tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC November 27, 2019 1:00am-2:00am PST
crime, extortion, kidnappings. >> it's a really crazy thing happening on the southern border. you've been documenting it really well. thank you for sharing that reporting with us. >> thank you so much. >> that is "all in" for this evening. "the 11th hour" with brian williams start right now. tonight what did the president know and when. as trump rallies the new york times is reporting he knew about the whistleblower complaint when he released that military aid to ukraine. that would blow a hole in the republicans' impeachment defense. plus trump claims he never directed rudy giuliani to work on ukraine. the problem is he said so it's in the summary of the call. the part where had says i'll have rudy giuliani give you a call. and jerry nadler and the committee he chairs, they will be next to step up eight days
from now when the lights come up on the impeachment process. all of it as the 11th hour gets underway on this tuesday night. good evening from our nbc news headquarters. in the last few hours, marine one touched down at martin bashir mara lago. when he released the congressionally approved military aid to ukraine. colleagues write, lawyers from the white house counsel's office told trump in late august about the whistleblower complaint explaining that they were trying to determine whether they were legally required to give it to congress.
light sheds on trump's thinking at two critical points under scrutiny by impeachment investigators. his decision in early september to release $391 million in security assistance to ukraine and his denial to a key ambassador around the same time there was no quid pro quo. remember trump was so clear when talking with sondland on that point. also tonight, trump is talking about his personal lawyer and long time friend rudy giuliani. in an interview with bill o'reilly, the president distanced himself from his role in the ukraine effort deny iinge sent him to look for dirt on the bidens. >> i don't even know. he was going to go to ukraine and he cancelled the trip he has other clients other than me.
>> you didn't direct them to go? >> rowe day is a great corruption fighter. he felt personally insulted by what happened during my c campaign. >> so you didn't direct him to go to ukraine to do anything? >> no, i didn't direct him. he's a warrior. he went and possibly has done work in ukraine for years. >> in the summary of that now infamous july 25 call with the new ukrainian president, trump himself repeatedly brought up giuliani saying, mr. giuliani is a highly respected man. he was the mayor of new york city and i would like him to call you. he's very capable guy. if you could speak to him, that would be great. i'll have mr. giuliani fwif you a call. that was part of the so-called
perfect telephone call. last week we heard ambassador to the eu gordon sondland, the former trump donor, testify that trump told him and other officials to talk to rudy when it came to dealing with ukraine. >> we worked with mr. rudy giuliani on ukraine matters at the express direction of the president of the yoits. >> the house intelligence committee released transcripts from two more impeachment witnesses. he spoke to lawmakers on november 16th. he told them two staffers left omb after expressing frustration over the hold place on aid to ukraine. meanwhile, the house judiciary
committee announced it will hold its first public hearings on december 4th. that's a week from tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. jerry nadler, democrat of new york, wrote the president to ask trump if he or counsel plan to attend the hearing or make a request to question the witness panel. he added, he has until december 1 to notify the committee. the president held what was billed as a homecoming rally in sunrise, florida. given he claims florida as his permanent resident den dense. he airs his grievances about the investigations during his presidency. >> first, it was the russia hoax. total hoax. it was a failed overthrow attempt and the biggest fraud in the history of our country. and then you look at the mueller
deal. you remember that mess? they had nothing. two years. they spent $45 million, and the real cost is many times that number. and now the same maniacs are pushing the deranged impeachment. think of this. impeachment [ crowd booing ] impeachment. a witch hunt. >> that was tonight in florida. here now for our leadoff discussion on a tuesday evening, one of the three reporters on tonight's breaking story from "the new york times," the aforementioned michael schmidt, pulitzer prize-winning washington correspondent for the paper. kimberly atkins back with us, senior washington correspondent for wbur, boston's npr news station. and jeremy bash is back with us as well, former chief of staff at cia and the pentagon, notably
former chief counsel to the house intel committee. mike, since you were quoted, i'd like to begin with you. what does your reporting say about the impeachment process? what might your reporting say about the motives of donald trump? >> well, what our reporting did is it provided a very key but sort of basic point about the entire saga. the simple fact of when the president knew about the whistle-blower's complaint to sort of help fill out the larger picture of the information the president had when he made one of these crucial decisions. and the point that we had uncovered was important to us because we didn't think that the folks on capitol hill that had been doing the impeachment proceedings had actually gotten to that in the course of all of their investigation. they spoke to all these witnesses. they've only gotten so many documents. the white house has blocked them from talking to those people closest to the president. the exact people who could
answer the basic questions of what the president knew. when was he briefed? why did he decide to do the things that he did? so while on the face of it, not the biggest fact on the face of the earth, not the biggest thing, but something substantial that fills out the larger picture, that chips away to give us a better understanding of everything that he knew when he made these decisions that are now at the center of the impeachment investigation. >> hey, kimberly, let's talk about will hurd, the low-talking, retiring republican member of congress from texas who really became, for a brief while there, the favorite republican of so many very hopeful democrats. he notably and publicly said about a week ago that he hadn't seen enough evidence or evidence yet of bribery or extortion. does reporting like this get a guy like will hurd -- and that's one republican -- close center. >> i think we'll have to see. one thing we are seeing is
public opinion. it seems to be growing in support of this impeachment hearing, and that's something that a lot of republicans -- not congressman hurd because he is leaving, but a lot of republicans should have in mind when they consider what rises to the level of bribery in their eyes. the democrats clearly have laid out a case that is only supported by this later reporting by michael and the other folks at the "times" that donald trump did this and ultimately gave this aid after he essentially got caught in the words of congressman schiff. and it takes away a key defense of republicans, who say, look, there's no foul here. he gave the aid. there was never any announcement of any investigation. nothing to see here. we're learning facts that really cast doubt on that defense, so it's becoming more difficult for republicans.
but if they believe that they have the support of their constituents and the support of the president, so far that's been enough for them to be solidly behind him. >> jeremy bash, in plain english, with guys like mike schmidt out there, we're learning new things every day, and yet the train is coming down the tracks, to mix my metaphors. the calendar is owned and run by the democrats. is this going to be a problem? are you going to have various addenda coming late to the floor while this is being debated? >> i think we may learn additional facts that strengthen the case. but i do not think we're going to learn new facts that weaken it. i think if the president had any exculpatory evidence, he would have put it forward. he would have insisted that the information he has be put out there. but there is no substantive
defense of the case. i think in some respects, it's case closed. the evidence is in. the testimony has been received. yeah, we might hear from john bolton down the road or some additional witness. but for the most part, the factual predicate is there. it's now really a legal issue, a constitutional issue as to whether or not this body of facts constitutes bribery, treason, or a high crime and misdemeanor. >> mike, talk about the conflict in the white house counsel's office that was going on during the time period of your reporting tonight. >> well, the white house counsel's office was trying to figure out whether the administration had to hand over the whistle-blower's complaint to congress. the whistle-blower had come forward to the inspector general for the intelligence community, and the inspector general wanted to give that document to congress, but the white house counsel's office thought that there may be some executive privilege issues. this was a highly unusual situation because you had someone coming forward complaining about the president, and the president has these powers or, you know, people think the president has these powers to protect certain
information from going out the door. and they were asking and talking to the president about they're going to ask the justice department for an opinion on whether they had to do this. now, the justice department ultimately came back and said they did not have to hand this document over, and it was only under pressure that this thing actually came out. so it's unclear sort of how this actually fed into what the president was thinking because after he was briefed on it at the end of august, he may have thought, certainly in early september, that it may not come out, and it may not go to congress. and obviously it is on the 11th, september 11th, that the aid is ultimately released. and at that point congress knows about the complaint, and we learn about more detail about that shortly thereafter. >> kimberly, let's widen the picture out a little bit to present day. jeanine pirro spotted at the trump white house at least two days this week so far. democratic pollster mark penn having visited the white house, further endearing him to his fellow democrats. is this indicative of any change in staffing, change in the inner or outer circles?
>> if that constitutes the war room for impeachment, i think that that's still pretty problematic for this president and one reason why republicans have been having such a democrat time trying to find a way to defend him in all of this. it seems that the president just insists on being defiant, but at the same time, he himself is weakening any defenses may have legally in his comments about rudy giuliani, that he didn't tell him to go anywhere, that he was a fighter and a warrior. there's no warrior privilege if giuliani, as expected, will assert any sort of attorney-client or other privilege, if the client who holds the privilege is saying, no, i didn't have anything to do with it. he was off being a warrior by himself, it's only going to cause him more problems. so it seems so far that there is not a clear strategy coming from judge pirro or anyone else. >> warrior privilege, it strikes me, may live on past this conversation, counselor. thank you for that. and jeremy bash, you and i have
talked many times on this broadcast about the president interacting with pressuring, criticizing institutions. fbi, intelligence branch. i've just written down a few. federal reserve. and as recently as this past weekend, the u.s. navy. years from now, are these like the points on a starfish? do they grow back, or will they need help? >> well, there is intensifying outrage tonight inside the department of the navy, inside the department of defense, at the way the president has meddled in the peer review of the disciplinary matter involving that navy s.e.a.l., who was acquitted at trial but whose co-s.e.a.l.s, the members of his profession want to determine whether or not he was entitled to wear that pin. i spoke to three former naval --
senior naval officers today, and they all said, in the words of one, this was gross. this was disgusting by the president. another said it's like the president going in and saying, hey, that kid, he failed his buds class, the dive challenge in buds class. i'm going to give him a s.e.a.l. pin anyway because his dad is well connected or his defense lawyer has reached out to me or they pressed some political button, and i'm going to go in and determine the professional standards for the s.e.a.l. community. it really undermines the military. it really undermines the profession of arms, and i think you're going to hear a lot more about this, brian. >> as we were reminds as recently as last night's broadcast, chain of command has existed for so long for a reason. our thanks for starting off our broadcast on this tuesday night. coming up as we continue, how much foreign business is rudy giuliani doing? we added up the countries. there are a lot of them.
"the washington post" is reporting that while rudy giuliani was pursuing his ukraine campaign, he stayed with a wealthy venezuelan energy executive link the to an investigation into possible money laundering and bribery in the u.s. a month later, giuliani met with doj officials on the venezuelan executive's behalf to argue his client should not face criminal charges. according to reports from nbc news, abc news, and "the post" giuliani has either done
consulting work, delivered speeches, or represented foreign clients or governments in at least 19 overseas countries. here to talk about all of it, mimi rocah, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, now a distinguished fellow in criminal justice at the pace university school of law. in most law firms, they're called rainmakers, and people from mueller to mondale to bob dole, it's not uncommon to have a prominent, big name on the letterhead as no one needs to remind you. what happens when rainmakers make their rain overseas and in some cases it splashes back against the home team? >> well, look, i mean giuliani is in this very precarious position for a lot of reasons. and what we're talking about here is this blurring of lines between being a lawyer, being a consultant, and supposedly being
the personal lawyer for the president. so he's trying to purportedly, you know, represent the president in criminal matters though i still really question that whole premise that that's what he's doing. he's more like a spokesman fixer for the president, and he's purportedly representing people in criminal cases like before the department of justice. and he's out trying to gin up business for possibly some business endeavor he's doing with mr. parnas and fruman, who were recently indicted. i think fiona hill actually even made a connection in her testimony about the possibility of parnas and fruman having some involvement in venezuela and that there was some connection there. so, you know, is it just a coincidence that giuliani was meeting with people with respect to venezuela and with respect to ukraine in the same place, or
was that something more nefarious, more connected? we don't know right now. but that's one of the things obviously the southern district would be looking into. and when you see a subpoena with eight different crimes listed on it, that's very telling. >> hearing the president say to bill o'reilly to the effect of, you'll have to ask rudy sent a lot of people back to the president in the doorway on air force one, you'll have to ask michael cohen. what is the peril for rudy when the president says something like that? >> look, rudy giuliani, as far as i can tell, is up to his eyeballs in crime. i mean there is -- you know, again, we don't like to try and make predictions, but i would be surprised at this point if rudy giuliani didn't get indicted. like i said, that subpoena with, you know, eight crimes on it seems very specific, very far along to me. and just the reporting that we're hearing, you know, there's a lot of smoke there. if trump is going to try to now put this whole ukraine matter on
him, giuliani seems to be going along with that so far. oh, yes, the president's right. i didn't physically go to ukraine to dig up dirt on joe biden. that was given to me by the oligarchs. he can go along with that for a while, but at some point that means that giuliani is essentially being implicated in a bribery conspiracy by the president of the united states because if he wasn't acting on behalf of trump -- and trump is saying, oh, no, if he went there to get dirt on the bidens -- >> because he hates corruption. >> -- and told them they can't have their aid, that was all him, then he was just implicating giuliani. he really should start paying attention and speak up now, not wait to be indicted. >> this is why we invited you on tonight. will you and your family please have a happy thanksgiving. >> thank you. you too. >> our thanks as always. coming up, exclusive analysis of how the media arm of the russian government is
attempting actively right now to shape our politics and our debate going into 2020. and why are you united states senators and television hosts, republicans who know better, advancing talks points translated from the original russian when we come back. health markets compares your current plan with thousands of options nationwide from national insurance companies. don't miss the deadline. there are only days remaining in open enrollment. funny thing about health insurance, you don't think about how much you need it until you need it. he's not going to be okay.
with so many changes to health insurance plans, are you still sure you have the right fit? having the wrong fit can cost you thousands. new plans are available that can save you money. that's why i love healthmarkets, your insurance marketplace. they guarantee you won't find a lower price anywhere for the plans they offer. their new fitscore instantly compares thousands of plans, both on the government exchange and off, to find the one that best fits your insurance need. call or visit healthmarkets to find your fitscore today. in minutes, you can find out if your current plan is the right fit or if there's another one that can get you extra coverage or help save you money. best of all, their service is completely free. their new fitscore makes it easy to compare your plan to new ones that could lower your costs and save you money. try the new fitscore today. you may even qualify for free health insurance with no monthly premium. don't get stuck using the government exchange either. healthmarkets can find you the right health plan and make sure you get all the subsidies you deserve without all the hassle.
they even have new alternative options most don't even know about that can save you thousands. they work to help you and do it all for free. don't assume that your plan is still the right fit. the healthmarkets' fitscore makes it easy to find the right plan for you. having helped enroll people in millions of policies with an a+ customer satisfaction rating, you can trust healthmarkets. for this free service, go to healthmarkets.com or call right now. your insurance market place, healthmarkets. call healthmarkets before the december 15th enrollment deadline to see if you qualify for $0 premiums. call the number on your screen now.
legit-seeming russian state news media is one weapon they have, one weapon they use. another is americans themselves. u.s. senators, members of congress, tv hosts using the russian talking points out loud, in public. these are people who, in other words, know better embracing russian propaganda. while he has tried to clean it up since without much success, here now is louisiana republican senator john -- no relation -- kennedy this past sunday morning followed by tucker carlson from just last night. >> senator kennedy, who do you believe was responsible for hacking the dnc and clinton campaign computers, their emails? was it russia or ukraine? >> i don't know, nor do you, nor do any of us. >> the entire intelligence community says it was russia.
>> right, but it could also be ukraine. i'm not saying i know one way or the other. >> why do i care what's going on in the conflict between ukraine and russia? and i'm serious? and why shouldn't i root for russia, which i am. >> nato cares. you may not. >> i don't live in western europe. i live in d.c., and i don't care. before we go, earlier in the show i noted that i was rooting for russia in the contest between russia and ukraine, and of course i'm joking. i'm only rooting for america. mocking the obsession with russia that so many on the left have. >> with us for more, clint watts, former fbi special agent, author of "messing with the enemy." and a distinguished research fellow at the foreign policy research institute through which he is about to release his latest study of russian-sponsored news media. we also welcome to the broadcast the veteran journalist john
harwood, who covers washington for a living. gentlemen, welcome to you both. clint, i'll start with you as you've been kind enough to share this before it gets released. what does round two show, especially about news coverage of our president? >> it wouldn't be what a lot people particularly on the political left would think, which is, yes, russia wanted donald trump to win going into 2016. vladimir putin will even say that onstage nowadays, but they don't necessarily treat him that great in terms of their state media, and they really have to separate him as two distinction individuals, one, the candidate that's going to run in 2020 versus the head of state. and when you find pretty consistently is it breaks in two different lanes. if he's the candidate, they're far more positive towards him. they see him as a candidate who's done great things for the country of the united states. it's interesting that russia wants to give their opinion about what our president has done for our one.
but then the negative side is when president trump drifts into foreign policy that doesn't match with what russia wants, you start to see the negative mentions pick up. that will oftentimes be tied in with some sort of negative gaffes or things that the president might have done that speak to his character or mistakes that he made, which is also very common of biden. we talked about him last week. they would go after him for his age, making mistakes, for gaffes. they do that similarly with the president in terms of media coverage. >> john, i wanted to share with our viewers the reason i invited you on the broadcast. it was because of a tweet you put out after we heard that jaw dropper from senator kennedy. you wrote, here's a republican senator disseminating russian intelligence propaganda fabricated to harm the united states. he's doing it because it helps him politically. and i had this thought. you and i are approximately the same age. we came up under the same
training and sets of rules, yet these times clearly require playing by a different set of rules. you would never have used that language ten years ago. i know you too well. i see totally why you've used that language this past weekend. >> brian, it is shocking the point that we have reached in this debate. the republican party for a number of years has moved further and further away from reason and rationality as they've lost what they once thought was a natural majority in the country. and rather than adapt -- broaden the base of the party, reach out to new voters, they've tried to maximize the use of sort of blunt-force politics. we've seen this in voter suppression. we've seen this in wild arguments against president obama, in bogus arguments for some of the president's tax cut and other programs. but now we've gotten to a point where it is so clear a president elected with help from russians,
who welcomed that help as robert mueller told us, who then tried to obstruct an investigation into it, continues that attempt to use foreign help in an election with ukraine, he's been caught clearly doing it. it is unambiguous. we know what happened. it's been shown what happened. and now to try to justify it because there's no factual defense of what the president has done. they are leaning on what fiona hill identified as russian propaganda in the hearings last week. she's one of the foremost experts on russia in the government. the president's own homeland security adviser told him that this was bogus, it was propaganda, and yet what we've seen is republican-elected officials, the secretary of state mike pompeo, who himself has been implicated in this, are parroting this propaganda as a way of defending the president. we can presume that those
people, pompeo, kennedy, and others, actually know better. not entirely clear that president trump does. you know, president trump evinces a certain detachment from reality. it's possible that he's been somehow persuaded and his paranoia has made him think that this is what's happening. but anyone with open eyes, clear eyes, can see that that's not what happened. and as for tucker carlson and fox news, they get paid money to appeal to that audience and parrot that kind of stuff. tucker carlson's kind of a troll. as he said, he was joking, but i think his motivation is a little bit more transparent. >> clint, let's talk about senator kennedy. he likes to skew homespun vanderbilt, uva law, oxford educated. he made his first comments on fox news with chris wallace, attempted the cleanup last night
on cnn with chris cuomo, a cleanup which still left the strong whiff of it was probably ukraine. is there anything to be gleaned from his choice of those two networks? >> i find it interesting how he is playing this, which is trying to open up the aperture, right? this is a very russian approach by the way, which is if there is truth, drown it out with falsehoods, which means it could be any number of possible scenarios. it could be any human on the planet that also tried to influence the election. you can do this in an infinite way, and it becomes almost impossible to defend. you could go to the center and say, what would you like us to do? what would you want us to investigate? where's the thread? and it would be pretty open, i would imagine. so when you get to the end of
this, it just leaves you wondering, as r.t. would say, question more. that is literally the headline of their news site every single day, and that method just leaves you open to the sort of doubt. and that is the entire goal of it. but when you hear from an elected official like the senator, who knows better, when you see him on multiple outlets giving slightly parsed or different answers, which is what we've heard of the mueller investigation, impeachment, you name any sort of topic in the trump era, it becomes impossible for americans to know what to believe. and they actually tune out. it creates apathy amongst the public in terms of policy debate. you can't move forward as a country if you can't decide on what actually happened or not. >> we'll have you both back. our thanks to both gentlemen. coming up for us, how effective have democrats been in making this case for impeachment so far. new polling numbers are on the move. that may offer some clues to us.
lot of bad things are happening to them because you see what's happening in the polls? everybody said, that's really bullshit. >> so that happens now at just about every trump rally. that point he was making actually not what the latest impeachment polling is showing us. according to a new cnn survey, half of all americans support not only impeachment but also his removal from office. this number has steadily increased from march when it was 36% to may when it slid up to 41%. support then reached its current level right with the start of the hearings that were live televises. back with us, alexi mccammond, politics reporter for axios, and michael steele, former lieutenant governor of the great state of maryland, host of the appropriately titled michael steele podcast. good evening and welcome to you
both. michael, on the general drumbeat of impeachment, how it's approaching this president, would you rather these days have a "d" or an "r" after your name? >> that's a good question, brian. oh, man, probably i'd like to have a "j" and "b," a little jim beam, baby, at this point. you know, probably i think the dems have done a very effective job of sort of setting out the case, the narrative. what has been interesting is more people paid attention to it than i think republicans and certainly the president thought would pay attention, and probably even democrats to be honest about it because you just didn't know how this was going to get absorbed by the american people. and i think that's reflected in the cnn poll, that a lot more
people paid attention to it, and, you know, maybe it started with yovanovich. it sort of captured the imagination and carried through and culminated with dr. fiona hill. so i think that narrative really worked to the advantage of the democrats to set up the next stage of this. >> alexi, two points that you already know. number one, none of the polling matters if all of this ends without consequence. number two, even some democrats are saying, let's settle this with an election in 2020. so that having been said, how is this going to play itself in to a presidential election campaign, do you think? >> well, i think it's too early to know exactly how voters, when they're going to the polling stations in november 2020 will think about impeachment and use that to inform their vote. i mean especially if this gets to a senate trial and the senate decides to acquit him, which we are assuming that will be the
case, that will make his supporters, i would imagine, even more emboldened. the interesting thing for 2020, of course, is all the senators who are running for president who will be plucked from the campaign trail to instead participate in the senate trial in the impeachment inquiry for president trump. that could shake things up in the dynamic of the primary field shaking up, but i don't know that it will necessarily sort of inform people's votes when they are voting in november 2020. >> both of our guests have agreed to stay with us. let's fit in a break now. coming up, pete buttigieg dealing with some new controversy about some old comments. it is part of one big challenge he has with a critically important group of democratic voters. it's time for the ultimate sleep number event
on the sleep number 360 smart bed. can it help keep us asleep? yes, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. and now, during the ultimate sleep number event, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. ends cyber monday. robinwithout the commission fees. so, you can start investing today wherever you are - even hanging with your dog. so, what are you waiting for? download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood. some things are too important to do yourself. ♪ get customized security with 24/7 monitoring from xfinity home. awarded the best professionally installed system by cnet. simple. easy. awesome. call, click or visit a store today.
comments and further comments on the topic when he was running to be mayor of south bend in 2011. they prompted a harsh rebuke from michael harriot, who writes for the root. in his essay, he wrote in part, quote, mayor pete's b.s.-ery is not just wrong, it is proof men like him are more willing to perpetuate the fantastic narrative of negro neighborhoods needing more -- get along moderates would rather make stuff up out of whole cloth than wade into the waters of reality. pete buttigieg doesn't want to change anything. he just wants to be something. so this setback comes as buttigieg struggles to gain traction with black voters especially. he later called harriet to talk about the piece and offered this explanation at an event today. >> what i said in that comment before i became mayor does not reflect the totality of my
understanding then and certainly now about the obstacles that students of color face in our system today. >> harriot has subsequently written about his phone call with the candidate. quote, for 18 minutes and 45 seconds, we talked about educational inequality, poverty, and institutional racism in america and how to fix it. back for round two, alexi mccammond and michael steele. alexi and michael, this conversation on the merits could take us several broadcasts. let's reduce it to initially here the kornacki estimate, and here's what i mean, alexi. steve kornacki estimates one in four democratic voters in the primaries, african-american. does this mayor have any hope of winning folks over to his side? >> steve kornacki also points out in that piece that you just
read from that since 1992, no democratic candidate for president has eventually become the nominee for president without winning a majority of the black vote. mayor pete in polling has shown up at zero percent. the most he's reached is 4% support from black voters. they're obviously a lot of room for him to grow. this conversation that he had at a table full of white men by the way, in 2011, which is like also very problematic to be talking about minority and low income students at the a table full of white men no matter what year it is, is obviously coming back to haunt him in a way that, you know, voters, reporters alike want to know where he stands on these issues now, especially as you mentioned earlier in the segment, as he's struggling to really gain traction with black voters. it's interesting when you compare someone like pete buttigieg to senator elizabeth warren, who has steadily increase the her report from less than 0.5% support in march of this year to now 20% among black voters. you have to did yourself why.
i think it's because she walks into these settings with black voters where she connects her own genuine experience to the experience they're going through, and she's really thought through the issues that black women in particular face in their daily lives whether that's health care or economically or otherwise. i think that for a lot of folks, pete buttigieg just comes in and sort of seems like he doesn't really know what the actual experience is like and instead he points to his douglas plan or his plan to end systemic racism. >> alexi, just to complicate things, enter mike bloomberg, who before he announced, apologized at a speech in a church in new york for the nypd policy so called of stop and frisk. >> yeah. situations like that, i'm not a political consultant, and i'm not running for president. i'm a reporter. but what is fascinating to me and the question i would love to ask michael bloomberg is why are you apologizing for it now? is it because you just now suddenly realized that that was wrong and the long-standing
implications of something like stop and frisk and the implications they have on the black and brown community? is that something you're just realizing now because you're deciding to run for president, or is that something you realized in however many years since it happened? that's what's confusing to me and i think to a lot of voters, who will recognize that that is simply pandering. you're only apologizing, i think a lot of voters will think, because he's running for president, and that is problematic. >> michael steele, at venues like the debate in atlanta but more broadly across this race, does anything make you cheer? does anything make you cringe when you see democrats speaking to, dealing with, trying to interact with african-americans and the african-american voting bloc that they are not naturally a part of themselves? >> well, it goes back for me, you know, this has been a narrative for a long, long time
in my political career. i've always argued the idea that, you know, republicans don't give a damn and democrats pretend they do. and that's kind of been the juxtaposition of the black political narrative relative to both parties. what i love so much about michael harriot's piece is he kept it real and he was very straight-up and honest about it, and it pushed pete to have to respond to him directly because he's on point with respect to democrats and quite frankly the country. a lot of thought around the black community is a stereotypical thought, you know. i grew up in, you know, a lower middle-class neighborhood. nye daddy was a truck driver. my mother was a laundress. i had perfect role models beyond them in the community both inside of school and outside of school. so this idea that a young negro child would not have such role models is just preposterous. you should take the two or three
kids that you see, and you project it to almost every kid in the neighborhood. no wonder it's been so hard to deal with a lot of the systemic issues that afflict the community. so this idea that democrats, you know, will come to the table and show up in a black church, you know, two weeks out from an election or presume the black vote is a given, that day is over. and i think that has been profoundly made clear by black women, who have said enough. so i think this dynamic is going to be very interesting for democrats over the next few months. black folks aren't going to tee off of iowa as the party has in the past. they're going to make a subjective, their own independent analysis of these candidates, which they're starting to do and have been doing, and come probably to a very different conclusion. >> two friends of this broadcast. alexi, i can tell you're bursting to continue this conversation. we're just going to invite you back and we'll do it the next time. >> great. >> thank you both. we really appreciate you coming
on. coming up for us tonight, the president tonight in florida vowing to defend us against something with no chance of happening. still the right fit? having the wrong plan may cost you thousands of dollars out of pocket, and that's why i love healthmarkets, your insurance marketplace. with their new fitscore, they compare thousands of plans from national insurance companies to find the right medicare plan that fits you. call or visit healthmarkets to find your fitscore today. in minutes, you can find out if your current plan is the right fit or if there's another one that can get you extra coverage or help save you money. best of all, their service is completely free. does your plan have $0 copays, $0 deductibles, and $0 premiums? if not, maybe it's not the right fit. does it include dental and vision coverage? well, if not, maybe it's not the right fit. how about hearing aid, glasses and gym memberships at no additional cost?
maybe there is a better fit for you. call healthmarkets now or visit healthmarkets.com for your free fitscore. we can instantly compare thousands of medicare plans with all of these benefits and more, including plans that may let you keep your doctor and save money. with the annual medicare enrollment deadline coming, don't waste another minute not knowing if you have the right medicare fit. for this free service go to healthmarkets.com or call right now. having helped enroll people in millions of policies with an a+ customer satisfaction rating, you can trust healthmarkets. don't assume that your plan is still the right fit. the healthmarkets fitscore makes it easy to find the right medicare plan for you. healthmarkets doesn't just work for one insurance company, they work to help you and they do it all for free. your insurance marketplace. healthmarkets. there may be medicare benefits and savings you're missing out on. only healthmarkets has the free fitscore. call before the deadline.
they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again!
chest, and then he told the crowd the governor of florida looks great without a shirt on, but i digress. this was the first out of nowhere moment about the holiday we're about to celebrate on thursday. >> as we gather together for thanksgiving -- you know, some people want to change the name thanksgiving. they don't want to use the term thanksgiving. and that was true also with christmas, but now everybody's using christmas again. remember i said that? but now we're going to have to do a little work on thanksgiving. people have different ideas why it shouldn't be called thanksgiving, but everybody in this room, i know, loves the name thanksgiving, and we're not changing it. >> as the historian ted weg mer wrote just days ago, thanksgiving is just thanksgiving. it's intended to bring us all together, all groups and sub groups, all to give thanks, and
it works, starting with the name. calling it the day we give thanks gets wordy and clunky, so thanksgiving is really kind of perfect when so much of our world is not. politics has now seeped into the football we watch, the foot we eat, and god forbid the drinking straws some of us might use while at the table. so when we heard the president tonight, we wondered who is trying to rename thanksgiving and why? short answer, no one. you can almost guess the rest here. while the president may have seen this graphic on his favorite morning show, the story he's referring to most likely a trope from the obama era. the two-term democratic president whom trump tonight calmed barack hussein obama has one does. the story which was false from the get-go alleged that obama
was planning an executive order renaming thanksgiving "celebrate immigrants day." never happened, never was going to happen, but it made for a nice story tonight in florida where it certainly revved up the crowd. that is our broadcast on this tuesday evening. thank you so much for being here with us. good night from nbc news headquarters here in new york. trump is denying he ever directed rudy giuliani to go to ukraine on his behalf. the house committee announced it will hold the first public impeachment hearing next week. president trump is invited to participate. as we head into the thanksgiving holiday, heavy sno americans, today, thanksgiving eve is historically the busiest travel day of the year. ♪