadership -- we've gotten certainly indications leadership is not too enthusiastic about impeachment. do you think they're trying to run the clock? >> uh, hard to tell. i'm not in those meetings, steve. and there's a lot of different interests in our caucus. you know, about 240 members of caucus from 240 separate districts. some moderate, some conservative, some liberal. and there's a lot of interest that speaker pelosi is balg now. so i don't know what their thinking is at this point. >> um, let me ask you about the other big piece of business there. again, we are expecting it shortly after this. but you see this vote now on your screen wrapping up. we are also expecting the house to vote on holding the attorney general the commerce secretary in criminal contempt. and as we were talking about in the last segment, that means goes to the justice department, presumably barr, says the
2:39 pm
justice department won't pursue this. why criminal contempt and not civil contempt that would have allowed you to try to get the a subpoena to enforce what you're looking for? >> well, you know, i'm not exactly sure the machinations on this. this is getting down to some fundamental values, the establishment of our own democracy saying that the congress has the power in article i of the constitution. and it's the house of representatives, not even the senate. and so i think having that there in a criminal way, i think is important, for us to do it. >> let me ask you -- we say you're a presidential candidate. we understand this afternoon there's news that you have qualified for this second debate coming up. but there is the criteria for these debates is going to be changing heading into the fall. you're going to have to be polling at a level you're not at right now, 2% in four of these
2:40 pm
polls. the fundraising criteria goes up. are we on the verge of a big crunch in this race where you and other candidates at this level of support have to make a decision? >> i think -- yeah, there will be a big crunch. i don't think it's going to be me. we're going to have a great debate at the end of the month. and as we saw in the last debate, those are opportunities where the role race can turn on a dime. and i think people are looking for somebody like me who is focused on the economic issues, focused on the corruption and the structural inequality in our society today. that's what people want. they want us to get back to this economic conversation, the 75% of the people, for example, who are living paycheck to paycheck, the people who can't afford their health care or pay their prescription drugs, they want the democratic party to be focused on their issues, which i am. and the more people that get to know me, the more they like me. so i am just going to continue to try to get that message out. then we take it to donald trump in the fall. and we take him down because he's not done anything for the
2:41 pm
economy. he's made matters worse and he sold out to the country club class. and we're excited about the next couple weeks and we are going to have some fun. >> folks can see there -- we'll go full screen with this. you see that tally board we've been showing you? the vote is officially closed. it is over. and the house has voted overwhelmingly to table the impeachment resolution. so that will sort of put that aside, al green's motion to begin impeachment against president trump. you do see -- this is now a new vote they have started here. it did look like about 90 democrats had voted against tabling it. the rest of the house pretty much in favor of putting it aside. congressman tim ryan, thank you for joining us there from capitol hill as all of this has played out. we appreciate that. and ahead, the latest on all of the action happening now. the contempt vote, that is still on the docket, that is still to come. a lot going on there in the house. we'll be right back. i switched to liberty mutual,
2:42 pm
because they let me customize my insurance. and as a fitness junkie, i customize everything, like my bike, and my calves. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ iand grew it toy i$36 billion dollars. 6 in 2010, i signed the giving pledge to fund good causes. then i left my business to combat climate change, fix our democracy, and hold president trump accountable. last year, we ran the largest youth voter mobilization in history - helping double turnout
2:43 pm
and win back the house. i'm tom steyer and i approve this message. let's make change happen! prpharmacist recommendedne memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams.
2:44 pm
2:45 pm
all right. back with all eyes again on the house floor on capitol hill. lawmakers there in the house, chamber just voted overwhelmingly 332-95 was the final vote count there to kill a measure of impeachment against the president. we're now expecting lawmakers to vote on whether to hold the attorney general bill barr and the commerce secretary wilbur ross in criminal contempt. nbc news white house correspondent kelly o'donnell joins me now with the latest. she is over there on capitol hill. kelly, 332-95, i note that is 30 more democrats voting against tabling than the last time there was one of these votes last year. >> reporter: well, there is certainly been a move toward -- and it's at times within slow with bursts of more democrats who want to see impeachment, inquires opened, and that question, sort of that process to begin. what's important to note about this is this resolution is authored by al green of texas, was not about the mueller
2:46 pm
investigation or some of the other controversies or questions about the president's conduct. it was a more broad allegation that he is unfit to serve, in part, based on racial matters, rarely incense activity, racist tweets, things of that nature. so it was not a chance, if you will, to look at the fallout of the russia investigation or allegations of obstruction of justice. so, al green has tried this a couple of other times, and it has not worked for him. but it does serve as an opportunity where democrats or republicans have to be counted. and republicans largely stood together on this. justin recently leaving the republican party voting for with democrats in this instance. so it is not a surprise. the real question is does it change the calculus for nancy pelosi? and it does not appear that it will, that this is something where she is willing to withstand periods of time where democrats want to let their voters know that they are
2:47 pm
concerned about this and want to go down this path, even if she is not yet ready. it is not just the speaker. it's the leadership team. it's the majority of democrats in the house caucus are not yet there. their argument is to follow a more prosecutorial line of going through each of the committees, building the case, and then trying to assess is there enough evidence to attract republican support without republicans, this is not something that can go forward to the ultimate conclusion of impeachment, which would be removal from office. otherwise, it's just a statement from democrats that they don't believe the president is appropriate to remain in office. so that's sort of the calculation there. now, on the other matter of contempt for barr and ross, the attorney general on the commerce secretary, what stands out about this is this was the fight over the census that we have seen play out sort of spike and now burn out. the question of citizenship will not be on the 2020 census. and that's where this all started. they had not provided documents
2:48 pm
and testimony that was requested by the relevant committees here. and that started the process of contempt. so even now that issue is effectively moot, the forms are being printed, the administration folded on that one, they can't add that question, which many argued would be a chill on immigrant communities responding, and the census is intended to call all heads around the country of any age, background, citizenship, and to count all people in the united states. and so that goes forward. so then the question is why do this. and it is a power of congress to say the administration must comply. and they fail to do so here in a way that satisfied the needs of the committee. and so they're going forward and putting this criminal contempt, which then goes to the justice department, that's a little curious because of course it's the attorney general who is a part of this that was also true when eric holder was held in contempt. so it is more statement than anything, but it's a powerful statement, and democrats want to make it.
2:49 pm
>> kelly o'donnell there on capitol hill. and, again, the voting continues on the house floor. a series of votes they are working their way through now, again building up to the contempt vote that is coming soon. a quick break. our experts at the table. a lot more to go over right after this. the more, the merrier. got to have this stuff in the morning. oh, that's too hot. act your age. get your own insurance company. carlo, why don't you start us with a little bit of cereal? you can spread it all around the table. and we're gonna split the warm hot dog. and i'll have a glass of grape juice to spill on the carpet. oh, uh, do you want some to spill? act your age. get your own insurance company. that's ensure max protein,me to spill? with high protein and 1 gram sugar.
2:50 pm
it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. o♪ ozempic®! ♪ oh! oh! (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7 and maintained it. oh! under 7? (announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? (announcer) ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®.
2:51 pm
stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. ♪work so hard give it everything you got♪ ♪strength of a lioness tough as a knot♪ ♪rocking the stage and we're never gonna stop♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... just in case you forgot♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... ♪no no no sweat...
2:52 pm
lick fast like a cookie dough ninja. apply that same speed to the ford hurry up and save sales event. for the first time ever get 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. it all adds up. don't you love math? so get here asap because tasty deals and summer go fast. get in or lose out on 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. welcome back to mtp daily. we continue to follow all the breaking news from the house floor. a resolution on impeaching the president just failed.
2:53 pm
up next a vote to hold the attorney general and commerce secretary in criminal contempt of congress. amy, john, michelle, yamiche all with us here. amy, let me start with you. i throw my sense of this past you and see what you think. that vote on tabling impeachment started while we were interviewing a member of democratic leadership. he seemed potentially as surprised as we were by it. was this a vote that democratic leadership was keeping some distance from here? >> yeah, they wanted to. pelosi has wanted to keep as far, far away from the democrats as possible and said as much. she sees forest on the trees for this thing. she thinks it is not good for the party and sort of why she wanted to do that. i think she knows that people want -- that people want to impeach him. it's obviously very popular in the party but not so popular in her caucus.
2:54 pm
it's just a third of the caucus you think about it now. it has seen some growth but not as much as some democrats would like. >> john, in terms of the republican party itself, let's separate it from trump a little bit. yesterday you had this vote on condemning his remarks, all but four republicans took trump's position on that. he thanked them on twitter this morning. all the republicans were also for tabling it. we talk so much about the risk of democrats suddenly, are they worried about being identified with the squad. is there a risk for republicans here they're all now kind of aligned with ha trump tweet. >> no, because i think the republicans who were threatened by trump's extreme behavior enormous numbers of them lost their seats in 2018, the suburban district republicans who had voters who really, really, really didn't like this stuff. >> the clinton district republicans. >> 40 of them are gone.
2:55 pm
so what you have is a hard-core of the party, you have these 191 republicans in the house and apparently 187 of them have very little counter pressure in their districts to scold trump and all kinds of downside for them to be -- to appear to take the side of msnbc, the mainstream media, democrats and you know and pelosi. >> michelle, looking at this vote, i'm curious to see who the names are. we've k all news organizations have been keeping a list of democratss who say they're ready for impeachment. that number was 85 coming into today. the number who said don't table this impeachment resolution, in other words let's go forward, was 95. ten more democrats that have publicly announced support. >> one of them was jerry nadler. >> i can read, jerry nadler the chair voted against table. he said the house should follow regular order and send it to the judiciary committee. in other words, send it to me
2:56 pm
he's saying. > i don't think it's a secret that there are more dras who want to begin impeachment proceedings than who have come out for it publicly. what you hear from the judiciary committee is that nadler himself has been very frustrated with nancy pelosi's reticence on this. particularly something like this that's unjikly to pass. there's not that much loss in just putting your name down on principle because obviously on principle, i i had a majority of the caucus believes that he has rendered himself unfit to serve. >> you wonder, you get to the point in the vote we were watching it so few votes in those early minutes and then it creeps up to 218. it hits 218 and you wonder if there's a certain number of democrats that say now it's safe to vote against tabling this and not have to worry it will be -- not be tabled. all these terms. i get mixed up. yamic yamiche, let me ask you, in terms of where democrats go in their relationship with trump
2:57 pm
legislatively, can there be a legislative relationship for the next year plus. >> it's tough to say because the president continues to say that he feels harassed by democrats. but this vote to table impeachment shows they're not ready to go forth with impeachment. as a result, maybe the president sees that and he likely will see it as a way for had imto say the democrats weren't ready to throw him out today. the president is facing all sorts of inquiries into his finances, who he's had at his hotel including who he employs at the white house, the emoluments issues with him having his daughter and his son-in-law working here. i think the president will use if he wants to the idea that democrats are going too far in congress if he feels as though it's politically advantageous. that said the president and white house want to get things done like infrastructure and immigration. even more toxic than the -- than what the democrats are doing in congress is this relationship
2:58 pm
between the president and democrats when it comes to these racist tweets and his attacking of individual democrats. i think that's going to be more problematic for things going forward than what the democrats do on the hill if they continue to not do impeachment. >> i mean we hear that pelosi is in the back rooms as negotiating with treasury secretary mnuchin on a grand deal to extend the debt ceiling through the next election. if that were to happen, if it weren't derailed by some reason either because democrats don't want to play this deal or if trump were to derail it because that's the kind of thing that he does, if that doesn't happen, that could be a pretty signif caitlyn thing to happen in the middle of all of this. >> it falls into the category of must pass. they've got deal with that one as we saw in 2011 is, you can
2:59 pm
get into the brinksmanship. that's one to watch, the debt ceiling. at some point you got to do it. >> you can do it in a way that can take it out of politics and if they can do that, then politics is still alive in washington. that's a real test. >> aimee, that question of spooking of running out of time, is the democratic leadership trying to run the clock and will they succeed on the broader question of impeachment? >> yes, and they have to. tell pelosi wants to, once had he go home for august, it's done. we're in the fall. the fall is a year away from 2020. no one's talking about it at town haws. they're talking about the issues. so i think. >> i don't think that's totally true. what i heard from the last -- i think that was true at one point. what i heard from people coming back from the last round of town halls there's a lot of people at the grassroots upset about the impunity of this administration. >> we've got mueller testifying next week, the recess, the town haws. debates coming once a month
3:00 pm
starting in the fall. we'll see aimee, john, michelle, yamiche, thank you all. we'll be back tomorrow with more "meet the press" daily" and "the beat with ari melber"" starts right now. >> sorry. we begin our breaking news from the floor of the u.s. house. for the first time since democrats have taken control of the u.s. house, right now, moments ago, a bill to impeach president trump just reached the house floor. that itself is unusual and what happened next was also striking. speaker pelosi leading democrats to unite with republicans as you see right here right now to squash this effort, voting down this bill to impeach the president of the united states donald trump by the 332-95. these numbers just came in. breaking. the debate comes amidst deep tensions as the house just formally rebuked donald trump laht


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on