tv At This Hour With Kate Bolduan CNN September 18, 2019 8:00am-9:00am PDT
in that situation. >> everyone does. thank you so much for that reporting. thank you all for being with us. we'll see you back here tomorrow morning. i'm poppy harlow. >> i'm jim schutt. our colleague kate baldwin starts right now. hello, everyone, i'm kate baldwin, thank you so much for joining me. we are following breaking news on several fronts this morning, saudi arabia setting out to prove what they say is iran's role on attacks on two major saudi oil facilities. the defense minister there is presenting a speech as we speak to present more evidence. even before that, president trump it appears isn't waiting any longer for evidence, announcing on twitter a short time ago, that he is ordering his administration to substantially increase sanctions on the country of iran. this as secretary of state mike pompeo is literally in the air soon to land in saudi arabia to
get a clear picture of what happened and talk about any possible response. one important voice that has been missing in all of this have been the national security adviser with john bolton gone, but there is news on that front as well, president trump announcing this morning he has chosen his chief hostage negotiator robert o'brien, to fill that post. clearly, there is a lot to get to this morning so let's get straight to it. joining me is kelly atwood, cnn white house correspondent boris sanchez, kylie, first you. what are you hearing about this new round of sanctions that the president is ordering and also are any plans for any possible military action? >> reporter: right. so, kate, we are just learning via tweet that president trump has ordered two substantially increase u.s. sanctions on iran. we don't know the details of what those sanctions are going to lock like yet. and we have just reported over the night that department of defense officials have been
asked to present plans to president trump, to draw up plans for a potential response to that attack on the saudi oil field. but the president hasn't revealed any detailed plans yet. he just told reporters yesterday, it's really up to saudi arabia. now, as you said, secretary of state mike pompeo, who has been dispatched to the region. he should be landing in saudi arabia later today, where he will meet with saudi officials to determine the way forward, obviously, the u.s. is already moving on their own here with some sanctions. but when it comes to the u.s. military posture in the region, that has been left unchanged. so we are really waiting to see what the results of this meeting between secretary of state mike pompeo and the saudi crown prince end up being before we know which way the administration is really going to go in charting a path forward. as president trump has said, he believed that this was an attack on saudi arabia, i'm sorry, this
was an attack on the saudi all fields. it was not an attack on the u.s., so the question here is now where did they go and mike pompeo is on the ground there to determine that path forward. >> now, there is a lot tore learned at this moment, thank you for that. boris, fill us in on robert o'brien in the midst of all this, the president's new pick for national security adviser. >> reporter: kate, o'brien was named special envy hostage afares in 2018. a senior white house official telling cnn president trump wanted someone who is a consensus builder and not a showboater. the president clearly unhappy with john bolton who he saw as someone that would frequently speak to the press about their disagreements, someone who sort of had made a name for himself with his views on foreign policy, in this case going with robert o'brien, he se more as na source told jeremy a consensus builder. he comes from mike pompeo's state department, an influence
the administration is growing. o'brien worked for the bush administration and did work for the u.n. as well. he has experience with working with afghan lawyers and judges. perhaps that will come in handy with this administration in withdrawing american troops from afghanistan. it's a hefty portfolio that o'brien is inheriting. not just withdrawing from afghanistan, tensions rising between saudi arabia and iran. ongoing de-nuclearization efforts with north korea and it is a national security council that has seen a tremendous amount of turnover. remember this is president trump's fourth pick to be national security adviser in three years, kate. >> boris, thank you. kylie, thanks so much. joining us right now from tel aviv, dan shapiro, a former ambassador and a senior director for the middle east on president obama's national security council, ambassador, thanks for being here. >> good to be with you. >> so the president announced this morning with regard to iran, ordering increased sanctions on the country.
what impact do you think that is going to have now? >> we have already sanctioned iran almost to the full extent of our capability. so i'm not sure it will have a significant additional impact. what is important, though, is to make sure that we are not alone in demonstrating to the iranians, if it's demonstrated that, indeed, iran is responsible for this attack, which seems very likely and that other par tis pants in the national community obviously, our gulf allies, also europeans, china, others who have an interest in stable global energy supplies convey to the iranians that that is onunacceptable things to do. there may be others who can join us in sanctions iran in a way that would have more of an impact. obviously, there needs to be at least consideration of some kind of retaliatory measure without escalating to a full scale conflict. if it is demonstrated iran is responsible, that clearly the an
attack on clearly the global economic system not just on one country. >> one question discussed and quite extensively and explored as we speak is what evidence there is or isn't na really points the finger at direct involvement from iran? you have this news conference that this is ongoing with saudi officials who say that they are presenting material evidence of what they have been able to pick up, components it looks likes of missiles that they're laying out on tables. and i wonder, what evidence do you think is required to see publicly and presented publicly to really point the finger at iran here? >> i believe that our own intelligence capabilities, the evidence that the saudis are able gather is very likely to be able to demonstrate the origin of the weapons that were used in the attack.
the place they were manufactured. the direction from which they came. and we have a whole range of intelligence that we can draw on to try to document that. if again it is proven that iran is responsible, that's a very serious matter and it shouldn't be only on the united states. it shouldn't be only on saudi arabia to demonstrate to iran that that's unacceptable. now, we should be doing other things as well such as keeping the door opened to a renewed diplomatic process with iran on its nuclear program, something that president trump walked away from when he cancelled iran -- >> do you think that is possible in light of this? >> it may. it's certainly difficult. but this is the challenge of vexing national security issues like this one. how do you show toughness and demonstrate there are red lines and unacceptable actions. yet also lead the door opened to the kind of diplomacy that can deescalate and reach agreements that can prevent these kind of
things from happening. not easy to do, senior much what's called for at the moment. >> senator lindsey graham is calling for a strike at iranian oil facilities. he is already calling for it. he says that he thinks this latest attack is a sign that iran isn't taking the president's threats seriously, that he says iran is seeing kind of what has happened with the downing of the drone and the response to that is weakness. and ambassador dennis roth was on. he called what if iran is behind this an act of war if eastern is directly involved. so does it require what would be you know an unprecedented then response if terms of military response do you think from the united states? >> again, if it's proven, it certainly requires a response. that can be from the united states. it can be from gulf countries. it can be from europeans. it can be. it should be an international response, not something that the united states simply takes on its own and not one that it can
at all be avoided leads to any kind of escalation and along, in an ongoing conflict. but there ask no question that attacks like that on not just another country's sovereign territory, but facilities that affect the entire global energy supply isn't something that should interest allowed to be conducted without iran understanding it's unacceptable. but there is a whole range of possible responses. military can be among them. so can covert actions, so can sanctions with international, much broader international support than what we have at the moment. so i think that's again the task of the administration is to build the coalition that will find the means to demonstrate to iran that if they have conducted that kind of attack, it's unacceptable and comes with high costs. >> i find after these conversations, i am always wishing we can discuss all of the things you cannot discuss publicly in terms of the range of options. i am always fascinated if we can do that. i appreciate your time, thank
you so much, sir. >> good to be with you. >> thank you. coming up for us, why is the nation's top intelligence official ignoring a congressional subpoena? how a refusal to turn over whistle-proceeder complaints is raising questions about what the trump administration could be hiding. and if you didn't catch the corey lewandowski testimony before congress yesterday, you missed quite a show. trump's former campaign manager within those hours of testimonying a knowledgeed that he does not feel obligated to tell the truth unless he is under oath. coming up, was this whole thing a mess or a success for house democrats? and what are the next steps? zblempblths call for your free publisher kit
today! . another congressional request, another denial from the trump administration. but this one is raising more than a few eyebrows. the acting director of national intelligence is refusing to turn over a whistleblower complaint to congress that was deemed credible and urgent by the inspector general. why? well, here is the line from the dni. and it's really quite interesting. because the information involves confidential matters relating to interests of other stake holders within the executive branch.
really? house intel chairman adam schiff is fighting back against the stonewalling now. we are following the latest here. alex, what is going on? >> reporter: well, kate, what we have here is the acting director of national intelligence rejecting politely but still rejecting this subpoena from the house intelligence committee that the chairman adam schiff issued on friday night. the acting dni saying it's for two reasons. first, there wasn't enough time. the subpoena came friday night. he had two days to respond. the second much bigger reason he touched on is he disagrees this whistleblower complaint is of urgent concern, that despite the intelligence community inspector general says it is you are exhibit. the reason the dni doesn't think it's urgent is this complaint according to this letter we obtained from dni doesn't have to directly do with intelligence activity. instead they write, quote, the
complaint here involves could have had confidential privileged matters relating to the interests of other stakeholders within the executive branch. the executive branch is the trump white house or various departments that fall under it. who have these executive state branch holders the whistleblower complained about? we don't know. >> that is the acting mystery. mcguire is asking for appropriate consultations. the intelligence committee chairman adam schiff immediately responded saying quote the acting dni cannot provide the complaint as required under the law or he will be required to come before the committee to tell the public why he is not following the clear letter of the law. now, schiff had demanded that mcguire's testimony happen on thursday. it doesn't look like that will happen. mcguire's lawyer says it's so short notice it wouldn't be available and it wouldn't be a productive exercise, kate. >> it definitely will be an
exercise in something coming up. it will be an exercise of wills it seems coming up. thank you. joining me right now is a former attorney harry litman. i got a lot of questions. i'd like your perspective on this. there is a whistleblower law. what does that mean for this situation? >> it means the administration position is bankrupt and directly contrary to the law. remember why we have whistleblowers in the first place? we seen them in doj and other places is you want to bypass the normal supervisory structure because they may be blowing the whistle on people in the supervisory structure. here it looks like they may be blowing the whistle on people in the white house. the law here is completely plain, kate. it says once the inspector general makes that determination, mcguire or the dni shall, no room, no wiggle room at all nor has there ever been wiggle room asserted transmitted to the director of the intelligence committee. it's plain as day and always
been honored and the argument to the contrary in any event makes no sense. they've had nothing to do with whether it's a matter of urgent concern that it might involve also some people in the white house. >> though, so the little of urgency of said any complaint is not relevant to what the law actually instructs? >> that's true, too. once the ig determined that it's covered, it simply gets transmitted. it seems to be simple. how can it be rejecting current law. it's a current means and tacks and other places. >> terry. >> they are willing -- >> i want to quickly get from you. >> that line it sticks out so much the complaint involves confidentially privileged matters relating to other stake holders within the executive branch. when you saw that, what did you think that could be? >> it's tantalizing, right? but what it has to mean -- has to mean, my best supposition is
it's about people in the white house up to and including the president, they would be covered by something a whistleblower in the intelligence committee might say. technically they are not of the committee. they are not supervised by dni. of course, it doesn't matter, must be provided. >> what would happen if the whistleblower would go around the dni and directly to congress? >> well, he could be in a heap of trouble, because the actual law doesn't provide a concrete way for him or her to do so. and they have to get permission from the higher ups. which, of course, they'll never get here. it could happen. the statute makes it unclear. it's not supposed to have to reveal their identity. >> that itself the whole other point of a whistleblower law. >> it's interesting. much more to come harry, thank you. >> thank you, kate. so while that was happening on capitol hill, this was
happening as well, house democrats had their first hearing in their impeachment inquiry into president trump. it became a bit of a side show, though, as president trump's former campaign manager corey lewandowski sat before the house judiciary committee for almost six hours, lewandowski consistently refused to answer questions. he says he answered them, he's had an agreement he wasn't going to answer anything about confidential questions with the president, that is inessence refusing to answer questions. one moment stood out, it was lewandowskis admission he wasn't telling the truth and doesn't feel obligated to to so liss gasoline the question is are you a truth tellner that interview? >> i'm a truth teller every time i stands before congress or a committee of jurisdiction and raise my hand and swear to god under oath. >> my question, sir, when you said the president never asked you to get involved with mr. sessions. >> i have no obligation to have a candid meeting with the media just like that have no candid
opportunity to cover me honestly. >> this isn't the first time inside trump's circle may not always be telling the truth to say the least, the mueller report found specifically speaking about the mueller report, it found that both of the president's press secretaries lied to the media. first on former white house press secretary sarah sanders, the report said this sarah sanders also recalled that in her statement in a separate press interview that rank and file fbi agents had lost confidence in comey was a comment she made in the heat of the moment. that was not founded on anything. the report also concluded that sean spicer lied to reporters about the firing of fbi director james comey. spicer told reporters it was all rosenstein. no one from the white house. it was a doj decision. >> that evening and the next morning, white house officials and spokes people continue to maintain that the president's decision to terminate comey was driven by the recommendations the president received from rosenstein and sessions. that decision we know now to
have come directly from the president, himself. here with me now is cnn's chief political correspondent dana bash. dana, from the beginning this administration has acknowledged that they are trying to work with what they call alternative facts. but now, with lewandowski sitting before congress and the way he very candidly said he doesn't feel -- that he lied to the media and that was okay because he wasn't under oath. but it kind of crystallizes this whole thing have you three close advisers to the president forced to acknowledge they don't feel an obligation to tell the truth unless they are under oath. i know they will say, high horse here, the president lies all the time. this really shouldn't be overlooked. what does it say? >> reporter: well, a couple of things. number one, it wasn't that long ago that press secretary, especially, really relied on their credibility. their credibility with the press and their credibility with their
boss. and it's a very fine line and a hard line to walk. and that also goes for people who speak to the press like a former campaign manager. if you want the press to believe you when you are telling them something, you have to show that you are worthy of that. that's out the window and it has been in the trump era. it's just a fact of the matter. because it doesn't behoove them to tell the truth because it doesn't come from the top. and there is one focus and one path that the president takes and expects people underneath him who follow him to take. and that is to fight like you know what. that's exactly what corey did. there is almost no one i can think of in trump's orbit who understands the man and what makes him tick and how he expects people to behave around him, particularly in public, corey lewandowski. boy did he show it yesterday?
and it should surprise nobody. >> that's exactly right. remember when corey came back in, the campaign manager, the whom mantra was let trump be trump? he knows that better than anybody. i also just so find that candid admission of unless i'm under oath. >> it's depressing. >> there is no real obligation to tell the truth. not just depressing but forget the media, someone who is seriously considering running for public office, that's also problematic to the public. >>. >> reporter: well, it is, but also he understands the at least in the short term if he decides to run for the senate. >> right. >> the pool of people he's going to be appealing to. and those are people who have a total distrust of all institutions, especially the media. so the reason is, it is even more depressing is because that is a likely winning statement for in the short term for winning a primary potentially to get into the united states
senate. >> a depressingly perfect point. on here yesterday, do you get a sense that democrats know what their next step is on this impeachment path? i do not get the sense from folks that i am speaking to that there is one. >> reporter: no, there isn't. look, yesterday was really a crystallizing moment in so many ways. one is what we were just talking about is truthiness or lack thereof. but more importantly, it is the democrats on the house judiciary committee especially reaching for something and they got something with corey lewandowski saying, okay, fine fine, ail come testify when everybody else said no obviously thinking through that, the spectacle that everybody who has ever watched corey lewandowski or might talk to him knew that he was going to be eager to participate in and in some ways it just in talking to some leadership folks two are
not that eager to run on the impeachment track. in some ways yesterday's hearing slowed things down. because it's proof of how hard it is to go the administration route and the oversight route and listen it's so frustrating and it is nailing jell-o to a wall for the house democrats. the more likely route, on the short term is russia is going to have to be the courts and that is taking a long time. >> a long time. good to see you, dana, thank you. >> reporter: you too, kate. we are awaiting a big potential announcement from the chairman of the federal reserve today. president trump has been calling for another cut to interest rates for weeks. basically, he wants it cut to zero or negative at this point. will it happen today? will any cut happen today? and if it does, what does it mean for the economy right now? we'll be right back.
managing type 2 diabetes? dimitri's on it. eating right and getting those steps in? on it! dimitri thinks he's doing all he can to manage his type 2 diabetes and heart disease, but is his treatment doing enough to lower his heart risk? [sfx: glasses clanking.] sorry. maybe not. jardiance can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. so it could help save your life
from a heart attack or stroke. and it lowers a1c! jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of al infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. lower a1c and lower risk of a fatal heart attack? on it... with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. that's where i feel normal. with jardiance. having an annuity tells me my retirement is protected. learn more at retire your risk dot org. (honk!) i hear you sister. that's why i'm partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual check-up,
and be open with your doctor about anything you feel - physically and emotionally. but now cigna has a plan that can help everyone see stress differently. just find a period of time to unwind. a location to de-stress. an activity to enjoy. or the name of someone to talk to. to create a plan that works for you, visit cigna.com/mystressplan. cigna. together, all the way.
reserve chairman j. powell is expected to end the speculation on whether the feds will cut the interest rates. this will be the second time in two months. despite this, he is still under intense pressure from the president of the united states. president trump constantly hitting the chairman that he appointed, a reminder, to the post. on monday, j. powell said that j. powell and the feds don't have a clue. he has also called thembonehead was. joining me another bonehead, i don't know why, it's such a good term to use. under appreciated and under used. okay. so on this, it does seem at this point like it would be more of a surprise if the fed chairman would not keep interest rates the same. what are you, though, listening for after the fact that could be more important even when an announcement comes? >> i am listening to two things. one awas alluded to by chairman
j. powell, we are flying blind here. he didn't use that exact term, he more or less said there is mo precedent for where we are today. so it's bobble that we could see a rate cut and it would pow dwrie market a little bit. it's possible stocks would be be flat or fall and markets would start to get worried, oh, wow, we're at the end of the fire power here that the fed has, what else is in the kitty? the answer is nothing. it's also possible that you could see them hold and not cut rates and that would, inturn, ska irthe markets. right now, i have been saying this for years, the markets are totally dependent on fed action. i think we're at the end of a growth cycle. i think we're close to what would be a normal recessionary period. i know that sounds scary. there are cycles. it's natural to get a slowdown, that's why everyone is so jittery. >> j. powell is between a rock and a hard place. a couple things, the president called for negative interest rates.
not that that would be the announcement, but what would that do? >> we've seen in japan they've had negative interest rates, it penalizes savers, you are not earning interest. it penalizes older people on pension, on fixed incomes. it would be good for corporate department, which is one of the reasons he wants it. he wants corporations to continue to take on debt for the markets to stay up, but overall in the economy, i don't think it's a great thing. >> so then there is this, something happened overnight that is raising alarm. the new york fed launched what's called an overnight repo operation which sounds very scary to respond. >> overnight operations are not very good. >> to respond to a spike in overnight borrowing rates. this is something, most folks, me included know very little about. i do know this has not happened since the last financial crisis so what's behind this? >> a lot of nervousness. what you need to know is is this repo action basically speaks to the trust banks have in each
other, institution versus in each other. right now there is a lot of worry in the market that there is something hiding. whenever debt goes up, which has gone up tremendously in the last ten years, it covers a lot of problems. we're at the end of the psych. everyone is wondering, where is the exploding package of debt going to be? so borrowing rates between banks are going up, that's what the feds are trying to cover. i think i will be back here in the next few weeks talking to you about major market movements. >> oh, great. i'm a little excited and a lot nervous. okay. let's see what j. powell says later this afternoon. a major blow to almost 50,000 gm workers. why the company is denying healthcare coverage to striking members and how the democratic candidates are making an issue of it. we'll be right back. i had no idy grandfather was a federal judge in guatemala. he was an advocate for the people... a voice for the voiceless. bring your family history to life like never before.
t-mobile's newest signal reaches farther than ever before. with more engineers. more towers. more coverage! it's a network that gives you ♪freedom from big cities, to small towns, we're with you. because life can take you almost anywhere, t-mobile is with you. no signal goes farther or is more reliable in keeping you connected. ever since you brought me home, that day. i've been plotting to destroy you. sizing you up... calculating your every move.
or dissolved solids, gets left behind. our tap water is 220. brita? 110... seriously? but zerowater- let me guess. zero? yup, that's how i know it is the purest-tasting water. i need to find the receipt for that. oh yeah, you do. . we are now looking at a third day of strikes at general motors. >> that means the third day gm is taking a hit, production has effectively been halted. >> that means a third day they are hit. the paychecks are coming in. now gm has dropped their
healthcare plan and there doesn't seem to be an end in sight. nearly 50,000 union workers walk offend the job monday. the fight is over wages and job security. it's now making its way to the 2020 xin trail, bernie sanders is using his strike to pitch his medicare for all plan. listen to this. >> here you have a situation with uaw out on strike. 49,000 workers. they cut off the healthcare benefits for those 49,000 workers. on the medicare for all, on the medicare for all, every american, whether you are working, whether you are not working, whether you go from one job to another job, is there with you. >> another candidate who is hitting the picket lines with the workers, democratic congressman tim ryan. he joined union workers in ohio yesterday. he's in michigan today, he joins me right now. congressman, thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me, kate. >> appreciate it. what are you hearing from union
workers in the midst-of-this? >> well, they're taking a stand. obviously, these things are very difficult. they're taking a stand on behalf of the united auto workers. but i think workers across the country that are clearly fed up with a system over the last 30 or 40 years where the ceo's got a 900% increase if what they earn and a worker got 12% increase. these guys just want a piece of the action. they want a little taste and they gave up a lot when general motors was having a lot of difficulties. the american taxpayer came to the rescue of the american companies. the auto workers made a lot of sacrifices. really, all they're asking for is to give back what they gave up in 2008. and i think we should be on their side trying to make them whole. they did the responsible thing and these are the last you know this is the last bastion of middle class jobs in the united states and we need to hang on to
them. >> especially, you are talking about the middle of the country and workers in the middle of the country is something that you uniquely have been speaking to throughout the campaign. but this, the idea of gm dropping healthcare for the union workers. this is the exact debate that you had with bernie sanders on the stage at the cnn debate if detroit at the end of july. for our viewers, i want to play a bit of the exchange between healthcare and unions. listen to this. >> well, two things, they will be better because medicare for all is comprehensive, it covers all healthcare needs for senior citizens. it will finally include dental care, hearing aids and eye glasses. >> you don't know that, bernie. >> i do know it. i wrote the dam bill. >> and this was all about healthcare coverage for unions. this is exactly what was happening on the debate stage. the arguments that sanders is making now, is if medicare for all was in place, these workers you were speaking to, they would
not have to worry that their u say? >> i would say these workers like their healthcare. i was in union hall in flint, michigan, with a 37-year-old guy. they had him and his wife. they had twins. there was issues with the pregnancy. he kept saying thank god i had really good healthcare and to go into an election, to go into ohio, michigan, wisconsin, western pennsylvania and tell union members that you've got a better deal for them than the healthcare that they already have and they like is a, i think it's bad policy and i think it's political disaster. >> do you think that this moment of what gm workers are experiencing with gm could change their mind at all? >> i think you know you'd have to ask them. but i would say they like the healthcare they have and you can't take one example of a strike and say that this should be dictateing all union workers or people who like their private
insurance. that's the big question. do you like what you have? if you do, the federal government and bernie sanders and elizabeth warren and others shouldn't be coming into you, into your home and saying, you have to get on this other alternative government program. what i'm saying is, build the alternative government program. build the public option out. build in the ability to buy into the medicare program. if you want to. not you have to. and that's the big distinction and i'll tell you campaigning in these industrial states and the general election against donald trump on you have to go into the bernie sanders' plan, whether you like it or not, is a political disaster for democrats. >> i want to ask you about another topic. because the president this morning is going after one of your competitors, broward county over his stance on gun reform that obviously kaim became very well known during the debate. i want to read you the tweet. he says beto made it much harder
to make a deal, convinced many that dems just want to take your guns away. this comes from his mandatory buy-back gun program. i have heard from other democrats that beto o'rourke's push for mandatory buy-back gun program could hurt democrats now with negotiations and down the road in electorally. this is personal for you after the shooting in dayton. >> yes. >> where are you on this? >> i would first say donald trump has never genuinely wanted to do anything around the issue of gun violence in the united states. there's a comprehensive background check bill that 90% of the american people support that we pass out of the house that sits at the senate and mitch mcconnell is not acting on it because donald trump has not given him the green light to go ahead and do that. and there are a variety of other things that we can do. so trump should not pretend he's somehow actually wants to get something done. i think we need to move on these
issues where we have 66, 70, 80, 90% of the american people in agreement. >> that means the comprehensive background checks. >> that is not the buy-back program. >> it is not. it's an assault weapon ban. it is a voluntary buy-back. >> is beto o'rourke talking about this saying yes i will talk away your ar-15. i mean, does it hurt negotiations now? does it hurt you guys? >> i don't think it should. i don't think a presidential candidate, one of 15 or 16's position on one particular issue have anything e any effect on the negotiations at all. you know, beto had a earn 'al experience in his state and he is coming out of that with this position that he has. i think he should be free to share that with the american people and beto is not in congress. so his opinion on it shouldn't have anything to do with congressional negotiations around a comprehensive background check that 90% of the american people support. i think it's, it has no
there's the amped-up, over-tuned, feeding-frenzy-of sheet-metal-kind. and then there's performance that just leaves you feeling better as a result. that's the kind lincoln's about. ♪ you don't need to go anywhere dad, this is your home. the best home to be in is your own. home instead offers personalized in-home services for your loved ones. home instead senior care. to us, it's personal.
president trump just opened a new front on his war with california. just announcing that he's revoking california's power to set its own vehicle emissions standards. here's part of the tweet that he put out just now. he says that he's making this move in order to produce far less expensive cars for the consumer while at the same time making the cars substantially safer. there's a whole lot more there. you can be sure there will be many a fact check to follow on that. up until now, california historically has been allowed to have stricter standards. what happens now? is this the end of it or just the beginning? nick, what are you hearing? >> well, kate, california officials knew this was coming so we got preemptive reaction from them last night, the attorney general here said, president trump, if you stand in
our way, we will see you in court. and no doubt they will. the governor said this is all part of what he calls a political vendetta. listen, president trump, as you mentioned, fighting california, arguably the bluest state in the land. also this kind of clash of political egos between president trump and gavin newsome. the fact the president tweeted this from his hotel room in los angeles, coincidence? i'll leave it to others to make that call. here's the background. california has been able to set its own standards since 1970 because california's clean air emissions standards predate any federal legislation, brought in when ronald reagan was governor here. the trump administration has already said they want to roll back some of the emissions standards that president obama introduced. and frankly if california still has this right, then that could be toothless. this is the opening salvo in what will be a long war. >> also note worthy what you
just said, that those standards were brought in under a governor ronald reagan. >> yep. >> great to see you. thank you. coming up, saudi arabian officials presenting what they call material evidence of iran's role in the attacks on two major oil facilities. dimitri's on it. eating right? on it! getting those steps in? on it! dimitri thinks he's doing all he can to manage his type 2 diabetes and heart disease, but is his treatment doing enough to lower his heart risk? [sfx: glasses clanking.] sorry. maybe not. jardiance is the number 1 prescribed pill in its class. jardiance can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. that means jardiance can help save your life from a heart attack or stroke. plus, jardiance lowers a1c and it could help you lose some weight. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin
of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. lower a1c and lower risk of a fatal heart attack? on it... with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. the type 2 diabetes pill that's on it. learn more at jardiance.com hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams.
here, hello! starts 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! life simple. easy. awesome.e so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.
welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. president trump announced new sanctions on iran and his pick for a new national security advisor, this as mike pompeo arrives in saudi arabia and the saudis display what they say are iranian weapons used to attack the kingdom's oil facilities. the first national poll of the most recent democratic debate shows elizabeth warren
Uploaded by TV Archive on