tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC July 26, 2019 11:00am-12:01pm PDT
week compelling former white house counsel don mcgahn to comply with a subpoena to appear before congress. the white house previously instructed mcgahn not to cooperate with the congressional subpoena. nadler defended his decision earlier this afternoon and downplayed rumors of tension between him and house speaker nancy pelosi. who for her part, argued she's not slow rolling impeachment talks. >> going to take whatever heat there is there to say when the decision will be made in a timely fashion, this isn't endless. when we have the best, strongest possible case. now, i'm not trying to run out the clock. let's get sophisticated about this, okay. we will proceed when we have what we need to proceed. not one day sooner. >> i don't know that there are real divisions with the speaker. i would refer you to her earlier comments in which she said that we must make the strongest case.
>> now, despite all that friendly talk, nadler and pelosi are reportedly privately at odds over the next steps for the democratic caucus. as the daily beast points out, the two are likely headed for a very public collision down the road. saying that for pelosi, the answer is simple. stay the course. for nadler, that course is becoming increasingly difficult to trek with members from his own committee and constituents back home calling not ownply for impeachment proceedings but for tougher posture toward a white house that seems hell bent on making his oversight work impossible. so our big question today is are house democrats setting themselves up for a public rift over impeachment? joining me is leanne caldwell, former california democratic senator, barbara boxer. founding director of defending democracy together, bill kristol, and former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and msnbc legal analyst mimi rocca.
>> congressman nadler said waiting until 2021 to remove the president is too late. let's take a listen to that first. >> got it be a reckoning date, doesn't there have to be? or this is going to slip away into 2021. >> no, this cannot -- deciding what we're going to do about this administration cannot wait until 2021. i can't give you a hard date, but i know the work that has to be done and we're going to be doing it. >> so leann, the question now is does he plan on pushing forward with impeachment? >> so morgan, there's been quite a little bit of a development very recently. jerry nadler just held a press conference, and there was some significant movement on this issue. so you mentioned those court papers, the going to court at the top of your show. and while they're trying to find this grand jury information from the mueller report, what they also acknowledge in these court documents is that the judiciary committee is investigating on
whether to open impeachment inquiry, so this is a significant acknowledgment from the judiciary committee to the courts that impeachment is absolutely on the table. when i asked jerry nadler if this was an escalation into democrats' investigation, he said yes. another member, veronica escobar, agrees and she said this is definitely crossing a new threshold into this investigation on impeachment. and then a lot of these members in the judiciary committee at this press conference, they also said that impeachment is a term that has gotten too much play. they believe that they have already started into this process, and this is a new development, a new step that they are entering into today. and so i think that it's a message that democrats are also hoping to send two days after the mueller hearings. and also as they head home for a six-week break, that these democrats are moving full steam
ahead into their investigation, that impeachment is not off the table, morgan. >> barbara, you heard leigh ann's reporting talking about the new step in impeachment proceedings, but nancy pelosi made a show of making nice with the insurgent party in her wing, but is she setting herself up for a bigger fight over the question of impeachment? >> nancy knows exactly what she's doing. they are in a search for the truth. and they are in search of proof. and by continuing these investigations, and telling the court that there is a possibility of an impeachment inquiry, they will get more information. and i believe the courts will say yes, don mcgahn, you do have to come before the congress so they do their oversight. so here's the thing about speaker pelosi, who i have known forever. she is very wise. this is a representative
government. she basically said to her members, you do what you need to do. many of them will go home and they will hear their constituency say investigate, impeach. some will hear, take care of me. take care of my problems. my health care, my kids' education. and that's what this government is about. so everything is on the table. and mainly it's a search for what's the best way to go get rid of donald trump. and that, i think, is critical for this country because he's a clear and present danger. >> it's interesting, barbara, you talk about pelosi thinking you need to do what you need to do, but there's also this question of these having access to these sealed grand jury material. mimi, what is the likelihood that nadler can in fact get them access to this material? >> i think right now as things stand, it's not a very high likelihood, though i would really like to read the brief they're apparently filing this afternoon. and this is where i think
everything we're talking about comes together. it can be strengthened. you need to have a, quote, judicial proceeding in order for the courts to rule that they're giving something over as part of impeachment. so that's where this word impeachment does become important. as they move into the courts of law, and i'm so glad to see that they are. i think that is progress. this is where, you know, the trump administration's bogus arguments, frankly, are going to be shot down broadly speaking. but as to specifically grand jury information, i think their hand would really be strengthened by formally announcing an impeachment inquiry or at least saying out loud this is preliminary to it. because those -- >> they're in the process. >> right, those are the standards the court is looking for. >> want to go back to something that barbara said. she brought up don mcgahn. we know the white house said he's basically protected. he does not have to testify. so how can nadler force him to testify? >> well, and that's one of the bogus arguments that i'm talking about. i think they have a much
stronger argument, the house, as to forcing don mcgahn to testify than they do on the grand jury. grand jury material is, and frankly, not that important. >> you don't think it's that important? >> the grand jury material. there aren't that many portions -- it's hard for me to say. i haven't seen it. maybe there's a golden piece, but there aren't that many pieces that are redacted a to grand jury. it doesn't mean it's not a battle worth fighting, but the don mcgahn argument, that's one that i think a court would quickly say to the trump administration, you are making way too broad of an argument. again, though, i think that having the official impeachment word invoked, the impeachment inquiry, would again, help in fighting back against these arguments. >> you think that the question of don mcgahn is worth going to the mat over? >> absolutely. that would be, you know, we all said, a lot of us said this about mueller, and i think in many ways it was a turning point, but don mcgahn is a fact witness. we have not yet other than michael cohen had an actual fact witness. if he were even a mildly
cooperative witness who testified to exactly what he told mueller, i think that would be very compelling for people to hear that the president told him to lie and to create a false document about it in a federal investigation. >> so possibly revealing, but procedurally, leigh ann, what happens if the white house continues to defy the subpoena even after a court ruling? >> well, the house democrats say that this court order has criminal implications, and there will be criminal repercussions if don mcgahn continues to defy this. but moving ahead, this is part of the process that they say they have to go through. this is the process that nancy pelosi says that she wants to undertake step by step before they officially announce that they're opening an impeachment inquiry. but there's an acknowledgment as well that even expedited court proceedings can still take a lot
of time. and that's the question -- one of the questions, anyway, that remains on capitol hill, how long are you going to work through this system before you just open the impeachment inquiry? because we are running out of time. just a little bit over a year until the election, and as you said at the very top, morgan, jerry nadler said 2021 is not an option for impeaching the president. >> so bill, you just heard leigh ann say nadler said twnt 2021 is not an option, but is nadler fishing for something, is he trying to set a trap for the white house, daring them to defy this. >> they have paid no price for defying anything so far. we're having this discussion three months too late. the report provided grounds for impeachment inquiry or it didn't. if it didn't, say thank you for the report. not a single fact in the report has been challenged. the idea that the house is going to discover new facts directly from mcgahn that he didn't tell
mueller underoath, i don't think it's likely. if you had an impeachment inquiry, you would call mcgahn and other witnesses. but i understand why nancy pelosi made the decision she made. she has a very tough job. she's managing a complicated conference. trying to coordinate with presidential candidates. she doesn't want to do something to endanger her moderate members, but this step by step creates in the worst of all world, the president is going to say this is harassment. you got the report from mueller, mueller testified. you know if i did something to impeach or not. it was a big tactical mistake by speaker pelosi not to necessarily impeach, but to launch the inquiry after receiving the report from mueller. >> you call it a tactical mistake and say the timing is off, but given president trump's instincts, could the trap still be effective? >> no, of course, they could be. but he's going to defy as long as he can and order people like mcgahn to defy. i assume ultimately he'll
testify as others have after delay, but running out the clock tells the american people that it's not a matter of real constitutional urgency. it's important, we're going to court. what does it say that heir going out for six weeks on recess? believe me, i'm well aware of the congressional calendar. this is longer than august, not even august yet. is that what you do when you're in the middle of a constitutional crisis? do you not -- i don't know, it feels to me like running out the clock. maybe that's the right strategic decision. maybe it's the right decision from a public policy point of view. maybe you don't want to have a partisan impeachment. it's bad for the country. i accept those arguments. if that's the argument, probably better just to make that argument and say let's go have an election and let's have oversight on a million other things. election security, there are a million issues in which to confront the trump administration, but i think this slow-motion step-by-step moving toward impeachment inquiry is not the right way to go. >> interesting that you mention election security. that's an issue right on time.
senate republicans keep blocking this legislation. has there been any progress so far? >> there's a big development, and that was the senate intelligence committee just yesterday came out with their report on election interference by the russians. this is something that they have been working on for almost two years now. and the report was pretty significant in the sense that it said of all 50 states had been touched by russian interference in the election. that is much broader than we had thought in the past. and it really paints a very damning picture of what happened in 2016 and the role that russians played. of course, in the report, they do say there's no evidence that the election was changed because of it, but they do say that the election system was extremely weak in the last -- in 2016, in the last presidential election. and the russians are still trying to undermine the election despite the work that has been
done since 2016 to insure they don't, morgan. >> and barbara, you have been on the hill. i mean, what can democrats do at this point? is there anything they can do to force this issue? >> absolutely. this is the most outrageous thing because here we have bipartisanship in the senate intelligence committee. warning us that we have to do something about our election security. and mitch mcconnell, who i worked with for many years, has turned into someone else. he always was kind of grumpy, but now he says he's the grim reaper of the senate. well, he's now the grim reaper of the country. and he's thwarting our democracy. when you have bipartisan support to make sure we help our election officials across our great nation secure the elections, have a paper ballot backup. what he's doing is malfeasance, and it's only confirming to me
that this next election, what the revolution to me is about, is a massive turnout of everyone, of every party, that loves this country and loves our democracy. >> and even with that massive turnout, voters are hoping their votes will be protected and secure. >> absolutely. >> thank you so much to leigh ann caldwell, baurb raw boxer, bill kristol, and mimi rocca. >> still to come, if there's a country to wage a war of words against, it certainly is not sweden. that is, of course, unless you're president trump. >> plus new reporting about active duty troops sent to the border. the administration is saying one thing and then doing something completely different. and right after this break, a member of the squad sits down with the house speaker to clear the air. are they good to go now? we'll find out coming up next. look limu. a civilian buying a new car. let's go.
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.
unity and family. those were the words used by house speaker nancy pelosi and freshman congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez as they emerged from a one-on-one meeting on capitol hill. but it was only a few weeks ago the two were locked in a public feud after pelosi's interview with the times where she criticized alexandria ocasio-cortez along with ilhan omar and rashida tlaitlaib. then the house speaker came to their defense, calling the
president's tweets racist on the floor of the house. all of this set the stage for today's 30-minute meeting where aoc and speaker pelosi emerged as a united front. >> in our caucus, we have our differences. respect that instead of making a big issue of it. like you're in a family. and a family, you have your differences. but you are still a family. >> you know, i'm looking forward to continuing our work and as always, i think the speaker respects, you know, the fact that we're coming together as a party and that unity and i'm looking forward to us getting back in september. >> that meeting was followed by a video from the president's campaign called the squad. >> yeah, you know, if that's what radical means, call me a radical. >> call me a radical. >> call me a radical. >> all right. so joining me now to break down this back and forth, bloomberg
news national political reporter shu heels cupora, and democratic strategist and former senior campaign aide to alexandria ocasio-cortez, walid shahid. let's start with you, because house speaker pelosi talked about her meeting with aoc this morning, and where want to play you sound of that. >> i would never even say it was a hatchet, but i do think we sat down today, we had a good meeting. and the congresswoman is a very gracious member of congress. so we had a very positive conversation about our districts and how we represent them. our country and how we need to meet the needs, the diversity of america and the challenges we face in terms of issues. and how immigration and people are respected. >> so that was interesting because speaker pelosi comes out and says there is no hatchet, but if there is no hatchet, why would she even have to have this meeting at all? >> right. i think speaker pelosi is downplaying what are very rear differences between her and
representative ocasio-cortez. that's idealogical, tactical, generational. they have fundamentally different roles. speaker pelosi's role is to build consensus in her conference, and that just happens to be on the more moderate wing of her caucus. and aoc's role, and i have talked to her about this, she views her role as pushing the needle, stretching the conversation, changing perceptions of what is politically possible, and those are inherently in conflict with each other. the president did step into a democratic circular firing squad and have them all point their fire at him. he saved them from the battle they were having amongst themselves but i think the friction will go on for a while because there's a fundamental difference in how they view politics. >> you saw this video the trump campaign released. it's clear that the trump team is trying to position the squad as the true leaders of the democratic party, saying they're radicals, saying they're scary. what can democrats do, and should they spend their time trying to combat that image?
>> well, i think the reason why donald trump and kind of fox news attack the squad is because they represent the multiracial liberalism of the democratic party in a lot of ways, the four members of the squad represent the base of the party, young, diverse, female, and that's what the democratic party is about, multiracial liberal democracy, and trump is trying to divide and conquer voters of all backgrounds in this country by pitting them against each other on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, and all that stuff, and that's the battle democrats are engaged in. nancy pelosi has to recognize this is the frame that we're going to be heading into in the 2020 election. the same frame in 2016. that's who the leaders represent. they are who the democratic party is. >> but is continuing to attack the squad really going to backfire on trump? because could the democrats just double down and protect these women and perhaps this wouldn't actually play out the way that trump has expected? >> i think it will backfire on
trump, because these congressen really represent the base, the voters who need to be nrlt energized. and i think that a lot of these young women are supporting -- they're really speaking to voters who didn't turn out for democrats in 2016. young people, union households. >> a new base. >> working class people of all backgrounds. they're not the trump voter who is going to switch over that nancy pelosi and moderate democrats are obsessed with. it's a different base. >> a different one and an energized one. let's turn from the trump campaign to the trump white house. listen to what hogan gillie, the white house principle deputy press secretary, said about that meeting that happened earlier today. >> he's not positioning her as the face of the democratic party. she is the face of the democrat party. her leftist radical agenda is in the fore, in the democrat party. there is no doubt about that. she's running the show. >> so back again on this leftist
radical agenda, which is interesting here, because the president seems to like a foe. he likes a foil. so does a united pelosi and aoc really impact the president's ability to weaponize aoc against the party as a whole? >> well, president trump is clearly comfortable with that foil. he likes going after those women. there all many possible reasons for that. one is their idealogical positions are the kind that he can try to use, he can try to turn his voters against. his base doesn't like a lot of what these women stand for. so i think he's going to continue to do that. i have always been skeptical that the president can make four members of congress the face of the democratic party when there's a presidential primary that will, from which someone will emerge who would literally be the face of the democratic party going into the election, but you're right, the president likes foils. he's settled on his foil. the last point i'll make about this is it's not clear to me that it's working. there's a fox news poll out just yesterday that shows ocasio-cortez's popularity is ilhan omar's popularity going up
after he made that attack telling them to go back, quote/unquote, where they came from, as compared to earlier this year. not quite clear to me that's working at the moment. >> thank you so much for joining us. i want to get right in to that poll you just mentioned coming up next. thank you so much, gentlemen. trump and fox, as we just heard sahil mention, are they no longer friends? the network is out with a new poll of the president's re-election prospects. and spoiler alert, he's not so happy about it. stay tuned. ♪ sport drumming starts [ referee whistle sounds ] [ cheering ] when you need the fuel to be your nephew's number one fan. holiday inn express. we're there. so you can be too.
and my side super soft? with the sleep number 360 smart bed you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. so, can it help us fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. will it help me keep up with him? yup. so, i'll wake up ready for anything? oh, we've got your back. so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise. prove. and now, save up to $800 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. ends saturday. a cockroach can survive submergede guy. underwater for 30 minutes. wow. yeah, wow.
the president is now railing against a new poll from fox news that shows him trailing some of the top democratic contenders. it shows trump losing to joe biden and bernie sanders. and barely beating out elizabeth warren and kamala harris. the president's reaction, he tweeted that fox news is at it again. so different from what they used to be during the 2016 primaries. and before proud warriors. now, new fox polls which have always been terrible to me, they had me losing big to crooked hillary, had me down to sleepy joe. then the president goes on to say there can be no way the greatest economy in u.s. history
i could be losing to the sleepy one. keep america great. joining me now to explain those polls, we have msnbc national political correspondent steve kornacki. steve, what do these polls actually show? >> well, we'll take you through them. we should say, fox news, the poll, the fox poll, this is a reputable poll. they have been doing this thing for years. we have been showing their polls every time they take them. it's considered a high-quality neutral poll. politically. here's what they're showing. when it comes to a head-to-head matchup, trump versus biden. you see trump mentioning it there, but biden, they have him running 10 points ahead of trump in a head-to-head matchup. this is something we have seen in our poll, in many other polls lately. biden out in front of trump, and biden doing significantly better against trump than other democrats. take a look at this. sanders still leads trump at six, not ten in the case of sanders. then you see elizabeth warren. trump may actually have a point ahead of elizabeth warren.
kamala harris, also a point behind trump. so that range, though, broadly speaking, is something we have been seeing in all sorts of polls. biden doing better than the other democrats. there's a question of if that will last, if that will hold, if that will mean anything to democratic voters, and biden running high single digits, maybe low double digits ahead of trump. question of whether that will last, but there seems to be a consensus in the polling right now that that's what people are saying right now. it really is not a surprise when you look at this. this is trump's approval rating. his average approval rating, if you put them all together, it's just over 44%. you probably expect numbers like that from a president at 44%, and more to the point, disappro disapprove, when you ask, they say disapprove of his job. well over 50%, and that number has been around that level for a while, too, so 44%, 53% on the approve/disapprove, probably going do be behind. >> interesting when you put the poll numbers against the approval rating. i'm also curious whether that
will shift after the second debate. >> joining me now, former clinton campaign national press secretary brian fallon, and republican strategist rena shaw. brian, thank you for joining us. i want to stay on those poll numbers for just a moment because the biden campaign fired off a tweet mocking the president's response to the fox poll. and he tweeted, donald trump, we know you love the polls. we're glad you saw the latest from fox. biden 49%, trump 39%. you're losing by ten. have a nice day. well, polling didn't give us the full picture in 2016, but brian, is it still too early for democrats to be flaunting these wins and to kind of get excited? >> well, if you're the biden campaign and you're basing your candidacy really on the democratic primary on an electability argument, you're going to tout a poll like this since it has you up over trump by ten points. absolutely, it's too early for anybody to be counting their chickens. the president's approval rating is up, the economy is doing well. he's going to betough to beat. but if i'm the other candidates besides biden, what i say to may
supporters and to these democratic primary voters is all of us have a shot. any of us could potentially beat the president. the reports in the last couple days that the president was having meetings with his political team and rnc officials scouting the 2020 potential field on the democratic side, and they didn't just mention joe biden. they also talked about kamala harr harris, they also talked about elizabeth warren. all of these candidates have an argument to go to voters and say any of us can beat trump. >> brian, it's interesting. you say all of us have a shot, but rena, you're a republican strategist. if you're inside the trump campaign or even the rnc, should those numbers phase you or you hope trump does what he has shown he can do, which is defy electoral gravity. >> if you're in the rnc, you're thinking it's just fine, no one to worry about. yes, this is a huge field. all these people think they have a chance, but the reality is there are only two people here
who have a strong chance at taking down trump. that's biden and sanders. you have to count out warren and harris in this, because look, trump is going to eviscerate a woman, and it pains me to say that as a woman. >> what do you mean, he'll eviscerate a woman if you mean at the polls or verbally? >> he's going to do it on the trail, right up until they get to election day. >> what do you mean eviscerate them? >> he's going to find a way to go for the jugular. it's going to be tough for harris or warren who are leading the pag to fight back in a way in which they win the favor of voters who are upset with trump and who could potentially cross over. so i really think it's going to be very difficult because what's going to happen is warren is going to come off angry, even though she's very substantive on policy, and kamala harris is going to come off as playing the race card. that's what the republicans are going to do to these women. i think frankly wood shelook at it for what it is. joe biden is leading the pack. the polls didn't tell us everything in 2016, but it remains a white man, an older white man having the best chance at taking down the older white
man that occupies the oval office. i hate to make it about color, but the reality is when you strip away the demographics, that's what it comes down to. >> i want to be clear on what you're saying. he will treat a woman and a woman of color differently than he will the other candidates? >> we saw it this past week. he's going to get really ugly in a way in which he can't with joe biden, in a way in which he can't with sanders. when you add the layer of gender, the american public views women differently, the responses to how men attack them on political trails, and we're not going to have that change in a year's town. while this trail is long, we have to see this for what it is. the best chance at taking down trump, and that's what i'm rooting for, because i did not support this president in 2016. i would not vote for him this time, no matter if the economy is thriving and great. it's no thanks to him. >> i want to pause you there, because that was a lot. so brian, what did you make of what she just said, because i was looking at your face. what do you think?
>> well, i mean, i won't dispute that sexism is still alive and well in america. and that a lot of voters will vote against a woman just because she is a woman, but i think that the analysis there was a little reductive and overly simplistic. it's not the dynamic you saw happen in 2018. you saw trump's behavior and his misogynistic comments really drive away republican leaning women in the suburbs and empower candidates in house districts across the country that were won by trump in 2016. i think the trend plitly right now is that the president's conduct, whether it's about the house freshmen he made racist comments about earlier this month, is what's repelling traditional republican voters, especially those college educated suburban women which will be a key bloc for the democratic nominee, whoever it is, but the idea that somebody like a kamala harris or elizabeth warren won't be able to win the voters who have been so pushed away by trump misses
what happened in 2016. >> it's interesting you mentioned the midterm results and kamala harris. david drucker wrote a piece about how gop insiders fear kamala could be the next obama. he writes a smaller though equally distinguished group of republican operatives in my rolodex, a sort of gop cult of kamala had been insisting for weeks that harris was being radically underestimated. rena, do you agree? do you believe she's being underestimated? >> no, i don't agree. and i also don't agree with brian's point that it's too simple. listen, simplistic is how we got trump. i think this is the reality here. is that women are just going to get treated in completely different by the men in their party and men on the other side as well. so kamala, i think what she's shown us is she's complex. i think what the voters are not going to want as we lead up to election 2020 is something that's too complex. that's what the democrats are getting wrong. they're going so deep down and diving so deep down they're forgetting most american voters
are very much right here. we're superficialal. we go to the ballot box thinking is the economy okay, how is the president handling anything related to national security. the women who go to the polls will look at that and tend to favor the incumbent. so democrats, all this infighting on capitol hill as well as the campaign trail is not serving them well. >> it's interesting because we're also in a new time where these issues are becoming more complex. so voters may react in turn. brian, i want to give you the last word. what do you think? >> well, i actually read that vanity fair piece and i thought there was a lot to it. i think that kamala harris is somebody that used the first debate to show that she has the ability to go toe to toe with donald trump. that is her whole campaign mantra, talking about the person who can prosecute the case against donald trump. i think she's going to geinto the debates next week and look and have the bearing of a potential person you could envision being the commander in chief. to the extent comparisons are being drawn between her and
obama, you have seen her since the first debate make inroads with african-american voters. joe biden is leading, yes, right now in the polls, but that strong base of support for him as african-americans since the first debate, he's gone down a couple ticks with black voters. kamala harris has gone up. you saw in 2007, barack obama was trailing hillary clinton with african-american voters in the year before the primary voting started. that could be a similar situation where harris, if she continues to come on strong over the coming months, could potentially overtake joe biden, and when she starts winning contests, whoever is that person that comes out of iowa, new hampshire, and gets momentum on their side, that person will look like a winner to the electorate. and that's why i think that there's a bandwagon faek that will take hold and somebody might be in a position to run the table in march with all those southern states that will be voting and go into the election against donald trump with a head of steam that dissolves all these concerns about electability. >> which is interesting that you bring up the power of the
african-american voting bloc because it's also going to be interesting who is get the youth vote within that voting bloc. while biden is leading among older african-american voter, it's unclear what the younger voters are going to do. i love a vigorous discussion. thank you for joining us this afternoon. a pleasure speaking with you. >> three more democratic candidates took the stage at the national urban league conference today. that was pete buttigieg, kirsten gillibra gillibrand, and kemamala harris. they addressed civil rights and the race to end discrimination. joining me is vaughn hillyard. who is at the top of the list today? who are people talking about? were there any standout moments? >> yeah, kamala harris was the talk of this morning. kirsten gillibrand as well as mayor pete buttigieg also spoke this morning, but it was interesting. you just referenced that joe biden has a great share of the older african-american support. and really the concern for him is those, the younger generation of black voters.
you know, there was a morning consult poll that came out that shows him with just 24% of support among african-americans younger than 45 years old. and those individuals that i talked to, one, she's a 30-year-old outside of houston, and she said that, you know, if you look back at the 1994 crime bill, that her generation is suffering the consequences of the policies that joe biden pushed from decades past. and she said that this party needs to look at an alternative, namely, kamala harris. i want you to hear a little bit of the california senator earlier this morning here in indianapolis. >> donald trump says he wants to make america great again. well, what does again mean? back before the civil rights act? back before the voting rights act? back before roe v. wade? back before the fair housing act? because we're not going back. we are not going back. and he tells them to go back to where they came from.
what do we say? we're not going back. we're not going back. and in fact, i'll tell you all where we're going. we're going it the white house. >> kamala harris has shown a willingness over the last month to take on joe biden, particularly on criminal justice reform, as well as the busing and desegregation issue back in the '70s and '80s. the question is at what point does that begin to move the polling numbers? there was a poll out of south carolina just yesterday that shows joe biden was still 50% of african-american support overall in south carolina. now, joe biden and kamala harris are both headed to detroit ahead of next week's debate. we don't expect to see them up until that point, and the question at that point is, what extent do those contrasts continue to be built out by the other candidates against the front-runner, joe biden, in this race. >> which is interesting because your reporting is now mirroring something, a question that seems to be intensifying that we just heard from our other guests,
which is kamala a formidable opponent, especially when it comes to trump, not just internally against biden. thank you for joining us. and a reminder that this sunday, award-winning journalist katy tur and jacob soboroff team up for an all new documentary series, american swamp. a four-part series that digs deep into the murky areas of american politics. everything from president trump's business ties to the way that dark money impacts our elections. catch the premiere episode this sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern only on msnbc. guys, you do not want to miss that. >> coming up, the --. e -- 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.
♪ ♪ applebee's all you can eat is back. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. stop struggling to clean tough messes with sprays. try new clean freak! it has three times the cleaning power to dissolve kitchen grease on contact. it works great on bathtubs. and even stainless steel. try new clean freak from mr. clean. i didn't have to shout out i didn't have to get you a lift. 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.
so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.key. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwal or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix.
new nbc news reporting on the crisis at the border reveals u.s. troops are now monitoring migrants at this texas border patrol holding facility. the active duty service members unarmed and perched there on raised platforms, stand watch over children and adults from just feet away. defense officials say their purpose was to provide welfare checks on the migrants, but it's now evolved into a continual presence watching over them. joining me is nbc news correspondent julia ananesly. what exactly are they doing? >> we remember when there were a string of migrant deaths so there needed to be an increased presence to watch for vital signs, to make sure there wasn't anyone who needed to receive emergency medical attention. but at the same time, you were seeing an influx of troops going to the border.
they were supposed to be there purely to monitor, to provide more support, but not to directly interact with migrants. that was a big no because it violates law to have the military enforcing domestic law. you can think of a lot of reasons throughout history why we have that in place. now they're not necessarily crossing that line, but they're getting really close. they're standing on these raised platforms, and they're able to sort of look at the crowd. if they see violence, if they see someone who looks ill, any behavior problems, they're supposed to call customs and border protection to alert them. right now, when you put these populations so close together, it just increases the risk for something to go wrong and for that line to be crossed. i do have to add they're not armed, which does make a difference. >> i know that they're not armed, but initially they were walking by allegedly every 15 minutes, then it got moved up to constantly and evolved into something different. why the shift in time? >> that's a good question. and it's only happening so far as we know right now in this facility in donna, texas, which is a soft-sided tent facility that they use to deal with the
overflow when the numbers got really high earlier this summer. those numbers are going back down now so it's a possibility donna and some other places could be closed, but they act li like it's an issue of personnel, just having more eyeballs on the situation, but cbp is the largest law enforcement organization in the country, so to be using soldiers for this, it's raising a lot of red flags, particularly from members of congress and civil liberties groups who say this is too close for comfort. >> secretary of defense mark esper did talk about this last week. i want to play a piece of that sound. >> many ways, the operations that dod is providing at the border in support of dhs is not unlike what we have done in the past through multiple administrations over many years. in many ways it's one of those things we do, whether it's putting out wildfires in california, helping with hurricane recovery in texas or puerto rico, flooding along the mississippi. it's one of those things we provide to other parts of the government and to the american people. >> okay, so why is he treating
this like it is just routine? or did he really not know? >> i think he might be trying to downplay it. so we do see our men and women go into areas of emergency, but what happened last fall was something very different. i was down at the border with troops in arizona who were getting getting ready to spend thanksgiving on a deployment within our own country it. >> really looked different, the scale of the amount of troops that were put down at the border, sometimes doing nothing, sometimes playing cards. it seemed to have more optics than it did a tangible, logistical reason. in this case we're seeing their mission increase. one person called it mission creep that has a lot of other connotations to it. but it is showing that they were there for a very specific reason. when i was there they were hanging wire over fencing. now they're coming this close to immigrants. so it definitely changes how it looks and so i don't think it's fair to say that it's the same as putting out wildfires. >> julia ainsley, you have been covering this story since the beginning, and you are just a top notch reporter.
thank you so much. >> it's so good to join you, thank you. president trump is lashing out at sweden's prime minister for refusing to free american rapper asap rocky who currently stands trial. he goes to trial on tuesday for allegedly helping beat someone with broken bottles in a june 30th brawl in stockholm. it's a charge that he denies. after speaking with the president, the prime minister's office responded, quote, the government is not allowed and will not attempt to influence the legal proceedings which are now ongoing. now in response, trump tweeted sweden has let our african-american community down. i watched the tapes, and he was being followed and harassed by troublemakers. sweden should focus on its real crime problem. joining me now gabby orr. gabby, it's interesting because we were all glued to our tv. mueller just testified. more democrats on the hill are now calling for impeachment and saying that those proceedings and the possibility thereof has reached a new level.
now a fox poll shows the president is trailing a number of democratic 2020 contenders. so of all these issues, why asap rocky? >> reporter: well, i think a lot of people are looking at this and thinking that the president is trying to appender to african-american voters because you have to question his sincerity given the recent developments. some of the things you just talked about but also last week's episode where the president sort of went after these four freshman congresswomen with a series of racially insensitive tweets and is now turning around saying that sweden is hurting the u.s.'s african-american community by not releasing asap rocky, the african-american rapper. it's just a moment where we really question the authenticity on whether the president means this. the democrats are pointing to this and saying that it's great that the president is doing this. pete buttigieg did an interview today with tmz where he talked about the president weighing in on asap rocky and certainly said
it's something we should commend him for doing, but it does not erase his record on african-american issues, the way that he has behaved around african-americans, and it certainly doesn't erase some of the rhetoric that we've heard from this president and from this administration regarding black americans and the african-american community. >> which i must say, gabby, a lot of people were scratching their heads just to see this connection made at all. by saying connecting asap rocky explicitly to the african-american community. one, does the white house believe that asap rocky is somehow emblematic of the african-american community and/or do they believe that he's doing something important for the african-american community? where is the connection? >> it's a great question. i think a lot of us are looking at this and wondering why is the president so committed to this issue. is this really a hill for him to die on. you know, if two years ago you had told somebody asap rocky's only hope of getting out of incarceration or prison time in sweden is to have kanye west and
kim kardashian leverage their political connections to get donald trump to weigh in, people would look at you like a mad man. so it's certainly something that looms over our heads. we are all wondering why is the president so involved with this. i do think that there is a certainly level of influence coming from jared kushner and the wing inside the white house that pushed criminal justice reform. they have worked with african-american leaders. they have worked with people like kanye west, and i would have to imagine that he is seriously involved in somehow getting the president's ear and attention on this. >> and just briefly on that point, is there a lesson here that if you won influence in the trump white house, you have to be a celebrity or you have to have celebrity friends? >> well, look at the president's record of visitors to this white house. look at the way that he has spent his time when he's at his properties in new jersey or down in palm beach, florida. he definitely likes to surround himself with notable individuals, whether that's athletes, golfers or
celebrities. and they, in return, enjoy a certain level of influence in this administration. >> gabby orr, thank you so much for joining this. a pleasure as always speaking with you. police in hong kong are being accused of turning identity into a weapon. stay with us because "one more thing" is coming up next. g" is t granted. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ when you have diabetes, ♪ dietary choices are crucial to help manage blood sugar, but it can be difficult to find a balanced solution. try great-tasting boost glucose control. the patented blend of protein, fat, and carbs is part of a balanced formula that's clinically shown to help manage blood sugar levels. in fact, it provides 60% more protein than the leading diabetes nutrition shake and contains only 1 carb choice. enjoy the balanced nutrition of boost glucose control as part of a healthy diet.
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. you should be mad at tech that makes things worse. but you're not, because you have e*trade whose tech makes life easier by automatically adding technical patterns on charts and helping you understand what they mean. don't get mad, get e*trade. i was told to begin my aspirin regimen, blem. and i just didn't listen. until i almost lost my life. my doctors again ordered me to take aspirin, and i do. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. listen to the doctor. take it seriously. "burger! i want a sugar cookie! i want a bucket of chicken! i want....." "it's the easiest, because it's the cheesiest" kraft. for the win win.
heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea. ♪ausea, (vo) try new pepto liquicaps for fast relief and ultra-coating. (flight attendants) ♪ nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea. ♪ (vo) get powerful relief with new pepto bismol liquicaps. hey! i live on my own now! i've got xfinity, because i like to live life in the fast lane. unlike my parents. you rambling about xfinity again? you're so cute when you get excited... anyways... i've got their app right here, i can troubleshoot. i can schedule a time for them to call me back, it's great! you have our number programmed in? ya i don't even know your phone anymore... excuse me?! what? i don't know your phone number. aw well. he doesn't know our phone number! you have our fax number, obviously... today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'll pass.
all right. so just one more thing before we go. another round of protests in hong kong demonstrators took their calls for democratic reforms to hong kong international airport today which is one of the busiest airports in the world. it's the latest in what's been a month-long effort by protesters to force officials to withdraw a controversial extradition bill that would allow hong kong residents to be sent to the mainland to stand trial for crimes. the bill has been tabled but not form thrown out.
after a mob of men seen there dressed in white attacked pro-democracy protesters just this past sunday. those same protesters had attended a march just earlier in the day. authorities had been tracking protest leaders online. but given how droves of people are protesting, how are police singling out specific demonstrators? some tell "the new york times" that they believe they're being tracked through facial recognition software. police turning their identities into a weapon. it's all in an attempt to be safe. demonstrators are covering their faces fearing that police are using surveillance cameras to identify people on the ground. so that's what they're doing to be safe so that they're not singled out for arrest. not only are they covering their faces to avoid those cameras. but they're also now spray painting those very surveillance cameras that they think are tracking them. i'm morgan radford in new york. thank you so much for joining me in new york. >> i feel like i never see you
because you're always on the road. but it is such a pleasure to see you. have a good weekend even though i know you're working all weekend. i'm yasmin vossoughian, everybody. in for ali velshi. it is friday, july 26th. cybersecurity experts are warning, quote, it's not just the russians anymore. iran and other countries are cranking out disinformation campaigns ahead of 2020. and americans are likely to be targeted more than ever before. just like the repeated warnings from the fbi director and former special counsel bob mueller. there is now details of how several countries are using russian-style tactics. at this very moment with the goal of exploiting u.s. vulnerabilities. multiple cybersecurity firms have reported suspected iranian disinformation on major social media platforms including facebook, instagram, youtube, and google plus. basically all of them. and in just this past year, twitter shut down more than