tv Morning Joe MSNBC July 25, 2019 3:00am-6:00am PDT
>> they are doing it as we sit here. >> it is not an interference. they have information. i thid i'd take it. >> i hope thiss not the new normal but i fear it is. >> this just came out. wikileak. i love wikileak. this is a whole big fat hoax. >> it is not a hoax. >> it is a total witch hunt. >> it is not a witch hunt. >> there was no obstruction. if you read the report, you'll see that. >> the report did not conclude he did not commit obstruction of justice, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> it is a complete and total exoneration. >> did you exonerate the president? >> no. >> good morning, mika, i was hearing about how republicans were extatic yesterday.
i guess that bar is so low. russia interfered with your democracy and mine. the second thing we learned was that donald trump and his campaign team happily welcomed that, aggressively welcomed it. they were grateful for it. we also learned that when federal agents tried to investigate this, that one member of the trump team after another member of the trump team lied about those contacts. then we learned from robert mueller that donald trump, the president of the united states lied about the russians trying to infiltrate. even lies when he was sending back his questions under oath. so we learned that donald trump
committed perjury. he lied under oath. then of course, as we heard there, we heard that american democracy is still, is still under threat from the russians. so just a little night cap for russians who have to be sell rating the fact that the entire republican party are useful idiots for them now and have flung open their arms for the russians to come and undermine american democracy. last night, mitch mcconnell allowed two measures to protect america from russian cyber invasion. he killed two bills that would protect this country. republicans, celebrate. what a great day it was for you and vladimir putin, i know you are happy with that. >> another thing we learned is
that the president can be indicted when he leaves office. >> yes. >> so that was a revelation we are grateful for. >> big victory for them. if i'm a republican, i'd be thrilled by the fact that i found out that president of the united states lied under oath, which by the way we impeached bill clinton for. the russians tried to interfere. the president of the united states and his team welcomed it. things are still happening where they are trying to interfere with democracy and mitch mcconnell and republicans are doing nothing to stop it. >> a good day is basically protecting donald trump. it is fair to say the democrats did not have the day they want
the bob mueller was not the witness they were hoping for. there was not some new evidence or context. as you say, bob mueller agreed with adam schiff if he was asked if it was unpatriotic and young wrong to ask for foreign assistance. he got mueller to conclude on this. if you take a look at the report, it is damming and devastating. the question now is what do democrats want to do now with all the testimony they got from mueller. >> some people will talk about
obsticle optics. they got all they needed. they should either start an impeachment inquiry or leave it for good. if they don't given all we heard yesterday, then nothing justifies an impeachment inquiry and prove trump right that he can do the equivalent of shooting someone on fifth avenue and they can do nothing about. >> it the republicans had all of that confirmed. they spent all day screaming at a guy who is a vietnam war hero, a marine in the ranger hall of fame because of the risks he took to save the lives of his band of brothers. a guy who got shot in vietnam. his knees were so bad he couldn't go to vietnam but he trained hard to do everything he
could do. the guy who guided this country so ably that he was asked to stay on in an unprecedented way. that's the american hero a lot of these losers were screaming and yelling at. afterwards, he was celebrating the fact that he is obviously challenged by some condition. the fact that they were cheering that and talking about how he was struggling shows this how sick and how low donald trump party is now going. >> twisted. >> it is twisted and sad. >> we have msnbc contributor mike barnicle, and nbc news correspondent. great to have you all on board. we are going to dive deeper into
the testimony in just a moment. we are breaking down all the biggest moments. we want to briefly tell you about overnight developments in two other big stories. sources tell nbc news that sex offender jeffery epstein was found injured and in a fetal position in his cell at a new york city jail where he's being held on sex trafficking charges. he was found semiconscious with marks on his neck in his cell sometime in the last two days according to two sources. he is now on suicide watch. why wouldn't he be on suicide watch before that? >> two sources say he may have tried hang himself. a third source cautioned that the injuries wither not serious. questioning whether he might have staged an attack or a suicide attempt to get a transfer to another facility.
another source said an assault hasn't been ruled out and another inmate has been questioned. epstein has pleaded not guilty to conspiracy and sex trafficking charges. we'll be following this story. >> the only thing i'll say here, they need to make sure this guy does no harm to himself or harm to him. he has testimony the american people need to hear about about some very powerful people, perhaps some of the most powerful people in the country. the man needs to be protected and allowed to testify and, again, tell us what we need to know about these powerful men that always swirlinged around him and some of whom raped young women. >> also overnight, puerto rico
embattled governor announced his resignation after leaked on line chats. the resignation goes into effect next friday, august 2, came in a facebook video after attorneys commissioned by the puerto rico house of representative unanimously found five offenses that are ground for impeachment. all happening while you were sleeping overnight. now back to robert mueller's testimony, over the course of seven hours yesterday, the special counsel who oversaw the investigation answered lawmakers questions where he affirmed his reports key findings, insisted russia will continue and acknowledged a lack of cooperation from president trump disputing the near daily assault
on the probe. mueller's testimony delivered warnings to a different medium to his two-volume report. it did not contain many surprises. his caution performance found him declining questions 198 times claiming he did not want to speculate or discuss internal investigations or was ordered not to answer. while he struggled through some questions, there were times when the hearing crystallized some difficult facts. >> mr. mueller, the president repeatedly claimed your report found no obstruction and it completely exonerated him. that is not what your report said? >> correct. >> the report did not conclude he did not commit an obstruction of justice. is that correct? >> that is correct.
>> did you actually totally exonerate the president? >> no. >> your report states it does not exonerate the president. >> it does. >> could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? >> yes. >> you believe he committed -- you could charge the president of the united states with obstruction of justice after he left office? >> yes. >> this just came out, wikileak, i love wikileak, donald trump october 10, 2016. this wikileak stuff is unbelievable. you got to read it donald trump october 12, 2016. this wikileaks like a treasure trove, 2016. i love reading those wikileak. would any of those quotes disturb you, mr. director? >> i'm not sure i would say -- >> how do you react to those?
>> problematic is an understatement in terms of the display of giving some hope or some boost to what is and should be illegal activity. >> several individuals associated with the trump campaign were also trying to make money during the transition is that true? >> that is true. >> paul manafort was trying to make money? >> generally, that is accurate. >> michael flynn from turkey? >> true. >> donald trump was trying to make millions from moscow. >> the hotel in moscow? >> yes. >> yes. >> numerous trump associates lied to your team, grand jury and congress? >> number of persons we interviewed in our investigation turns out did lie.
>> mike flynn lied? >> yes. >> george papadopoulos? >> true. >> paul manafort was convicted of lying? >> true. >> paul manafort went so far as to encourage others to lie? >> that is accurate. >> michael cohen, the president's lawyer was indicted for lying? >> true. >> he lied to stay on message with the president? >> allegedly from him. >> when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt, that was also false? >> i'd like to think so, yes. >> your investigation is not a witch hunt? >> it is not a witch hunt. >> from your testimony today, i gather knowingly collecting assistance from a foreign
governmeduring a campaign is a crime. >> it is a crime. >> rudy giuliani was gleeful in sending text messages with emojis that the president was not exonerated for obstructing justice, that the president can be charged with a crime after he leaves office, that the president can be charged with obstruction of justice after he leaves office, that's president gave, quote, hope and a boost, a boost to illegal activity, that paul manafort tried to make money during the campaign, michael flynn tried to make money from the campaign from the government of turkey, that donald trump tried to make money during the campaign from moscow,
that donald trump's nsa director lied and was indicted, donald trump's campaign manager lied and was indicted, trump's deputy campaign manager lied and was indicted, that's president's lawyer lied and was indicted, that's president's foreign policy expert lied and was indicted. as to the question as to whether or not robert mueller believed his investigation is not a witch hunt, we can take the word of 60% of republicans who said in a poll two days ago that robert mueller ran a fair investigation. if that is a good day for the republican party in the age of trump, i'd hate to see a bad day for them. >> we talked about yesterday
going in, will he present anything new. the answer was no. but as you have laid out, the old stuff is damning enough. it was one thing to see written in a 448-page report and another to hear from the mouth of robert mueller. we have heard it said, robert mueller was probably not the witness democrats had hoped to have. they hoped he would come out there and make the case. what he restated, that is almost enough right there. >> willie, i don't know what it says about us as a culture after yesterday's hearing of a man of
this character, that we are now emersed in the cosmetics. that he looked old, he stumbled a few times, he had difficulty finding the sources in his report that he and his people authored. the bottom line, when you look at his testimony and everything you laid out is this, the president of the united states dropped his duty. the president of the united states failed his oath of office. he failed to protect the people of the united states of america from a sworn enemy, russia. in addition to failing to do that, he consorted with russia, he and his people consorted with the russians during a campaign for the presidency to subvert our electoral process. that's the bottom line of what happened. >> not only that, they did it last election. it is still happening now.
mitch mcconnell and donald trump are doing everything they can to stop any legislation from passing that would protect us from russian attacks. this is stupid and short-sighted. what if donald trump indicts to run the tariffs in 2020. we'll talk about that. i wanted to pick up on something you said yesterday afternoon. it is this, speaking of how shallow many people in the news media are. many people who follow politics. it is remarkable that these facts were laid out yesterday and people were concerned about the optics. almost as remarkable that this report came out and was shaded by what the attorney general did. it was the work of what, say a mob boss's lawyer might do to
shade the facts. we are here now coming up on the end of july and people's view of this report is still colored by what william barr did is pretty incredible and disturbing. the facts as laid out are damning enough to justify any impeachment process and put anybody else in jail. >> there is a big cultural question about how it could be that this is the kind of thing we are focusing on, the optics. i do think the democrats framed it for us. this is going to be the movie, not the book. they were trying to make this thing come to life, that was placing a burden on bob mueller he was clearly not prepared to meet. he was within the four corners
of the report. i think mike would concede this bob mueller is not the man he was in his public performance. he did not turn out to be the star of the movie the democrats wanted him to be. let's put it on them. the reality is everything mike just said, everything you just said, everything bob mueller said affirmed in his stocatto way. all of those facts have been known for months. all of those are in the report. we've known them. they've been on paper all this time. we didn't learn anything. all we did was have those things reinforced. the question comes, what happened between the release of the mueller report and today. if it is true it is a damning report and i believe it is. it lays out a series of high
crimes and misdemeanors. what has happened to have them sitting here in late july saying privately to everyone. i will say that is what house democrats are saying. the same thing hannity was saying last night. impeachment is dead. how did that happen? i think part of it has to be laid at the feet of bill barr who engaged an scoextra ordinar act of ruthless raw power that took the report and lied about everything in the report and helped set in stone a deception that still has not been dispelled in the public. number two, democrats in the face of that did nothing. did not say this is a national
emergency. did not say at any point in these months, stop. it is all here. let's go. an impeachment inquiry is justified now. let's get it going today. instead, they sat and said, bob mueller will be savior. they've dij dithered for the last five months and now we sit in june with a report that definitely evidences an impeachment inquiry. it is partly about bill barr and the failure of the democrats to fight back in the moment when it was necessary. >> as a former republican who saw his party fight sometimes savagely, it is shocking in the age of trump to look at the democratic party and how inept
they seem to be time and time again to taking the fight to donald trump or to mitch mcconnell. you are right, john. it has been a remarkably bad miss playing by the democratic party. willie, let me tread very carefully with the next thing i say here. "the new york times" reporting that members of robert mueller's own staff new early on that he was obviously challenged, whether by a medical condition or something else and that he was not able to put in the hours he had been able to put in before and that things were challenging. we suspect now, perhaps, that's why he had an aid next to him the entire time. talking about his labored performance was a departure from
his once labeled stamina. others scheduling this hearing had to know this. i am really surprised if their overselling this as the movie and they know that the man is facing apparently some challenges, that they put him in front of the cameras. we were all calling for public hearings but we did not know what people close to robert mueller knew and what the democrats knew that he should not have been in the glare of a public spotlight if he is facing some medical challenge. >> there are a number of reasons he didn't want to testify. among them were some of the reasons we saw. that he wasn't feeling physically up to it. why he wanted had is aid next to
him throughout both hearings. as john says, democrats couldn't make the case for impeachment so they hung it all on robert mueller. even just restating what has been out there in his 448-page report, that would make the case to the american people. it's unclear whether he accomplished that. it doesn't look like it so far. >> there were a number of times, they were ordering the integrity and many times mueller allowed inaccuracies to go unchecked. let's take a look. >> in 2016, the fbi did something they probably haven't done before, they spied on two american citizens associated with a presidential campaign. >> you didn't follow the special counsel regulations. it clearly says write a
confidential report. nowhere does it say write a report about decisions that weren't reached. volume two was not authorized under the law to be written. >> earth steeither steele made e thing up or russians lied to steal. >> peter strup hated trump, you didn't know that? >> i did not know that. >> telling george papadopoulos. >> i can't get into that. >> i hope they are just stupid. if not, then they are will fully
lying to the american people and beating up a decorated marine. the attorney general of the united states also lied about the agagenesis of this investigation. >> you've been looking at this closely from the beginning. what jumped out at you especially as to the origins. >> they were very methodical about the ways they were continuing and he didn't push back. i think i can speak to joe's question. reporters who have been covering this story the last two years have been hearing for weeks there is an issue with robert mueller. people close to him pushed back
strongly and said this is overblown, he's fine. i believe that's why this hearing happened. we were all asking, why did they let this happen. >> i have nothing but refer reference. he volunteered for the vietnam war. a congressional hearing is a communications exercise. the whole point of yesterday was to get the message out of all these things you guys are talking about to the american public. one of our nbc news poll shows less than half of americans heard any coverage at all about the mueller report. that is compared to like 75 percent in an effort to breath
life into that hearing. you played the best moments where he did breath life. in other key points, he didn't seem to know what was in his own report. over 100 times, he referred to back to his report. those were key moments where they were trying to deliver information about the president. >> what about the lies about the genesis of the report. >> the first clip you played from jim jordan, i was shocked where he said the fbi spied on carter page. i was surprised mueller didn't push back. you don't use the term spying when the fbi goes to court and gets a warrant from a federal
judge for a man already recruited by russia. >> wasn't this guy indicted before 2013 before donald trump even thought about running? >> that's right. he had been targeted by russian intelligence. there is a wiretap, he had travelled to russia. one republican said robert mueller's report was unamerican. they accused him of violating the special counsel regulations. there was no push back to that. even on his best day, he may not have pushed back because he decided there was no percentage in it. he didn't want to be there and didn't want to get involved in these fights. there is an inspector general review that may come outer. the idea that this was a deep
state conspiracy, democratic plot to attack donald trump is fantasy and yet the republicans methodically put that message out in clips that could be played over and over again on fox news. >> 60% of republicans believe the investigation was honest and straight forward. if it was this deep state conspiracy, it was run by republicans for republicans. the judges approved those wiretaps with carter page, all republican appointees. so again, it is absolute nonsense. the republicans were left -- all they could do was lie, scream and yell yesterday. >> it was quite a display. >> a very bleak day. >> i actually think the gocha
moment the dwrats were democrats wither looking for. the gocha moment. you believe he committed? you believe he could be indicted when he leaves office. robert mueller said he does. big ouch. so the president doesn't get auto reelected. >> which led to one of the greatest openings every. mika was jumping up and down when he said. second term or jail term. let's play hard ball. >> mika lives for those hard ball opens. >> it was a good one. chris matthews crystallized the most painful day for president
trump. he could be indicted when he leaves office. second term or prison term. brought to the table thanks to the republicans. good job, guys. >> he had been saying years ago, he did not think he would seek a second term. now not only is he going to seek a second term he to avoid jail time, he's going to once again to do a win at all cost campaign. it may get uglier than in 2016 because donald trump's freedom may be on the line. he's running for reelection so he won't be indicted and sent to jail. >> many have said after
yesterday, we have everything we wanted. we have the report, let's turn the page and go win the election next year. that's what some democrats are saying. >> nbc's ken, thank you very much. we'll bring in one of the members. congressman hakeem jefferys and mark warner will be our guest. >> we are going to ask him why republicans killed two bills that would have protected you and me from vladimir putin. we'll be right back. ht bk.ac
woman: (on phone) discover. hi. do you have a travel card? yep. our miles card. earn unlimited 1.5 miles and we'll match it at the end of your first year. nice! i'm thinking about a scuba diving trip. woman: ooh! (gasp) or not. you okay? yeah, no, i'm good. earn miles. we'll match 'em at the end of your first year.
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. here, hello! starts mom andwith -hi!mple...rez!!! how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?!
a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today. >> americans need to know this as they listen to the democrats and socialists on the other side of the aisle. >> he knows he's innocent.
he's not kuptly acting. he's not obstructing justice, he is pursuing justice. the fact that you ran it out two years, means you perpetuated injustice. >> when people lied, you through the book at him. when steele lied, nothing. when the trump campaign met with russians, 3500 words. the team was so bias. >> having desperately tried and failed to make a case, you made a political case instead. >> the drafting and publication of information in the report without an indictment, without prosecution flies in the face of american justice. i find those facts and this entire process unamerican.
>> there is collusion in plain sight. collusion between russia and the democratic party. >> some of the performances from yesterday. >> the stupidity of nunez i find stunning. it is breathtaking. how inept he is. john, help me out here. a little comment. i got a question, john, for you. so these certain stupid republicans will call capitalists socialists. so playing by these rules. if somebody called me a socialist and i was a capitalist, it is fair to ask if
you can start calling them fascists. if this is the world we are in where socialism is being thrown around. if that's the game republicans want to play. also, can you help me out just with some numbers here, john. >> sure, go. this is the part of the show where you participate instead of me just talking. >> i'm teeed up, brother. let's go. >> that one guy. mcclintock, i think the kids call him. that fella said what robert mueller, a highly decorated marine did, he got a bag of poo and lit it and put it on the front doorstep and there was
nothing to it. help me. is there anything off the top of your brilliant head that is like an ibm super computer. how many of the president's men were indicted and arrested? weren't there 299 indictments in all of russian indictments? >> counts. >> can you give us the numbers of this poo in a bag, setting on fire, ringing the doorbell and run that a marine war hero did. can you do that for the americans and would like to know the real facts. >> if i had known your direction i would have conducted my documents. first of all, it is true. alex is going to ring in my ear and tell me if i'm wrong on this. it is true north of a dozen trump people are in fact or had
been convicted or, here we go. six ex trump advisors, four lobbyists, lawyer, russian nationals and officers have all been indicted, if you totalled up the number of accounts of the counts you would get. the motion of this effort is, i believe, you refer to it quoting the congressman as calling it a flaming bag of poo. seems like that is not quite strie strictly speaking accurate. >> that was the name of my first band, flaming bag of poo. that other fella said what
robert mueller did by investigating things when he knew that ola guidelines prevented him from actually bringing charges against the president flew in the face of american justice. he may have even said it was unamerican. i believe if you look at what robert mueller's charge was, it was specifically to investigate this and the president to see if other people were involved in other possible conspiracy and to also again get the information to educate the american people and send his findings along to congress. >> of course, yesterday was an exercise of protecting the president for the republicans. if you took president trump's name off or blacked it out and just sat and refewed thoviewed
pages, how could you not be alarmed there. bob mueller said again, they are doing it as we sit here today and they will do it again in 2020 and not enough is being done about it. take politics out of it, your personal feelings of the president out of it and look at the evidence. are you not concerned or alarmed about what russia did and continues to do? this is not a political question, this is an american question. >> this is not about hating donald trump. this is about loving america as it was said yesterday. so mika, there is a simple test i use when speaking about impeachment. idea a simple task. it was this.
if you or i did that. if we lied under oath, committed perjury in a deposition, in a grand jury. what would happen to us, we we'd be sent to jail. i voted against two articles of impeachment. the two that would have sent anybody else to jail. the federal judges in florida was a yes. i stand by that vote today. democrats today may better understand that vote today. the same thing with donald trump. there is a reason why everybody around donald trump gets into jail. they weren't protected. there is a reason mueller said trump could be sent to jail after his term. a lot of reason. obstruction of justice.
it is a simple reason for democrats. do you believe that no man is above the law? or do you believe because you are scared of donald trump that you are going to allow donald trump to be the one man in america who is above the law? the question is a simple question. if anybody else did the things we learned yesterday that donald trump did, would they be in jail? talk to any federal prosecutor. they would say he would at least be indicted and tried. >> we also learned that donald trump tried get don mcgahn to lie for him. mcgahn wouldn't and how many others did and some of them are in jail. this is basic image. black and white. i'm not sure how republicans are
standing on this. it is not well. >> this is not about republicans now but democrats having the will to at least open up an impeachment inquiry and see where the facts take them. enough is enough. open it up or burry it for good. >> let's bring in the reporter for the "washington post," eugene scott. what nancy pelosi has been saying that of course all the foundation is there for this president acting above the law, doing things that are clearly enforceable offenses. she wants the american public to understand what is going on and to be along for the ride of the process. what are you hearing from inside the caucus, anything about if
that is changing at all? did yesterday move the meter for the american public? >> that is certainly the hope of televising these hearings so more people who haven't been reading or engaged can hear and the questioning that would lead them to question their lawmakers to move forward towards impeachment. when i talked to staffers, they believe and had seen there had been an increase of calls and e-mails to representatives from americans suggesting their support for impeachment and frustration of republican lawmakers who made it clear that they had no interest in further protecting the american public from russia's actions which we now know are ongoing. we also saw that republicans communicated that their main priority wasn't just pleasing
the president but pleasing voters. we have to remember majority of voters in america are not concerned about future interference into the election from russia, and so now democrats are put in a situation to answer what will they do given their power and influence to stop this and to please the american voter. >> eugene, in your discussions, talks with people on the hill, on both sides of the aisle, does it ever come up, the fact that the president of the united states takes an oath of office to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the united states? and it was visibly clear yesterday during that testimony from bob mueller during that hearing that he failed his oath of office. he failed to protect the united states of america? this has nothing to do with politics. so off the record when you
encounter republicans, do they ever get into the fact that the president has placed this country in danger? >> not republican lawmakers. certainly republican staffers, aides, and voters. the argument about the president being unfit coming from the right is rooted in his ignorance and lack of awareness of what he is supposed to be doing. that his job is not one where it's focussed on himself and protecting himself, but the american public as a whole. and there's deep frustration with him within the party because of that. people aren't going to speak out. they aren't going to push back. they know that if they do, they will not maintain their influence and their power in washington, and that's what is of concern to many republicans more than anything else. and i think that was very clear yesterday in a way for americans to see as a whole like they never have before. >> hey, joe scarborough, i want to get back to a comment you made a second ago about how in
the end this is about democrats. i was perusing this new media platform called the twitter yesterday. >> the twitter, yes. >> i came upon this account by someone called@joe nbc. he said i was interested at one point he tweeted jesus, forgive me for ever being a republican. the other one i liked. this is the thing i want to engage you on, this piece written by someone in the national review that goes -- speaks directly to this issue. the quote that you tweeted out, which i think is -- the headline of the piece on the twitter thing it says you can't beat trump without throwing a punch, and then the quote from it is like jeb bush, marco rubio and those before him, house democrats will lose any contest with donald trump so long as they are unwilling to sustain political damage in the act of inflicting more damage on him, and i'd just like you to unpack that. i think that is where we are right now.
that's what this debate has been about. it's been about political timidity. i respect nancy pelosi, but we got to bring the country along and have a national outcry for it. it's been let's follow the public as opposed to lead the public because there's a fear that if there's in a prosecution of an impeachment inquiry that will cost democrats politically. it seems like what this argument here is you've got to take a risk if you're going to inflict greater damage on donald trump. >> this is something we've been talking about. i grew up as a republican. had the mind set. i campaigned fairly. you can talk to the people i campaigned against. they'll tell you i campaigned fairly and didn't make it
personal. my mind set was simple at the beginning of the campaign. i did not want to win. i want to beat them so badly. i'm serious. it was every second of every day was driven by one thing, winning. winning, winning. destroying the other side. every second looking for advantages every second. burying them in an avalanche of fact. outworking them. outcampaigning them. making sure my phone banks kept calling people so much that they get sick of hearing my name. being it's so frustrating.
john, the only way to defeat donald trump and i've said this for years, you've got to get in his face. you've got to smother him politically. you've got -- it's got to be like a dean smith, like smul court unc press where they can't even pass the ball inbounds without three great athletes around them at all times. but marco, all the people -- ted cruz, none of them knew how to fight. i mean, think about ted cruz. this man insulted ted cruz''s wife, said she was ugly, and said his father killed jfk. if somebody did that to me, they would not be there. they would not have been elected
president of the united states. i would have spent every waking second figuring out how to destroy their political career and i would have done it. that would have been my mind set. i would have been driven by it. take jeb bush. donald trump insults jeb bush, retweets a slur against jeb bush's wife. right? jeb bush said you should apologize for that. donald trump said i'm not going to apologize for that. jeb bush says nothing else. no, no, no. everything stops right there and you turn to donald trump and say here's the deal, donald. i may not win, but neither are you because i'm going to spend 24 hours a day 7 days a week focusing, not going to sleep until i figure out how to turn your political bones to dust, and when i push it to dust, at that point i'm then going to spit on it. and then i'm going to sweep it off the stage and make sure nobody remembers you for anything other than being the mean clown you are. again, i'm sorry to scare
children this morning. but i'm talking about a mind set, and by the way, i'm dead serious, democrats running for president of the united states. >> listen to this. >> i'm dead serious, democrats running the house of representatives. if you want to stop donald trump, it is time to stop fighting by markets of queens bury rules. it's time to roll up your sleeves and go after him and do whatever it takes to win. if you don't do that, well -- >> you'll see him again four more years. >> you'll have donald trump for four more years. >> we'll be right back. this was me before liberty mutucustomized
report? no concerns at all? >> i do not. this -- you ask me do i have concerns about this president? he's created millions of jobs. he has the strongest economy -- >> i'm not asking about that. i'm asking about the examples of potential obstruction of justice from which robert mueller did not exonerate this president. >> there was no collusion. how do you get to obstruction? >> what i have concerns about is the fact in 2016 two american citizens were spied on -- >> and you have no concerns about this president's interaction -- >> he was -- you would be ticked off too. >> oh, my gosh. by the way, those two guys right there? >> yeah. >> so kevin mccarthy, the majority leader now, minority -- i'm sorry. oh, my god. you know what? because donald trump became president an they had the worst loss in the history of american politics for midterms, 9 million plus votes kevin mccarthy is now
minority leader. i apologize. he told other members in congress, other republicans, that donald trump was being paid off by the russians? >> and that was something he believed was true. >> yeah. donald trump, he believes that donald trump had payoffs from the russians. and now suddenly donald trump is in power and suddenly he doesn't care that donald trump is welcoming russian interference in american democracy to subvert american democracy. jim jordan also very critical of donald trump before he came to power. so, again, those two guys appear to only sort of like dogs following the scent of power? >> i guess trump calls them -- >> he calls him steve. >> to guy who believes donald trump perhaps is corrupt, come back to that person, steve, whoever you are. >> i think his name is steve. >> the president doesn't even know your name and he's going to forget it soon. >> welcome to "morning joe."
it's july 25th. >> we have willie with us every day along with mike barnicle. national affairs analyst for msnbc john heilemann, and joining the conversation, jonathan lamere. former u.s. attorney and aide to robert mueller now an nbc news law enforcement analyst, chuck rosenbe rosenberg, kasie hunt working way too many hours, and political reporter for the washington post and msnbc political analyst, robert costa. >> let's go first to kasie hunt. you had a busy day yesterday. zl she needs to put her feet up. good lord. >> i find that to be sexist. >> on her feet all day. >> it's not sexist. she's pregnant. >> tell me, i'm just going to keep going. casey, tell me this. >> nine months. >> you talked to the republicans.
you also had questions of nancy pelosi. give us a feel for how things are on the hill. are we moving away from impeachment? is nadler still going to be pushing impeachment? is that effectively finished? was that effectively finished yesterday by robert mueller's testimony? >> joe, i think that it's stalled, i would say. there are some signs inside the caucus that there is optimism that nancy pelosi will change her mind. pelosi herself, i talked to her yesterday. i asked her have you changed your mind at all. she talked about some of the same things she's talked about the whole time, being concerned about the president, called what he did a coverup. but then when i pushed her to say okay, people think there are steps imminent here, she said you know, i'm not sure what they're talking act. we have lawsuits in the courts. jerry nadler is moving forward with some subpoenas in the courts that they're expected to press today or tomorrow.
so the reality here is it's very hard to see how nancy pelosi possibly changes her mind about this at this stage. this was really the critical moment, and there are some questions about whether when americans see kind of that line of sound bites you played at the beginning of the show, all the moments that are toughest on the president from robert mueller in a row, if that starts to sink in and the polling numbers start to change, i think it's possible you could see some adjustment on capitol hill. the reality is we are steaming into an election year. it's basically already here, and that's going to make it more difficult to get this started. i will say, joe. the remarkable thing that was on display for me yesterday was republicans ignoring absolutely everything, basically, that robert mueller had to say. i mean, this is not a question where anybody is actually seriously considering the facts at hand and what we learned. everyone has decided where they
stand and in particular, for republicans, i mean, to say you have zero concerns about what the president did based on what robert mueller said, clearly robert mueller has concerns. >> you have robert mueller saying a former fbi director, saying that the russians interfered in american democracy which every one of donald trump's appointed intel chiefs said the same thing, russia tries to interfere with american democracy. said they're still trying to do it and they're going to do it again and the risks may be even greater in the future. that concerns no republicans. and the fact that mitch mcconnell republican senate killed who bills that would protect americans from the russian invasion, a russian cyber invasion is, in fact, quite distressing whether you're a republican, democrat, or independent. let's kasie talked about clips from yesterday. let's play a quick roundup of a
few of the best clips from yesterday. >> director mueller, the president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him. but that is not what your report said, is it? >> correct. it is not what the report said. >> the report did not include that he did not commit obstruction of justice. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> and what about total exoneration? did you actually totally exonerate the president? >> no. >> now, in fact, your report states it does not exonerate the president. >> it does. >> could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? >> yes. >> you believe that he committed -- you could charge the president after he left office with obstruction of justice? >> yes. >> this just came out wikileaks, i love wikileaks. donald trump, october 10th, 2016th. this wikileaks stuff is unbelievable. it tells you the inner heart. you got to read it.
donald trump october 12th, 20 , 2016,. this wikileaks is like a treasure-trove. donald trump, october 31st, 2016. boy, i love reading those wikileaks. donald trump november 4th, 2016, do any of those quotes disturb you, mr. director? >> i'm not sure i would say -- >> how do you react to them? >> well, it's problem attatic i understatement in terms of giving some i don't know, hope or some boost to what is and should be illegal activity. >> several individuals associated with the donald trump campaign were also trying to make money during the campaign in transition. is that correct? >> that is true. >> paul manafort was trying to make money or achieve debt forgiveness from a russian oligarch. >> generally that's accurate. >> michael flynn was trying to
make money from turkey? >> true. >> donald trump was trying to make millions from a real estate deal in moscow? >> to the extent you're talking about the hotel in moscow? >> yes. >> yes. >> when your investigation looked into these matters numerous trump associates lied to your team, the grand jury and to congress? >> a number of persons that we interviewed in our investigation it turns out did lie. >> mike flynn lied? >> he was convicted of lying, yes. >> george papadopoulos was con jikted of lying? >> true. >> paul manafort? >> true. >> paul manafort went so far as to encourage other people to lie? >> that is true. >> manafort's deputy rick gates lied? >> that's accurate. >> michael cohen the president's lawyer was indicted for lying? >> true. >> he lied to stay on message with the president? >> allegedly by him. >> and when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt, that was also false, was it not? >> i'd like to think so, yes.
>> well, your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? >> it is not a witch hunt. >> from your testimony today, i gather you believe that knowingly accepting foreign assistance during a presidential campaign is an unethical thing to do. >> and a crime. >> and a crime. >> an unethical thing to do and a crime. very interesting. so robert costa, really quickly running through what we saw there, and then i want to get the reaction you heard on pennsylvania avenue yesterday. robert mueller said the president was not exonerated. he was not exonerated on obstruction. that the president be charged of obstruction of justice after office. that he gave hope and a boost to illegal activity. that paul manafort tried to make money during the campaign as donald trump's campaign manager from a russian oligarch. michael flynn tried to make money during the campaign from turkey. donald trump while running for president of the united states
lied about the fact that he's trying to make money from moscow. then trump team lied. flynn lied, his nsa director. his campaign manager and deputy manager lied. foreign policy expert lied. all charged and many sent to jail. and 60% of americans agree with robert mueller that this was not a witch hunt. so that is the backdrop of some of his testimony yesterday. i'm curious, bob, what was the reaction on the hill, and what was the reaction from the white house yesterday? >> talking to house democrats, they felt the house intelligence committee hearing was effective in illustrating a portrait of the president's character that they feel could be used against the president next year in the 2020 campaign. they still have much work to do on the obstruction front that we saw in the house judiciary committee. when are they going to get don
mcgahn finally to testify? they keep asking each other inside of the house democratic chamber? when are they going to get him to make an illustrated case against the president on that front? among republicans they feel like they've escaped politically. they know the democrats are going after the president's finances and his conduct. inside the white house you have a president that wants to use this mueller investigation and the house democrats as a foil. but he does not have a real plan yet to address russian interference and foreign interference in the 2020 campaign, and the republicans refusal to move forward with certain pieces of legislation like the secure elections act in the senate and leader mcconnell's refusal to bring up certain pieces of bipartisan legislation, that's a message democrats are hoping to drive the white house -- >> so -- >> yes. >> bob, the president, we heard the white house was happy, but the president seemed agitated at
the president yelling at a reporter who brought up robert mueller said he could be indicted and possibly sent to jail after he leaves office. so what did you hear about the president's reaction? he seemed agitated. he seemed angry, but did he consider yesterday another escape for him? >> hallie jackson was asking sharp questions of president trump. you saw the president agitated to a point, his aides say, but he does feel emboldened now that mr. mueller is not making some kind of case where impeachment now seems imminent. he believes at this point he wants to have this investigation almost out there as something he can run against in 2020. his grievance style politics, although it seems like agitation, it's his usual style of portraying himself as the victim of a political establishment. >> chuck rosenberg in the first five minutes of the first hearing, jerry nadler got bob
mueller got -- he said i did not exonerate him, and he said no, i did not conclude that there was no obstruction. and then adam schiff got bob mule tore say the behavior of seeking out and accepting assistance from a foreign power was unpatriotic, wrong, unethical, and, in fact, a crime. there was so much weight put on bob mueller by democrats. they expected him to bring new light, new life to this report, and to somehow change the national conversation. what was your view -- not just of his performance but of the substance of what we heard yesterday. >> let me take the second part first. nothing about the substance changed. mueller told us two months ago that if he were to testify, and he didn't want to, but if he were to testify, his report would be his testimony. and so what you saw in pieces yesterday was just his report. right? so the fact that the president wasn't exonerated, it was in the report. the fact that russia massively
interfered with our election in 2016 was in his report. and the fact that the president of the united states obstructed justice but couldn't be charged as anyone else could, because he was president, was in the report. so substantively, nothing changed. >> but did you view his -- i think there were people projecting something onto him that he was not prepared to do. they wanted more than the report, but he said at that 8, 9 minute statement he made a couple months ago, i'm staying to the report, and he did. >> i had the privilege of working for bob mueller. it was one of the great professional privileges of my life, but i learned this. take the man at his word. mike barnicle knows that. take the man at his word. when he tells you he's going to do something, he's going to do it. he delivered precisely what he promised he would deliver. the people, i think, imbued this moment with more meaning and gravity and more hope than bob mueller was prepared to deliver. that's not an indictment in any
way on bob mueller. you know, when jim comey testified we thought that was the moment. when michael cohen testified, we thought that was the moment. when the mueller report was published, we thought that was the moment. all of these things were not the moment. >> and, in fact, onthat be, if you look at it, i think a lot of republicans would now say the democrats, you've exhausted everything you wanted. you had a two-year investigation, tens of millions of dollars, you got the report. judiciary got the underlying evidence. you got bob mueller to testify. you got everything you wanted. make your choice. are you going to pursue impeachment? what's the move for democrats and what does the internal fight look like inside the house with nancy pelosi? >> i think for a long time mueller was either going to lift the cloud of this russian probe, or it was going to send us barrelling down the road to impeachment. i'm not sure either happened. i think we're in a stall. i think the debate within the democrats is still happening
according to our reporting. i think there are some people pushing for impeachment. nadler is. yesterday despite the performance, some say the top lines are the same. he made clear the president was not exonerated. he made clear that you should not be accepting foreign help and passionately he made the case near the end of the hearings yesterday. i think it's going to embolden some democrats to try to move toward impeachment. speaker pelosi seems reluctant. her allies pointed to yesterday as vindication of her stance. you needed mueller to almost deliver a home run in order to persuade enough democrats to go that way. i think there's a sense he didn't do that. on the other side of pennsylvania avenue, it is certainly more of a much more gleeful tone. a lot of people around the president have been tired of the president. he was more personally invested in yesterday than most of his aides. he holed up in the residence most of the days watching despite a few days prior saying
he wouldn't see any of it. instead, he watched. he was commenting in realtime on twitter, and then spoke after. and as bob said, he does want to use this as an issue going forward, but he also feels this was proof that this all was partisan overreach and if democrats keep going down impeachment, they'll make the case more strongly. >> chuck, there was an element to yesterday's hearings, both the morning and the afternoon hearings that a lot of people, i suspect, perhaps even you, found deeply upsetting in the sense that the republicans came with two objectives. one to sdiscredit the witness ad avoid any pursuit of the truth. to the first point, discredit the witness. not any witness. robert mueller who took over the fbi just a few days before september 11th. and literally changed the direction of the agency, changed the purpose of the agency, and god only knows how many attempts
on this country were shortstopped because of what he did during the course of his directorship. and yet yesterday what was your reaction when you saw the director who we both revere, and we know his character and his integrity, what was your reaction when he seemed to stumble a bit and seemed not to go back at the republicans when they basically charged him with dereliction of duty? >> the attacks on bob made me sad, and by the way, mike, you know this. i'm biassed. i worked for the man. >> me too. . >> i worked for him right after the attacks of 9/11 when he was director of the fbi and saw that he almost quite literally saved the fbi. put aside all the attacks that the men and women of the fbi prevented. there was a movement back then to split the fbi into two pieces a as you may recall. and bob mueller through force of
personality and will held that thing together. it made me sad. it's incomprehensible to me that someone would attack that man or question his motives or question his integrity. that said, it was not the bob mueller i knew in some ways. right? he, i think in the past might have been more forceful, or angrier, and he seemed more subd subdued. but i also think that speaks to his integrity. he wasn't there to win. he wasn't there to knife anybody. he could easily have thrown the president or the attorney general under the bus. he did none of that. right? he would have, but he did none of that. he drove down the middle of the road. and so in many ways that is the bob mueller we know. >> hey, bob costa. let me ask you this question. come back to what democrats are going to do next and the effect of all this. joe and i have been talking
about this all morning. it seems like -- that there's a couple people yesterday made the point that in a weird way the hearings, the back to back hearings yesterday really had not maybe an audience of one, but in some ways kind of an audience of one. there was one person who matters most in this, and that's pelosi whose control over her caucus and whose doubts about impeachment have been the dominant political fact in terms of how democrats who control the lower chamber have approached this from the moment that the mueller report was sent to the administration all throughout the time that bill barr mischaracterized it, withheld it for a period of time, dominated the public perception of it for months. in the end nancy pelosi has set the tune for democrats. so i know you talked a little bit about how democrats have reacted to what happened yesterday and what their hope were and how they weren't quite met. just talk about nancy pelosi on this day and whether -- how she looks at the state of play,
because the ball is pretty squarely if her court now. go forward with an impeachment inquiry or not. >> the thing about speaker pelosi you have to understand her allies say, is that she is called when it comes to the political calculus. she is not just going to be pushed in a direction toward impeachment because there's some kind of dramatic hearing. she sees this strategically for her party. if they move on impeachment, what happens? it goes to the senate. the senate is controlled by republicans. vuld a trial. she knows that the majority leader would want a show trial that would exonerate the president politically. she wants to build a case so if they move on impeachment in the house, they have a full case to make on the president's conduct through mcgahn's testimony if the courts decide he has to testify where they have all the documents on the president's finances to paint that picture. plus robert mueller's testimony. she's thinking about how this plays out in a trial scenario in an election year in 2020.
and not just trying to react to what happens on a wednesday morning in this summer. >> now, kasie hunt, this is all a very measured approach by nancy pelosi. i can see how many would find that frustrating when there's such obvious signs of legitimate reasons to start proceedings right now. but isn't the next step to continue in making that case? to bring don mcgahn forward to testify? to gather that information and have a complete case? it takes time. >> nancy pelosi wants donald trump to not be president of the united states anymore, and she thinks the best way to do it is to beat him in 2020 as bob was laying out, there's no real end game here for getting the president out of office with an impeachment inquiry. that's simply not what's going to happen. so if you're nancy pelosi, you're looking at the entire map. you may be focussed on the state
of wisconsin. that is likely to be the deciding state in the 2020 election. how does she contribute to making sure democrats can win wisconsin in 2020? >> what does that look like? it means satisfying the base, yes, continuing these investigations. giving ammunition and evidence to those who are pushing against the president politically, trying to paint him in many ways as a swamp creature. that's something that voters often don't -- aren't interested in and something that broken promise on the part of the president, but her cold political calculation is that if they watch an impeachment proceeding, willie nilly without preparing anything, and in her view, perhaps if they do it at all, that's going to bolster the case for the president. her task is threading this very careful needle where she appears to be very strongly holding him accountable, letting her members do what they need to do in their districts based on whether they're talking to liberal or more conservative voters, and
holding the line. she's got no problem taking all this heat herself, zero. if it serves the larger goal. >> kasie hunt and robert costa, thank you both for your reporting this morning. chuck, thank you very much as well. >> and chuck, i want to say thank you so much for saying what you said about a man that you respect and love, robert mueller. i actually had a couple trump trolls yesterday mocking me for putting a picture of director mueller up in my home. i couldn't think of an american right now who would be more worthy to be up on the wall of americans than a man who came from a family that could have kept him out of vietnam and while donald trump was complaining of bone spurs and paying off a family doctor to write that up, bob mueller had bad knees and they said he couldn't go. he trained so he could go. he got put in the ranger hall of
fame. he was -- he was recognized for his valor. he was recognized time and again for what he did in vietnam and then he came back and as you said, and as they said in the ranger's hall of fame, he saved the fbi. he restructured the fbi. and he kept us safe after 9/11. i know -- i know that you'll always respect and love this great man. >> absolutely. you know, one story, joe, he was a student at princeton. he tells this story when a classmate a year ahead of him named david hackett serving in vietnam was killed. bob said that is in part what inspired him to volunteer to serve in vietnam. so he wasn't drafted. he volunteered. he went in as a marine infantry officer in part to serve his country, and in part in memory of his princeton classmate, david hackett. that's the kind of man that you
saw being disparaged yesterday on capitol hill by certain members of congress. >> and joe, if you want a metaphor for what bob mueller did yesterday, and anybody seeking a metaphor for yesterday in his actions yesterday, read the bronze star citation for robert mueller who literally went back out on to the field through a stream of field of fire to rescue a marine who was wounded, a marine working for him. he was a second lieutenant. out to get the platoon member to drag him back to safety. that's what he did yesterday. he was in the field of fire for the country. he went back into the field yesterday for this country, to protect and preserve this country. that's the oath he took of office when he became fbi director. that's the oath he took when he was a marine core second lieutenant, and that's a similar oath the president of the united states has failed.
joining us now congressman ha ream jeffreys of new york is also a member of the judiciary committee, and questioned bob mueller yesterday. congressman, how do you think bob mueller did? did you guys get what you needed in terms of his testimony moving forward trying to further inform the american people as to what happened to our democracy in our election process? >> yes. i think it was an important step in the right direction. bob mueller confirmed the principle findings of his investigation which was thoroughly done and conducted with integrity. finding one, of course, that russia attacked our democracy in sweeping fashion for the explicit purpose of trying to artificially place donald trump at the white house. the second finding was that the
trump campaign welcomed and embraced russian interference in extraordinary fashion at the highest level, and third, bob mueller confirmed that substantial evidence existed that the president obstructed justice in the context of the investigation. he also made clear that despite donald trump's lies that have been peddled repeatedly out of 1600 pennsylvania avenue focussed on the notion that he was completely and totally exonerated, that that was not the case, and, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. >> chairman jeffreys, it's willie geist. with all that testimony on the record over the course of about fix hours, we have reporting out of democratic caucus meetings yesterday where i assume you were with nancy pelosi and jerry nadler had a debate. the reporting is nadler is ready to push forward with impeachment proceedings. do you support that idea? >> i support the approach that
nancy pelosi laid out which is that we should proceed and continue to follow the facts, apply the law, and be guided by the constitution. to do it carefully but to do it forcefully, consistent with the house being a separate and co-equal branch of government. we've made clear we don't work for donald trump. we work for the american people. we have a constitutional responsibility to serve as a check and balance on an out of control executive branch. nadler has said our next step is to get fact witnesses. coming out of the hearing yesterday what's important is the most important witness on the question of justice is don mcgahn. >> it sounds like nadler is ready to proceed with impeachment proceedings. >> i was not in the meeting. i did not witness an exchange between nancy pelosi and jerry nadler on the question of impeachment or accountability. i did personally hear jerry
nadler make clear we're going to take forceful steps to get fact witnesses beginning with don mcgahn. >> chairman, there are a lot of democrats, progressives who don't work in the government who say we've heard enough. we've seen the report. we now have testimony from robert mueller himself. we've got all the evidence we need. it's time to impeach president trump. what do you say to them? >> well, i say including to some of my constituents and people are split on this question. many people i represent want us to continue our work to lower health care costs, protect people with preexisting conditions, fix problems that will make life better for everyday americans, because the middle class dream is increasingly at risk. and so there are constituents who want us to proceed as we will press forward on our for the people agenda. i understand there are other people who are dismayed, shocked, angry, upset, confused at what is happening to our
country because of the person sitting in the oval office. what we saw yesterday is that the party of reagan is dead. the party of lincoln is dead. the party of scarborough is dead, but we have the party of trump and roy moore and steve miller. it's a frightening thing. we won't shirk from our constitutional responsibility holding the president accountable. we want to do it in an appropriate and forceful fashion. >> congressman, i want to focus in on a moment for your questioning of the special counsel about the obstruction of justice will weather you laid out the three matters you would need to bring the charge but suggested the special counsel didn't because of the department of justice guidelines from the forefront that he believes meant he could not being any sort of -- bring any sort of charge against the president. he kind of stopped you and fought bag a little bit on that. do you think special counsel
mueller, was it part of his responsibilities to see that through in one way or the other whether or not he could bring obstruction of justice and should he have done so to this president? >> there is still some confusion, quite frankly, as to why the special counsel stopped short of acknowledging once he laid out in my view and the view of many people as he pretty much confirmed yesterday, substantial evidence that all of the elements of obstruction of justice had been met, one an obstructive act. two a connection to a proceeding and three, corrupt intent which they documented in devastating and decisive fashion that he still declined to confirm his view that speaks to the issue that obstruction of justice occurred. but it's our job how to present that information to the american people. let me say one last thing. we didn't expect -- we weren't trying to entertain the american
people. we wanted to educate and inform the american people. we didn't invite robert de niro to testify. we invited robert mueller to testify, and in that regard, he delivered what we expected. >> okay. congressman hakeem jeffries, thank you. >> yesterday russia's active measures against american democracy. >> in your investigation, did you think that this was a single attempt by the russians to get involved in our election or did you find evidence to suggest they'll try to do it this again? >> they're doing it as we sit here. and they expect to do it during the next campaign. >> my concern is have we established a new normal from this past campaign that is going to apply to future campaigns so that if any one of us running for the u.s. house, any candidate for the u.s. senate,
any candidate for the presidency of the united states, aware that if hostile foreign power is trying to influence an election has no duty to report that to the fbi or other authorities? >> i hope -- >> go ahead. >> i hope this is not the new normal, but i fear it is. >> and yet, despite robert mueller's warning that russia is still trying to meddle in u.s. elections, senate republicans yesterday blocked two election security bills as well as a cyber security measure. democrats tried to pass two bills that would require campaigns to alert both the fbi and the federal elections commission about any offers of assistance from foreign entities. the party also tried to pass a bill that would let the senate sergeant at arms offer voluntary cyber assistance for personal devices and accounts of senators and staff. but republican senator cindy
hide smith blocked each of the bills. she didn't give reason for her objections or say if she was objecting on behalf of herself or the senate gop caucus. a spokesman didn't immediately respond to the hill's request for comment. joining us now, host of andrea mitchel reports, andrea mitchel. i'm hoping we can understand -- i mean, we learned a lot yesterday from robert mueller. we learned that republicans still wanted to undermine the credibility of his report and him. but we learned that russia is actively trying to infiltrate our democracy through our elections process. if you believe the results of his two-year investigation, and you put aside the concerns some might have about the president's affiliation with all of this, his corruption, whatever you think about him personally, what's the problem with trying to secure the elections for this country with these bills?
>> it is simply astounding that not only has the president not led a government-wide attack against this invasion by the russians and perhaps other players. we don't know what iran and china and others are doing. we know that russia set the model for this. they succeeded in interfering in the election. there was no confusion about that. that's been validated by all the intelligence agencies. no matter what and how often the president seems to be disputing this and siding with vladimir putin publicly, repeatedly, most notably in helsinki just over a year ago. despite all of that for the administration not to be doing a government-wide defense against this, and counteroffensive which the intelligence community is trying tad and did successfully do during the midterm elections, despite a lack of leadership from the top, for the senate to sit on their hands and not do the minimal things they could do
is outrageous and coming just after mueller's testimony. look, i don't think there's -- that it's an accident that robert mueller became more engae engaged and more interactive in the afternoon when the russia piece of this was being examined. that's how he opened his initial nine minute statement which he thought would be his final statement, what he hoped would be his final statement. he opened and closed it with the warnings about russia. he was clearly either in conflict or not as certain about the obstruction piece of this. and it was a con vo lea lewded explanation. there's no argument that should be made. what i found the most damaging, frankly, even though there was a narrative if you pieced it together, you could find certainly the warnings and the acknowledgments about no exoneration, so the president's main thesis was penetrated and disputed by mueller because of
the way in particular nadler and some of the other people on judiciary and schiff notably the chairs of both of these committees did a good job of setting the tone before and after in the wrapups but the fact -- the fact that the republicans were not rebutted, and that's where i think mueller's reluctance to engage or the cob fusion and the -- confusion and the other signs, and his inability to rebut the conspiracy theories from the russians was perhaps the most unfortunate part of the hearing. >> andrea, let me ask you this. i've been listening to this the last 24 hours since this happened. i agree bob mueller wanted to talk more about russia. obviously to the much more comfortable much more passionate, much more urgent, went further on those questions. he's trying to ring the alarm, especially that statement of it's happening now. right? not just russia but other countries. >> and interference would be a
crime, he interjected. >> yes. but to say that president trump is not leading a concerted effort to ward off interference is a wild understatement. he continualously with other people around him, rudy giuliani, is inviting not -- he's not just trying to repel foreign interference. he's inviting foreign interference actively, openly saying let's do it again. yeah. it is amazing that we're not mounting a concerted effort, bipartisan, led by the president and the senate majority leader and the speaker of the house. what do we do in the face of this? if donald trump faces no consequences for what's happened. there may be political consequences in 2020 but no immediate consequences and the president is continuing to invite foreign interference in the 2020 election, and mitch mcconnell has shut down any legislative effort, what -- >> i take your point. you have to rely on the career
people. the generals at the nsa, and dan coats under fire from the president now we hear rumors of at dni and the people in the fbi, chris wray, despite the sort of shocking admission the other day that he has not read the full mueller report. if not chris wray, who among hundreds of millions of americans should be reading this report chapter and verse? these are the career people doing it even without a full homeland security secretary where it should be based. and a major country-wide effort among all the states. the states that are so vulnerable. >> jonathan, just to butt a button -- put a button on this. robert mueller's warnings yesterday were nothing new. the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in
sweeping fashion. what he said yesterday is it continues and will continue into the 2020 election and warned other countries could do the same. >> that's his central focus. he's warning it happened before. it can happen again. as the president discussed, he is not only openly inviting it but won't look back and condemn what happened in the past. any acknowledge of foreign interference cheapens his victory. andrea, let me ask you about things lost in yesterday's headlines because of everything that happened with mueller. first, the president vetoed a pair of measures that would have prevented selling arms to saudi arabia. >> bipartisan, senate and house passed. overlooking all the evidence from the intelligence committee that the nbs, the leader of saudi arabia either directed or was in charge is complicit in
the murder of jamal khashoggi. >> i was part of the press pool and he stepped into north korea and met with kim jong-un. here we have north korea firing more missiles into the sea according to south. >> and the president has said in may when they did this also that with short-range missiles that oh, it's not important because it doesn't threaten us. excuse me? south korea is not happy and john bolton is in seoul, south korea today when this happened and last night. and japan is not happy. these short-range missiles are banned by the united nations. they are a threat to our allies. yet, it doesn't matter to the president because he makes every excuse for kim jong-un with whom he has this love affair, and says that as long as it's not a long-range missile that can range the continental united states. presumably he cares about guam and hawaii as well with b-52s regarding them. it's astounding to me, but i
understand the impetus to try to find a way out of fire and fury which he himself created. he inherited a bad hand, no question, from decades of bad or ineffective policies toward north korea, our most difficult intelligence target. yesterday, at the same time the overly excessive embrace of kim jong-un, a brutal tidictator is inexplicable, and giving him a third meeting and stepping into north korea, you were there. you witnessed it all. it was really unnecessary. >> andrea mitchel, thank you so much. we'll be watching andrea mitchel reports at noon right here on msnbc. >> coming up, we're going to talk to senator mark warner who has been pushing for legislation to help protect our democratic institutions. as we go to break, a first look at the latest issue of "time"
magazine. the cover story asks who party is it and takes a look at whether democrats can overcome their divisions to defeat trump in 2020. "morning joe" is back in a moment. don't miss your golden opportunity to experience the luxury you desire on a full line of utility vehicles. at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. lease the 2019 rx 350 for $389 a month, for 36 months, and we'll make your first month's payment. experience amazing.
it's how we care for our cancer patients- like job. when he was diagnosed with cancer, his team at ctca created a personalized care plan to treat his cancer and side effects. so job could continue to work and stay strong for his family. this is how we inspire hope. this is how we heal. we love you, daddy. good night. i love you guys. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. cancer treatment centers of america. right now, congress is working to end surprise medical billing. that's when patients are hit with medical bills they thought would be covered by insurance. but what congress is considering would cut money that vulnerabe patients rely on the most. that means seniors, children, and americans relying on medicaid would be hurt. it's already too hard for people to get basic medical care with hospitals closing and a shortage of er doctors. tell congress we can end surprise billing without shredding the safety net. paid for by physicians for fair coverage.
dto experiencer gthrilling performance. now, at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. get 0.9% apr for 60 months on all 2019 models. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. wiswitch wireless carriersn bring in your own phone, and save hundreds of dollars. it's pretty much the easiest way to save since sliced bread. sure is. because savings is as savings does. and sometimes you've just got to stop and smell the savings. i'm sorry, i think you mean roses. oh right. you need to stop and smell the roses of savings. bring in your own phone, switch to xfinity mobile and save hundreds of dollars a year. now that's simple, easy, awesome. get $100 back when you bring in an eligible phone. click, call, or visit a store today.
questions put to him about his relationship with the former russian arms dealer. >> boris johnson is going toe to toe with his opponents. he is now prime minister which would be news to boris johnson of 2012. >> is there a possibility that you could become prime minister? >> i think that is vanishing. about as much chance of you're being reincarnated with an olive. >> do you think the hair is holding you back? >> honestly, no. >> reincarnated as an olive.
okay. well, here he is today. coming up, we have so much more to discuss from robert mueller's testimony. president trump celebrated after yesterday's hearings, calling it a great day. but perhaps he missed the part where mueller said he was not exonerated and could be indicted when he leaves office. senator and vice chair of the intelligence committee mark warner will be here to weigh in on all of that. plus, an update on the jeffrey epstein case. we're following new reporting that he was found injured inside his new york city jail cell. we'll have more on that, straight ahead. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. and i didn't have to call your wife to meet you at the doctor. because you didn't have another dvt. not today. we discussed how having one blood clot puts you at risk of having another,... ...so we chose xarelto®, to help keep you protected. xarelto®, is proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt or pe blood clots from happening again.
in clinical trials, almost 98% of people did not have another dvt or pe. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of blood clots. while taking, a spinal injection increases the risk of blood clots, which may cause paralysis- the inability to move. you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. enjoy every moment and help protect yourself from an unexpected one, like another dvt or pe. are you doing enough? ask your doctor about xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com. woman: (on phone) discover. hi. do you have a travel card? yep. our miles card. earn unlimited 1.5 miles and we'll match it at the end of your first year. nice! i'm thinking about a scuba diving trip.
woman: ooh! (gasp) or not. you okay? yeah, no, i'm good. earn miles. we'll match 'em at the end of your first year. that's ensure max protein, yeah, no, i'm good. with high protein and 1 gram sugar. 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. lowering prescription drug prices. expanding criminal background checks on gun purchases. blocking secret corporate money from elections. and giving dreamers a path to citizenship. the new democratic majority in the house of representatives is proving they're up to the challenge. but, mitch mcconnell's blocked every one of these important bills from getting a vote in the senate. that won't stop house democrats. tell them: keep up the fight for what's right for america's families.
i have president putin. he just said it's not russia. >> they're doing it as we sit here. >> it's not an interference. they have information. i think i'd take it. >> i hope this is not the new normal, but i fear it is. >> this just came out. wikileaks, i love wikileaks. >> how do you react to that? >> well, it's problematic is an understatement. >> it's a whole big fat hoax. it's just a hoax. >> it's not a hoax. >> it's a total witch-hunt. >> it is not a witch-hunt. >> there was no obstruction and if you read the report, you'll say that. >> the report did not include that he did not commit obstruction of justice. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> it was a complete and total exoneration. >> did you actually totally
exonerate the president? >> no. >> and morning and welcome to "morning joe." it was interesting. republicans were ecstatic yesterday. what they were ecstatic about is the bar has been set so low that the american people found out that, once again, like donald trump's intel chiefs have been saying for a year, russia interfered with american democracy. russia interfered with your democracy and my democracy. they interfered with american democracy. we learned that first. the second thing we learned was that donald trump and his campaign team happily welcomed that. aggressively welcomed it. they were grateful for it. we also learned that when federal agents tried to investigate this, that one member of the trump team after another member of the trump team lied about those contacts. and then we learned from robert
mueller that donald trump, the president of the united states, lied about the russians, trying to infiltrate. even lied when he was -- when he was sending back his questions under oath. so we learned that donald trump committed perjury. he lied under oath. and then, of course, as we heard there, we learned that american democracy is still -- is still under threat from the russians. so just a little night cap for russians who have to be celebrating the fact that the entire republican party are useful idiots for them now and have flung open their arms for the russians to come and undermine american democracy. last night, mitch mcconnell allowed two measures to protect america from russian cyber invasion.
mitch mcconnell killed two bills that would actually protect this country. so republicans, yes, please celebrate. what a great day it was for you and vladimir putin. i know you are happy about it. good luck with that, comrades. >> and the other thing we learned, thanks to republican questions, is that the president could be indicted. >> yeah. >> when he leaves office. so that was a -- >> but it is a victory. hey. >> grateful for. >> big victory for them. willie geist, my gosh, if i'm a republican, i'd be thrilled by the fact that i found out the president of the united states lied under oath, which by the way we im you peached bill clinton for and all of them said bill clinton should be impeached for. the president lied under oath. the russians tried to interfere with american democracy. the president of the united states and his team welcomed it and things are still happening
today where they're trying to enter foo fear with our economy and republicans will do nothing to stop it. that's how republicans actually define a good day in the age of trump. >> a good day was protecting president trump, which is what they all went out there to do yesterday. it's fair to say democrats did not have the day that they wanted. that bob mueller was not the witness that they were hoping for, that there wasn't some new evidence presented or some new context given that would perhaps convince the american public that this president had to be impeached. but as you say, bob mueller agreed with adam schiff when he asked if it was unpatriotic and wrong to seek foreign assistance during a presidential campaign. he got bob mueller to say no, i did not exonerate the president. he got bob mueller to say did not conclude that there were no obstruction. i think we've talked about this so long that it's sort of been baked in. but if you take a step back and look again at the report, it's devastating. the question now is what do
democrats want to do with all the information they have and the final testimony they got from bob mueller? >> well, mika, you know, some people will talk about optics. optics don't really matter here. the democrats got all the facts they needed. >> yeah. >> that the president of the united states acted inappropriately. they should start an impeachment inquiry or they should leave it for good. if they don't start an impeachment inquiry, given all we learned yesterday, then obviously nothing justifies an impeachment inquiry and the democrats not starting that inquiry will be proving donald trump right, that he can do the equivalent of shooting somebody on fifth avenue and nothing will be done about it. i mean, the republicans -- the democrats learned all of that again yesterday. had all of that confirmed again yesterday. the republicans spent their day screaming at a guy who is a vietnam war hero, a marine who
is in the ranger hall of fame, because of the risks that he took in vietnam to save the lives of his band of brothers, a guy that got shot in vietnam, a guy who was -- whose knees were so bad he couldn't go to vietnam, but he trained hard to do everything he could do to go over to vietnam, a guy that guided this country so ably through 9/11 that he was asked to stay on in an unprecedented way past ten years. that's the american hero that these -- a lot of these losers were screaming at and yelling at. and afterwards, which i think is really sick, they were celebrating the fact that he is obviously -- he's obviously challenged by some condition. and the fact that they were cheering that afterwards and talking about how he was struggling with this word shows how sick and how low donald trump's republican party is now going. it's very sad. >> we're going to dive deeper
into robert mueller's testimony in just a moment. we're breaking down all the biggest moments, what they mean. but we want to briefly tell you about overnight developments in two other big stories we've been following. sources tell nbc news that sex offender jeffrey epstein was found injured and in a fetal position in his cell at a new york city jail where he is being held on federal sex trafficking charges. the 66-year-old was found semi conscious with marks on his neck in his cell at the metropolitan correctional center in manhattan. sometime in the last two days, according to two sources. he is now on suicide watch. >> why wouldn't he be on suicide watch before that? >> yeah. two sources told nbc news that epstein may have tried to hang himself. while a third source cautioned that the injuries were not serious. questioning whether epstein might have staged an attack or a suicide attempt to get a transfer to another facility.
another source said that an assault hasn't been ruled out and that another inmate has been questioned. epstein has pleaded not guilty to conspiracy and sex trafficking charges. we will be following this story. >> and the only thing i'm going to say here, mika, because we need to move on, but they need to make sure this guy does no harm to himself and nobody does any harm to him. he has testimony that the american people need to hear about about some very powerful people, perhaps some of the most powerful people in this country over the past quarter century. the man needs to be protected and allowed to testify and, again, tell us what we need to know about these powerful men that always swirled around him and some of whom, obviously, raped young women. >> correct. also breaking overnight, puerto rico's embattled governor ricardo rossello announced his
resignation after nearly two weeks of protesters calling for his ouster over criminal investigations in the leak of a profanity laced online chats between rossello and some of his officials and close associates. the resignation, which goes into effect next friday, august 2nd, came in a facebook video after attorneys commissioned by the president of puerto rico's house of representatives unanimously found five offenses that constituted grounds for impeachment. we'll be following these developments, as well, all happening while you were sleeping overnight. up next, we will tackle bob mueller's testimony. one point everyone should take from it. russia is still actively attacking the united states. so what is congress and the white house doing about it? you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. when the hot sun hits your ice cream 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. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country.
e-commerce deliveries to homes when didwhen i needed ton? jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. ...and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com. has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life.
♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. a cockroach can survive heresubmerged ttle guy. underwater for 30 minutes. wow. yeah. not getting in today. terminix. defenders of home. the business of family time... ...and downtime. ...and you time. ...and forgetting what time it is...altogether. modernized comfort inns and suites have been refreshed because when your business is making time, our business is you. get the lowest price guaranteed on all choice hotels when you book direct at choicehotels.com.
xfinity mobile is a designed to save you money. whether you use your phone to get fit or to find the perfect gift, you'll use less data with a network that automatically connects to millions of wifi hotspots and the best lte everywhere else. so you save hundreds of dollars a year on your wireless bill. xfinity mobile has the best network. best devices. best value. simple. easy. awesome. click, call or visit a store today.
now back to robert mueller's testimony over the course of seven hours yesterday. the special counsel who oversaw the federal investigation into russian meddling answered lawmakers' questions on capitol hill. where he affirmed his reports key findings. insisted russia will continue its disruptive efforts and acknowledged a lack of cooperation, to say the least, from president trump, disputing the near daily assault on the probe. but while mueller's testimony delivered his warnings through a different medium than his two volume report, it did not contain many surprises. and his cautious performance included him declining or deflecting questions 198 times, claiming he did not want to speculate, discuss internal interpretatio deliberations or was under organizations not to answer. but while mule ur struggled through some of the questions,
there were times when the hearings crystallized some problematic facts for the president and his allies. >> director mueller, the president is repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated himself. but that is not what your report said. is it? >> correct. that is not what the record sate said. >> the report did not included that he did not commit obstruction of justice. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> and what about total exoneration? did you totally exonerate the president? >> no. >> now, in fact, your reports expressly states that it does not exonerate the president. >> it does. >> could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? >> yes. >> you believe that he committed -- you could charge the president with obstruction of justice after he left office? >> yes. >> this just came out, wikileaks. i love wikileaks, donald trump, october 10th, 2016. this wikileaks stuff is
unbelievable. it tells you the inner heart. you've got to read it. donald trump, october 12e 12th, 12016. this wikileaks is like a treasure trove. donald trump, october 31st, 2016. boy, i love reading those wikileaks. donald trump, november 4th, 2016. would any of those quotes disturb you, mr. director? >> i'm not certain i would say -- how do you react to them? >> well, it's problematic is an understatement in terms of what it display necessary terms of giving some, i don't know, hope or some boost as to what is and should be illegal activity. >> several individuals associated with the trump campaign were trying to make money during the campaign in transition. is that correct? >> that is true. >> while manafort was trying to make money or achieve debt
forgiveness from a russian olgarch? >> that is true. >> michael flynn was trying to make money from turkey? >> true. >> donald trump was trying to make millions on a deal in moscow? >> to the extent you're talking about a hotel in moscow? >> yes. >> yes. >> when your investigation looked into these matters, numerous trump associates lied to members of your team and members of congress? >> a number of persons that we interviewed in our investigation it turns out did lie. >> mike flynn lied? >> he was convicted of lying, yes. >> george p >> manafort's deputy rick gates lied? >> that is accurate. >> michael cohen, the president's lawyer, was indicted for lying. >> true. >> he lied to stay on message with the president?
>> allegedly by him. >> and when donald trump called your investigation a witch-hunt, that was also false? >> i'd like to think so, yes. >> well, your investigation knot a witch-hunt? >> it is not a witch-hunt. >> you gather knowingly accepting foreign assistance during a presidential campaign is an unethical thing to do. >> and a crime. >> and a crime. >> and a crime. so, willie, just wrote down some of these takeaways. this, again, let's frame this the way it is. the republicans were celebrating the fact and rudy giuliani was gleeful in sending text messages with emojis that the president was not exonerated for obstructing justice. that the president can be charged with a crime after he leaves office. that the president can be charged with obstruction of justice after he leaves office.
>> good lord. >> that the president gave, quote, hope and a boost, a boost to illegal activity, that paul manafort tried to make money during the campaign from a russian oligarch. michael flynn tried to make money during the campaign from the autocratic government of turkey, that donald trump tried to make money during the campaign from moscow. that donald trump's nsa director lied and was indicted. that donald trump's campaign manager lied and was indicted. that donald trump's deputy campaign manager lied and was indicted. that the president's lawyer lied and was indicted. that the president's foreign policy expert lied and was not indicted. and as to the question of
whether robert mueller believed that his investigation was a witch-hunt, we don't have to take his word for it. we can take the word of 60% of republicans who said in a poll two days ago that robert mueller ran a fair investigation. now, if that is a good day for the republican party in the age of trump, i'd hate to see a bad day for him. coming up, the vice chairman of the senate intelligence committee, democrat mark warner is standing by. we'll get his take on yesterday's testimony next on "morning joe." on yesterday's testimony next on "morning joe." i wanted more from my copd medicine... ...that's why i've got the power of 1 2 3 medicines with trelegy.
the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment . ♪trelegy. ♪the power of 1-2-3. ♪trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy. with trelegy and the power of 1 2 3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1 2 3. ♪trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com
♪trelegy 1-2-3 i felt i couldn't be at my best wifor my family. c, in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured and left those doubts behind. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b,
a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions, and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...and there's no looking back, because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. here, hello! starts with -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.
during today's meeting, i addressed directly with president putin the issue of russian interference in our elections. i felt this was a message best delivered in person, spent a great deal of time talking about it. all i can do is ask the question. my people came to me, dan coats came to me and some others. they said they thinkite russia. i have president putin. he just said it's not russia.
i will say this. i don't see any reason why it would be. i have great confidence in my intelligence people, but i will tell you that president putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today. >> in your investigation, did you think that this was a single attempt by the russians to get involved in our election or did you find evidence that suggests they would try to do this again? >> it wasn't a single attempt. they're doing it as we sit here. and they expect to do it during the next campaign. >> okay. joining us now vice chairman of the select committee on intelligence, democratic senator mark warner of virginia. senator, your big takeaways beyond that, which seems to be the most important thing that all should be concerned about, but your business takeaways from the hearings yesterday? >> well, mika, that was my big take away, that bob mueller said what we have heard from donald trump's own fbi director, from
donald trump's own director of national intelligence, that the russians felt they were successful in 2016 and they will be back in 2020. and what kind of makes me crazy is we're not doing enough to actually make our country better protected. there's common sense things we can do, simple things. there aunt to be an affirmative obligation. if a foreign government intervenes, tell the fbi. >> well, there was a bill that didn't pass -- >> i had that bill. but let's -- let me go through a couple other simple things. every bam yot ought to have a paper ballot backup. we ought to make sure our country attacks us. we have to put sanctions on them. we have to make sure in social media there's a requirement to report if foreigners or others advertise it. we need guardrails around facebook and twitter. these are things that would get overwhelming majority of the
votes, but this white house and the majority leader refuse to allow any of these bills to come to the floor. that to me is not making our country safer. >> but why? why are they doing that? that's like saying, you know -- i mean, it's a basic necessity for our country that most people can agree would help keep our democracy safe. why would the republicans not want these types of safeguards? >> mika, i think these votes -- these bills will get 70, 75 votes on the floor of the senate. i think a lot of the reluctance is coming from the white house. remember, this president joked about this issue with vladimir putin a few weeks back. this president sat in the oval office and basically welcomed further russian interference when he said to a reporter, he didn't know if he would report if russians tried to interfere on a going forward basis. to me, that's outrageous. i'm not here to try to
relitigate 2016. i'm here to say how do we make sure that we're protected in 2020? as bob mueller said, this is not a perspective item. the russians are already out taking these kind of activities. >> senator warner, it's willie geist and robert mueller again made that very clear in his testimony yesterday. he said not only did it happen in 2016. it's happening right now as we sit here and it will happen again in 2020. i'm curious because you have good relationships with many people across the aisle in the senate, many of the republicans. can you explain their opposition to something that seems pretty obvious to most americans listening? >> well, willie, we had a lot of cosponsors, for example, last year on a bisque election security bill which said, you know, if states are going to take federal money, have a paper ballot backup, have some kind of outside auditing. the dhs, department of homeland security did a better job in 20 2018. they have upped their game. there's not virtually any election security official that doesn't think we need these
additional rules of the road. frankly, i've been discouraged at some of my republican colleagues because of pushback from the white house and because of long time leader mcconnell has been reluctant to put anything on the floor that even smells of election sharing or campaign finance reform. my help would be out of the mueller hearing today. on this issue, he was quite strong that we'll make it another. >> so, senator, what you're saying is republicans in the senate won't support this bill, some of these, anyway, because of pressure from the white house. why do you expect the white house is exerting pressure to not defend our election process? >> well, that's one of the things that i think is still an unanswered question. because i will give, you know, mr. trump's appointees his fbi director, his director of national intelligence, his cia director, his director of the nsa. they all acknowledge the folks at dhs, they are working very
hard on trying within their limited roles what they can do to help protect other elections. it has to be disappointing for them, as well, when there's not a recognition at the white house of the seriousness of this process. >> so take senator cindy hide smith who stood in between the passage of these bills. what does she say to you? what's the explanation because she hasn't given any public explanation for why she won't support, again, defending not a political question, an american question of defending our elections. what's the case against it? >> so far what we've heard is simply objections raised by some of my republican colleagues. and i've told my republican colleagues, for example, my duty to report. if there are ways it can be improved, you know, i think we were clear, this is only about foreign campaign assistance. this wouldn't mean if you talked to a foreign journalist or if you talked to a foreign official, but if there were way toes improve the legislation, i'm wide open to that.
i don't want to get anybody kaup caught up in anything. we want to make clear what i would have thought would be morally clear before 2016 that, of course, if a foreign government or a foreign spy agency was trying to offer dirt on an opponent, the obligation ought to be not to say thank you, the obligation ought to be to tell the fbi. if there's any lack of charity, let's go ahead and put it into law. >> senator, i think i just heard you say these election security bills, you're confident that you could get at least 75 votes on the senate floor. did you just say that, 75 votes? >> yes. >> well, that begs the question there are 100 united states senators. that means 25 united states senators would vote or not vote for a bill to ensure the security of our elections? what is wrong with the united states senate? do we need iq tests now for people to become senators? >> i'm not sure you could get 80 votes to degree the sun is going to rise in the east. that is a number i picked up.
i do know this. i think, you know, i know on my committee, and i'm really proud of the fact on the intelligence committee or the last bipartisan group who is working on this, we're going to have the first part of our report in the next coming days on election security which will document in great detail not only what happened, but some ideas about how we move forward. i don't know virtually any republican member of the senate that doesn't acknowledge that the russians attack, that they'll do it again. i like to point out if you look at what the russians did in our election, in the brexit vote, in the french presidential election, add it altogether, it's less than the cost of one new f-35 airplane. so the russians are going to do it because it's cheap specificive. particularly on social media, pit us against each other. one of the reasons why we need some guardrails out there, why we need to make sure we have a right to know it's being communicated by a bot versus a human being, why i think some of these other issues around facebook, twitter, google, that
is another area. the good news is, there's bipartisan consensus that the wild, wild west days have to be in the past. >> so people are familiar with what happened to the past election and the role that social media played, perhaps in altering the outcome of the election. but in this fourth coming election, in the 2020 presidential election, according to what you know, what you've seen and what you sense, is it possible that the next election that could actually alter the vote count? >> well, i think there is that possibility. what i think is a greater possibility is not getting in necessarily and altering the vote count. but if you go upstream into some of these companies and three companies control about 90% of the voter files, if you simply were to change a few thousand folks from one precinct to another, you wouldn't have to change the vote file. you would simply have chaos on election day when people show up at the polling place and are
told they're on the wrong spot. there are so many ways that they can mess with our election. and all the more reason why we need to put these rules in place. in the case of social media, we saw in 2016 the creation of fake accounts where somebody says that, but it they're mike but i in st. peters berg. in 2020, you may have news figures or political figures, their faces appear, their voices sounding like the actual person with that being a fake contrived video coming at you from your favorite account. >> geez, this is going to get even more complicated. senator mark warner, thank you very much. and still ahead, we're going to bring in a whole new panel of legal experts to discuss bob mueller's testimony. what it means for congress and what it means for president trump. we're back in a moment. esident trump. we're back in a moment
carl, i appreciate the invite here. as my broker, what am i paying you to manage my money? it's racquetball time. (thumps) ugh! carl, does your firm offer a satisfaction guarantee? like schwab does. guarantee? (splash) carl, can you remind me what you've invested my money in? it's complicated. are you asking enough questions about the way your wealth is being managed? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management.
this just came out, wikileaks. i love wikileaks, donald trump. this wikileaks stuff is unbelievable. it tells you the inner heart, you've got to read it. this wikileaks is like a treasure trove, boy, i love reading those wikileaks. donald trump, november 4th, 2016. would any of on those quotes disturb you, mr. director? >> i'm not certain i would say -- >> how do you react to it? >> rob attic is an
understatement. >> are you concerned you could be indicted after office? >> so wikileaks is a hoax just like everything else. it was a witch-hunt. a total witch-hunt. and when you saw robert mueller's statement and then he did a recap, he did a correction later on in the afternoon. and you know what that correction was and you still have the question. you know why? because you're fake news and one you're of them most. the fact that you asked that question, you are fake news. >> joining us now, et tore and chief of law fair, benjamin whittis and jennifer taub.
let me start with you, jennifer, your general impressions of what you saw yesterday. there's been a lot of talk about what kind of witness bob mueller was. but in terms of the substance of what you heard, what was your read? >> i thought he did a terrific job in delivering to the american people, especially those of us who haven't read the full report, exactly what went wrong in 2016 and what we need to do going forward. so specifically, he laid out the crimes and the cover-up. and we know that we should now be very concerned that the russian government not only interfered in the 2016 election, but is continue to go interfere in our chekzs goielections goin. as we can see, the president doesn't seem to be at all concerned about that. in fact, he would welcome in. and the second part is, in terms of the cover-up, going forward, we need to have congress begin
impeachment proceedings to examine that cover-up because mueller has made it clear that he does not believe a sitting president can be indicted. and so it's time now to use the constitutional procedures available to congress to hold him accountable. >> and that impeach many conversation within the democratic caucus is taking place even as we sit here this morning. benjamin, let me get your take on yesterday. there was a lot of talk last night and this morning of peeg saying, well, there's nothing new presented there. that is exactly what bob mueller promised was nothing new, he was going to explain the report, recite it when necessary, stay within the four corners of that 448 page document. how did he do yesterday? >> yes. so bob mueller did not go in there with a objective or a message that he wanted to send. he went in there with a unwillingly in order to answer questions if people threw them at him. and he -- and so i think the most important thing that
happened yet was not what bob mueller did. it was what the members of the committee did or the committees which is that they began the process of turning his report into a congressional record and getting him to agree and ascent in public to the things that he said in that document in formal statements to the committee. >> john. >> so jennifer, i'm curious about, you know, there's no doubt that if you looked at the two hearings that you saw between the morning and the afternoon and it clearly was i think animated by his kind of zeal for getting into some of the issues that were on deck in the intelligence committee. and it's interesting i think in the context of when the report camous, the first volume dealing with russian interference got less attention some in some ways than the obstruction volume. so coming out of that, in a
purely legal sense, we have a lot of discuss now about what can be done to -- or if anything will be done to try to combat future interference which bob mueller is clearly concerned about. but in a legal sense, what would have to be done? it seems to me that there is law miss to go criminalize some of the behavior that the report pointed out and that mueller highlighted again yesterday. >> i think part of what is missing right now are laws that the republicans are obstructing to make it a requirement that campaigns report when foreign governments are trying to approach them and interfere. and this is something that needs to move forward, but for some reason, that is not happening. i think the other side of it in terms of there's a prevention at the stage, but you also have to be concerned about the ballot box. so we need to harden our election systems. we need to have backup paper,
you know, records of all voting. i think that what was really chilling to me was that conversation with peter welch about this being the new normal. we have to face that we're eight months away from voting beginning in our next election. and we really don't have the systems in place and the public confidence that it will be, you know, free and fair election. and that really concerns me gately. >> ben, on that score yesterday in the afternoon session, bob mueller repeatedly, even though it was terse and sometimes staccato-like answers, addressed the fact that the united states electoral system and thus the united states of america, our country, has been under attack from russia for a couple of
years. we're still earn attack. yet the conversation largely after the hearing revolved around the cosmetics of the hearing rather than the content of the hearing, the content of what bob mueller said. could you please speak to the importance of the content of what he said in that afternoon session. >> yeah. so look, anybody who was expecting a charismatic jim comey like performance from bob mueller just doesn't know bob mueller. this is a very dry, just the facts kind of guy who clearly doesn't want to be there. but the message that he's bringing is really important and it's a kind of sign of our times that he can go, he can say the things that he said, write the things that he wrote in that report and all people want to talk about afterwards is the at
more feesics of it. look, he went in there and pled both in his press conference weeks ago in the report itself and yesterday for people to take seriously the idea that russia is doing these things and that other countries will do these things, as well. i suppose the good news is that the republican members of the committee who were intent on discrediting mueller and discrediting his findings actually didn't contest the facts of the report at all. they didn't contest what he was saying substantively. the bad news is they also won't act on it and the president does just kind of deny the whole
premise down to the clips that you mayed from yesterday. i think we have a lot of work to do in getting people just to take seriously that this stuff is real, it is corrosive, it is ongoing and i do wish and i'm glad you asked that question, i do wish that people would focus on the substance of the message that he is delivering. >> there is a lot of talk this morning about what democrats are going to do next. where do you see that going? we know the attorney general is working on this in the origins of this russia probe. do you believe this is an appropriate matter? and could we see future hearings
down the road with that being the subject? >> so i do think there's a possibility of that in the senate, although not in the house. look -- and the attorney general, as you point out, is definitely committed to this. by the way, this is a real witch-hunt. and, you know, it's terribly, terribly damaging to have agents and prosecutors and lawyers who supervise agents looking over they are shoulders when they think about how to handle a high stakes matter like this knowing that some future attorney general might loose a u.s. attorney on them, which is what might happen here. so i think it's very damaging, that said. i also don't think it's going be very productive because at the
end of the day, the facts of what happened here are reasonably well noon. you can investigate it all you want. and at the end of the day, what happened is what happened. >> benjamin whittis and jennifer todd, thank you very much for being on with us this morning. up next, have you ever had a conversation about, say, a new pair of sunglasses and inexplicably an online ad pops up on your computer or phone about sunglasses? it's an eerie feeling. we'll talk to the anymoremaker behind a new netflix documentary explaining how our personal data is collected, analyzed and spit back at us in the form of targeted messaging. f targeted messaging all money managers might seem the same,
but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. yof your daily routine.lf so why treat your mouth any differently? listerine® completes the job by preventing plaque, early gum disease, and killing up to 99.9% of germs. try listerine® and for on-the-go, try listerine® ready! tabs™ liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
right now, congress is working to end surprise medical billing. that's when patients are hit with medical bills they thought would be covered by insurance. but what congress is considering would cut money that vulnerabe patients rely on the most. that means seniors, children, and americans relying on medicaid would be hurt. it's already too hard for people to get basic medical care with hospitals closing and a shortage of er doctors. tell congress we can end surprise billing without shredding the safety net. paid for by physicians for fair coverage. ♪ (music plays throughout♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ and my side super soft? with the sleep number 360 smart bed it can with your sleep number setting. can it help keep me asleep? yes, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. save up to $800 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. ends saturday. 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. who has seen an advertisement that has convinced you that your microphone is listening to your conversations? >> all of your interactions, your credit card swipes, web searches, locations, likes. they're all collected in real time into a trillion dollar a year industry.
>> the real game changer was cambridge analytica. they worked for the trump campaign and for the brexit campaign. they started using information warfare. >> cambridge analytica claimed to have 5,000 data points on every american voter. >> a look there at the new netflix documentary "the great hack" which explores how data has surpassed oil as the world's most valuable asset and is being weaponized to wage cultural and political warfare. the film also looks at how the cambridge analytica facebook scandal might have played a role in the 2016 presidential election. joining us now, oscar nominated film maker behind the documentary, plus the former executive at cambridge analytica, who is featured in the film and was interviewed by robert mueller as part of the russia probe.
also with us the cohost of "morning joe" first look. good to have you. i begin by saying that i feel like all of our data is constantly being picked up on our phones and that that data is not secure. tell us what the big takeaways are of this documentary and does it focus on how unsafe each and every one of our devices are? >> thanks. i think the film is, you know, trying to bring to life this moment where we feel our phones are listening in on us. the reality is our phones are not listening in on us, but what is happening is we realize there is a moment of fragility. this is about how a democracy like ours can function in the face of monopolistic tech platforms. it is a fragility about how the word truth can exist when we have weaponized information and a fragility about how we can have a, quote-unquote, country
based on shared values when everyone is living in their own individual reality. what we have found is that the hack that's happened is the hack of our minds. that hack has been allowed to happen because facebook has put our data in a very dangerous and complicated space. facebook has become a crime scene. >> we've seen that as you guys were saying information has become more valuable than oil. yesterday we saw that really front and center with the mueller testimony. he expressed a lot of concern that we are still being under attack by, you know, foreign countries, perhaps even the russians trying to influence our election. i'm curious to get your thoughts as somebody who worked on big data. how vulnerable are we still today going into another election cycle? >> if you think of it this way, data is the only asset where the producers of that asset, all of us as individuals, have no rights. absolutely no rights to that asset whatsoever. we have no transparency, hardly any consent based mechanisms to know where our data is collected
and held and how it can used or abused against us. right now in the wake of the mueller investigation coming to a close, we're actually seeing how easy it is for our data to be used and weaponized and how we're still not safe ahead of the 2020 election. >> you were the director of business development at cambridge analytica? >> correct. >> you were interviewed by robert mueller just in this news cycle, what was that like? now the investigation is over so i think a lot of people who did interviews with the special prosecutor who were not free to talk about their experience or maybe felt constrained now feel a little freer, so what were they interested in and what did you talk about? >> well, i'm not at liberty to discuss the specifics of the interview, but the most important topics that now you can see from both the report and the public testimony yesterday are the facts that our regulatory and legislative system still do not protect us from the same way that we were targeted in the 2016 election. right now it is just as easy for
an individual, a company, or even a foreign government to purchase data on american citizens and use that data against us and to divide us ahead of the next election. >> so in this two-year investigation into what happened in 2016 cambridge analytica is a name a lot of americans have heard but don't understand. can you walk us through basically what cambridge analytica did, why the film is focused on it, and the role it played in 2016 but also across the atlantic with brexit? >> sure. well, i think for us what attracted us to the story was that we could unpack this entire relationship that we have with technology and how our democratic process has been kind of disabled because of it. i think what we found by following this story is someone who could take us through the journey of our relationship with this technology of going from how it was used to inspire people to come together under
barack obama's campaign and how it was used to weaponize information and suppress votes during the 2016 election. >> and what cambridge analytica did from the beginning was get access to all of the data sets that are still very easy to access -- everything from experien to info group to axiom to labels and lists which commercially sells our political data. it is very easy to build up a large data base even without access to facebook data since there is no longer the friends api access that caused the original data crisis in the first place. it is still just as easy to buy all of that data, model it, and predict behavior in a way where you can divide people and cause them to act against each other instead of to come together on issues. >> from where you guys both sit in terms of what you've been able to see in documenting this phenomena over the last couple years and, brittany, where you sit as well, do you feel there is a solution to this big data
problem without some kind of legislation on big tech companies? this is a debate kind of raging on on capitol hill. should big tech companies be in some cases broken up or put under tighter regulation. what conclusion have you come to about that? >> i think that we're talking a lot today about the mueller testify, which is an attempt to make the invisible visible. we've seen in our vapgs whinves is what they have in common is they both exploited the vulnerability facebook and other platforms made possible for all of us. we live in this notion whereby we think that our admission fee to the connected world is giving up our privacy. we need a new deal. we need a new social contract. that should be in the user agreement. i think brittany can talk to the actions happening on the ground on the policy front. >> there's a lot of really exciting legislative initiatives going on at the moment on the hill. i think everybody should be looking out for everything from the criminalization of
executives that, through negligence, allow data hacking, all the way to data ownership where individuals will have property rights over the data they produce since it is the only asset class where us as producers don't have any rights at the moment. >> we should note that we reached out to facebook for comment but didn't hear back. the great hack is available now on netflix. thank you both for joining us today on this important issue. >> thank you. >> congratulations on the documentary. final thoughts? >> well, mika, we had the day for the history books yesterday and now the ball is squarely in the court of the democrats on capitol hill. we'll see what happens with them. you know, still much to play for here, but i think it really is their call now what to do. >> that's right. there is so much to look forward to as to what happens next. i think we should take a pause and i want to echo what others
said earlier today. whether republican or democrat, some note for robert mueller capping off probably a lifetime of service and i know there's been criticism of his performance yesterday but the work he has done for this investigation but also his whole life for this country should not be overlooked. yesterday shouldn't be the defining image. >> all right. thank you very much. that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage right now. hi there. i'm stephanie ruhle. here's what's happening now. democrats strategizing their next move after robert mueller's testimony while the political and legal fallout is still unclear, mueller did manage to remind us of a few very key points. number one, that russia interfered with our election in 2016 and they are determined to do it again next year. number two, that this investigation resulted in indictments, convictions, and guilty pleas from nearly three dozen people, including the president's former lawyer michael cohen, his former campaign chairman paul