tv Meet the Press MSNBC February 5, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PST
and chaos. the fight over president trump's travel ban. the president vows to get the restrictions reinstated after a judge temporarily blocks them calling the ruling ridiculous and tweeting about this so-called judge. what are travelers supposed to do now? plus president trump's head-spinning week. a supreme court pick. >> outstanding legal skills, a brilliant mind, tremendous discipline, and has earned bipartisan support. >> putting iran on notice. softening his support for new israeli settlements and holding testy talks with allies, mexico and australia. >> when you hear about the tough phone calls i'm having, don't
worry about. we have an all-star lineup of guests this morning. mike pence, speaker of the house, paul ryan and nancy pelosi. finally, this super bowl sunday how everything has become political right down to the beer you drink while watching the game. joining me for insight and analysis are andrea mitchell of nbc news, tavis smiley, host of the tavis smiley show on pbs. republican strategist alex castellanos and danielle pletka of the american enterprise institute. pence, ryan, pelosi, a packed house. welcome to super bowl sunday. it's "meet the press". from nbc news in washington, the longest-running show in television history celebrating its 70th year. this is "meet e press" with chuck todd. good morning, and a happy super bowl sunday to everyone. saturdays are becoming protest saturdays under president trump. with a third weekend in a row thousands of people rallied in cities across the country.
this week's issue, the travel ban, targeted mainly at muslims. the trump administration moved to get the travel restrictions immediately reinstated and overnight a federal appeals court temporarily denied that request instead calling for a full hearing on monday. here's what the president had to say at a red cross gala last night at mar-a-lago. >> the president had a lot to say yesterday before that, mainly on twitter. one example, when a country is no longer able to say who can and who cannot come in and out especially for reasons of safety and security, big trouble. the president has taken great pains to deny his travel restrictions amount to a muslim ban. four times yesterday he did refer to his policy as a ban in tweets. two weeks into the trump presidency we're learning the answer to the campaign riddle. should we take donald trump literally or seriously? the answer appears to be both. >> the world is in trouble, but we're going to straighten it out, okay?
>> donald trump is lashing out, tweeting on saturday the opinion of the so-called judge which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country is ridiculous and will be overturned. federal judge james robart appointed to the bench by george w. bush explained his decision blocking mr. trump's travel ban friday night. >> the state has met its burden of facing immediate and irreparable injury. >> visas have once again been declared valid for now. the travel ban confusion is the latest twist in a chaotic week, and has longtime u.s. allies asking can the world handle donald trump-style diplomacy? >> when you hear about the tough phone calls i'm having, don't worry about it. >> president trump is aggressive, tangling with longtime u.s. allies mexico and australia. ♪ don't hang up >> on tour in melbourne, australia, bruce springsteen didn't pull any punches.
>> we stand before you embarrassed americans tonight. >> neither republicans on capitol hill. >> if politics is music, the president was soft key. >> this, in my view, was an unnecessary and frankly harmful open dispute. >> president trump can be unexpected warning israel that new settlement construction may not be helpful in achieving peace or ambiguous. his administration led by national security adviser michael flynn is ratcheting up on iran. >> we are officially putting iran on notice. >> and levying new sanctions on ishlgs ran. >> they're not behaving. >> and refusing whether the trump administration will keep the iran nuclear deal intact and mixed messages to russia as president putin tests mr. trump stern ukraine. amid continuing protests and confusion around the world and even at his own doorstep, the president is defending his aggressive approach to foreign policy, reiterating once again
in the video address -- >> from now on it's going to be america first. >> and joining me now is the vice president of the united states mike pence. mr. vice president, thanks for coming in. >> good to see you, chuck. >> let me start with the overnight developments in the ban. there are ten different suits in various courts. >> correct. >> obviously one is the washington state. i know you're pursuant in appeal to this decision. >> we are. >> is it time to cut bait and say, you know what? rescind the order and go through congress because there is support for the idea but the specifics appear to be a challenge for you. any thought of essentially rescinding and trying again? >> from the outset of his campaign for president and the outset of this administration president trump has made it clear. he's going to put the safety and the security of the american people first and using a list of countries that the obama administration and the congress have certified, were compromised and by terrorist influence, seven different countries are permanently suspending
immigration from syria and suspending for a set period of time the remaining six countries is consistent with the president's commitment to do just that. we are very confident the president is operating within his authority as president and both under the constitution and under clear, statutory law. that's what's so frustrating about the decision. >> statutory law is confusing because there is the one you're referring to in 1952, but there was the one passed in the '60s. it seems that some people believe makes this unconstitutional. >> well, look, when you have people as diverse as allen dershowitz and jonathan turley who have acknowledged the merits of the president's action under the constitution and the law, i think it speaks to itself. we're very confident that we're going to prevail. we'll accomplish the stay and we'll win the case on the merits, but again, the focus here is on the safety and security of the american people. >> that's why my question on the idea of sort of pulling it because if this is a concern and
this is something that you c't wait, you and i both knowhe court system will take a while. this could take weeks, maybe months. why not do this in a way when you have proper consultations with different departments? there was a part of this that many republicans in congress believe it was done hastily. you have the opportunity to do a do-over. why not? >> it was not done hastily. there may have been some leaders on capitol hill that were not informed in the usual niceties of washington, d.c., but look, we live in a dangerous world. they have inspired violence in the homeland. we saw in the basement of the louvre a machete-wielding person in the country. the threats that we face is real and they elected president donald trump for many reasons, but one of them was for us to rethink our immigration policies relative to ensuring that people who represent a threat to our families and communities do not come into this country and we
will continue to press that and we remain very confident that the president's actions are on solid constitutional and legal grounds. >> let me take you at your word on that. you brought up the louvre and you noted the person came through from egypt. on this travel ban, no egypt, no pakistan, no afghanistan. that is -- if this is your concern, then why weren't those countries included? it does feel as if it's sort of -- it was more done because you wanted that obama talking point. >> well, no. it was done because both the congress and the prior administration identified seven countries. one, in syria torn asunder by civil war and the other six that lack. here's theissue as secretary kelly said so well in that pss conference. the issue is these are countries that do not have the internal systems in place so that we can be confident today that when people present themselves for access to the united states that they are who they say they are. now there's a 30-day review
under way. there is a temporary suspension. we're going to work with those remaining six countries for ways to enhance, but the other countries we mentioned and our policy is that we're confident that someone comes from that country that they are, in fact, who they say they are. this is really about the safety and the security of the american people. it is not a religious ban it is people coming into this country for countries for which we cannot be confident that they represent a threat. >> does the president undermine when he told that they would prioritize christians. >> the president was reflecting on the fact that christians who have faced persecution across theed bier middle east have not been treated. >> so it's a religious test. >> it's not a religious test. people are straining to do that. it identified seven countries irrespective of the religious composition of those countries.
seven countries have been compromiseded by terror ifrm, and i've got to tell you, we respect the right of every american to be heard on protest, online there are messages and that's what freedom looks like and that's what freedom sounds like, but i truly do believe that a majority of the american people are grateful that we have a president who is willing to take decisive action, use the authority he has under the constitution and the law to pause with regard to these seven countries and rethink the way we admit into america. >> you don't accept the notion that you guys did this hastily and a little sloppy? >> we live in a dangerous world. i think the american people welcome a president as decisive and as action oriented as president trump. >> i want to ask about the president's criticism that he called him a so-called judge. that's the leader of the executive branch. you know, that made a lot of people uncomfortable. i know your answer is hey, this is donald trump, people need to get used to it, but there is a
tendency here to just not take critics -- not take criticism constructively or seriously. he accused chuck schumer of having fake tears. it's like any time he gets some sort of critique he wants to commune ify them and make them go away. is that healthy? >> the look, the president of the united states has every right to criticize the other branch of government, we have a long history of that in our country. >> is this a way to do it? >> i think people find it not only refreshing that they understand the president's mind and how he feels about things and he expresses himself in a unique way, and again, the judge's actions -- look, the judge's actions in this case in washington which are adodds with the federal district court in boston that upheld the constitutionality, the federal judge making decisions about american foreign policy and national security, it is frustrating to the president and the whole administration and
millions of americans who want to see judges that will uphold the law and recognize -- >> all he did was put a pause. >> before the president of the united states has, under the constitution, to manage who comes into this country. >> all he did was put a pause. on this issue of criticism i found something you said about president obama. take a listen. >> this president has shown an unusual interest of commenting on critics in the media and the capitol hill. the people don't want to hear about the president's comments and criticism. >> i know when one party is in power. that's what mike pence thought when they got caught up in criticism. should the president take the advice? >> my hair has changed a lot. the presidents are able to respond to the critics. the president of the united states represent all american people and president donald
trump will exercise the prerogative to criticize other branches of government when he thinks they're not acting in a way that's consistent with the best interest of the american people. >> all right. i've got to ask you to respond to something, an excerpt of the super bowl interview the president's doing about vladimir putin. here it is. >> do you respect putin? >> i do respect him? will i get along with him, i have no idea. >> putin is a killer. >> a lot of killers. we've got a lot of killers. you think our country is so innocent? >> moral equivalency? is there a moral equivalency there? what was that, mr. vice president? >> not in the least. not in the least. look, president trump has been willing to be critical of our country's actions in the past, but what you're hearing there is a determination by the president of the united states to not let semantics or the argument of the past get in the way of exploring the ability to work together with russia and with president putin and the days ahead, specifically if you played the
rest of that interview. he said he didn't know if we would be able to get along with him better, but the president's top priority is to hunt down and destroy isis at its source and we have a common interest with russia to do that. the president has made it clear. >> you know the putin record here. let me just put it up here. obviously, a former kgb agent, in itself an institution of mass killings, what he's donto promote separatists in eastern ukraine, proxy wars that he's gotten involved in that, of course, ended up in the killing of innocent passengers on mh-17. then there's the list of mysterious deaths that are putin-related. this is not -- what american leader has done something similar? that's what the president seemed to say there. >> no, that's not what the president said in the least. >> then why can't he say a negative thing about vladimir put sn putin? >> he has expressed himself in the campaign, an election that he won that he was determined to go forward and see whether or
not we might be able to start anew in a relationship with russia. the president has said many times if we got along with russia better that would be a got thing for the world. if we were to confront isis and destroy radical islamic terrorism, that would be a good thing and what you have in trump is someone who is not going to look in the rear-view mirror so much as looking out the windshield. he's also made it very clear, chuck, maybe not, maybe it's not going to work out and he's absolutely determined, he had a productionive conversation with president putin. he spoke to the ukrainian president poroshenko yesterday about the need to maintain the cease-fire. he's going to continue to engage these world leaders. he's going to put america first, and he's going to look, as he always does for a way we can move forward that we can advance the interest of the united states. >> are you comfortable with using those same words to describe vladimir putin? >> well, using what words?
>> basically, you know, yeah, he's a bad guy, but we've done bad things too. are you comfortable with that moral equivalency? >> i don't think it's a moral equivalency. >> do you think he misspoke? >> no, i truly believe. look, president trump has been critical of american policy in the past, and i expect he's always going to continue to be candid with the american people, but what you have in this president is an absolute determination to re-engage the world. i see it in the telephone calls with world leaders. we saw it when prime minister may came, but it's to re-engage world leaders with american interest, to bring american strength back to the world stage. >> okay. >> and president donald trump, people know that here is someone who knows how to put a deal together and if he can make a deal with russia or other countries it's going to advance the security of the american people, advance the interest of peace in the world and we'll look to do that. >> vice president pence, i'll leave it there.
i know you're going to the super bowl. do you have a rooting interest? >> you know, the indianapolis colts are not there, and i'll be on neutral ground, and it's going to be a great game and we'll have the opportunity to travel with a couple of america's heroes that we'll bring down to the super bowl. >> we're looking forward to see president bush toss the coin. >> what a blessing. two perspectives, the current speaker of the house current speaker of the house paul when you have a cold, pain from a headache can make this... feel like this. all-in-one cold symptom relief from tylenol®, the #1 doctor recommended pain relief brand. tylenol® when you have a cold, pain from chest congestion can make this... feel like this. all-in-one cold symptom relief from tylenol®, the #1 doctor recommended pain relief brand. tylenol®
welcome back. panelists here, tavis smiley, host of "the tavis smiley show," danielle pletka and andrea mitchell, chief foreign affairs correspondent and alex castellanos. welcome, everybody. andrea, where does this stand? where is this headed? >> possibly for a constitutional crisis, but possibly not. overnight, the administration and state department, homeland
agreed with lifting the ban as it applied to people who had been restricted and they are following the judge's order. this judge is likely, you know, the appeals court has to weigh in and this could end up in the supreme court and there's a long process. i think the problem that donald trump is creating for himself is a political one by tweeting the so-called judge and by criticizing the judiciary. he's raising the bart and making it more difficult for a very credible nominee to the supreme court in his confirmation hearings. now what you will have is another pretext, not just merrick garland who they believe is a real pretext for democrats to challenge this nominee on every aspect of the separation of powers and whether or not he agrees with the president who has nominated him. >> danielle, should they be cut and bait here? isn't this an opportunity if they want to do it, basically do a do-over. >> i don't think this is the kind of administration that wants to do the do-over and to be perfectly fair i don't think barack obama would have taken a do-over either. i think they'll let the process
play out and use the time available to them to put the thought and process in that they didn't put in before because the problem here is not actually one of substance. barack obama did many of the things that are actually in this executive order. it's all about the how and not necessarily about the what. whether it's the tweeting or it's the judge or it's russia or it's this immigration stuff, it's actually all about style and not about substance. >> you buy that? all style? >> i think it's about style and substance. it's a bit of both, number one. number two, i saw the vice president in the green room so we chatted, and i like him as a person, and it's tough to watch him twist like a pretzel to defend a precedence they is so difficult. you're probably right, chuck, it's not a moral equivalency, but an immoral equivalency and dr. king was a guest on this program in his beyond vietnam
speech used these word. he called america the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. so it's not a moral equivalency and it's an immoral equivalency and on this issue, president trump is right. we are not a perfect country. putin is a bad guy and i'm not going to get into a situation where i will defend all that america has done. the apparatus of the military state, we can have that conversation. >> still, do you want to be defending putin? >> i think you have a president that sees a very different geo-political arrangement, that china is the new russia, not russia, and he sees a different geometry and there may be opportunities where russian interest and ours align, and tht's why think you see him changing here, but you know, we're judging donald trump differently than we should. we're saying, oh, my god, donald trump is unpredictable. we had a very predictable president for eight years and it led to an unpredictable and uncertain world.
donald trump's unpredictability in these matters on one hand he pushes putin back and say you want an arms race? you've got one. on the other hand, there are times we can work together. i think donald trump's unpredicibility is a form of deterrence. it keeps bad people -- >> it's not unpredictability and it's being unprincipled and those are very different things. >> the facts matter and the way they rolled this out where they did not, despite their claims to the contrary, they did not listen to the experts at the pentagon and at homeland. if they had left out the ban on visa holders and green card holders and legitimate people they wouldn't have had this problem, but the other issue is even on putin to say what he said about putin to bill o'reilly is extraordinary. you've got a man now in the hospital who had just recovered from extreme organ failure who is now clearly poisoned in a moscow hospital. you've got so many know stances, not just individual, but on a large scale and to say that he'll help us against isis. how is he helping us with isis
when he is not bombing isis targets and bombing legitimate opposition to assad and using iranian and propping up iran. the president doesn't seem to understand these alliances. >> you're not going to get me to disagree with you on a lot of these thing, but let us separate out what's happened in the last week from the things that donald trump has said if in the first week of the trump presidency he had put in place -- let's not call it a travel ban, but he had limited the immigration from certain countries and put in what he calls -- >> he keeps calling it a ban despite denials. >> i don't -- i don't think that's a relevant discussion, and i've established that i'm not a fan of this. the point here is it is the way they do everything. if donald trump hadn't said that, is it okay to say, you know what? i want to start fresh with vladimir putin. maybe he can help us beat isis. obama did that. the problem is not any of the substantive things it's how they
do them. >> is it they? i think we'll pause it here. but the question is is it they or is it him, and i think that we will save for the next time we bring you guys back in a few minutes. when we come back we'll hear miles per hour. to win, every millisecond matters. both on the track and thousands of miles away. with the help of at&t, red bull racing can share critical information about every inch of the car from virtually anywhere. brakes areetting warm. confirmed, daniel you need to cool your brakes. understood, brake bias back 2 clicks. giving them the agility to have speed & precision. because no one knows & like at&t.
to speaker of the house paul ryan about that federal judge's order blocking the enforcement of president trump's immigration restriction. speaker ryan's office provided meet the press with this statement, what's important is his administration is complying with the ruling and taking the proper steps to resolve the issue quickly. this is our system of divided government, and i am confident that when the process runs its course the order will be upheld. on friday i sat down with speaker ryan at capitol hill and at the time he said the president's policy did not amount to a ban, but that its implementation could have been handled better. he agreed with president trump that some travel restrictions are needed and we talked about a broad range of subjects beginning with whether he'd like to get out with the iran nuclear deal. >> i never supported the nuclear deal, and they're done. >> i don't think you can go back and reconstitute the multilateral sanctions that were in place. >> it should be tried, though. >> i think we should expend our effort where it can pay off the
most and that's why i think what they're doing now does make a lot of sense. remember, they're testing ballistic missiles and they're still the largest state sponsor of troshgism in the world and human rights abuses galore and that's where we need to ratchet up sanks. i think what this administration is doing which i agree with is saying we have a new administration and we'll hold you, iran, to account. this last administration did not do that, and this new administration needs to do that, and i think that's where you're getting here. >> where's the line? are you concerned that iran will retaliate and all of a sudden we're in a proxy war in yemen. >> we're appeasing them already and it couldn't be worse than what we have. they need to be held to account because if we don't do that they'll go off and do other things. remember, they're a belligerent force in the middle east and look at what they're doing to destabilize the region with their proxy, and terrorism, human rights abuses and testing
specific solutions that we believe will improve people's lives and that's why people gave us this responsibility and the what i'm focused on is that. get the policies done, make good on our promises and reforms to make people's lives better in this country whether it's prosperityor peace and security and what at the end of the day matters so that we will have a successful republican president and a successful republican party if that's your question, are the results of this party that have been give then great responsibility. >> is there a point where you just feel as if that, you know what? this is moving too, too harshly, that given he was elected in such a divided country that he has not -- >> yeah. >> has he done enough to try to heal division, and i know that you can play some of this and say the other side isn't accepting defeat, but has he done enough to -- >> i think he's going to feel his way through this. look, what i'm excited about is that he wants to hit the ground
running and he's very much a man of action, and we have conversations at 11:00 at night on policy matters. >> is this a sustainable political environment? >> we can get to the left in a minute, and he's hit the ground running and he's doing a lot. what i'm excited about is how ambitious he wants to be on following through on the promises that we made on the campaigns that we can execute the good ideas and the policies. that's what's going to matter. all of the division and polarization in america, i think a lot of it can be healed if we get people back to work, and if we help keep people out of poverty and if we get faster economic growth and more jobs and higher wages. if we can fix these problems that are solvable in this country, that's what's going to matter at the end of the day. >> i can't believe that i'll use the words very quick and health care in the same sentence. i know people have noticed and whether it's lamar alexander and committee, and yourself the other day repair is a new buzz word and if you look at some of
the replacement bills that are out there, and there are chunks of obamacare that stay alive. is that where this is headed? that it will be a hybrid of a big chunk of obamacare? >> i don't know what happened, but maybe somewhere in the press this kind of got crossed wise. if you're going to repair the american health care system and fix its problems you have to repeal obamacare and replace it with something better, patient-centered health care and that's how you repair the system. >> this isn't conditional to the public -- >> somewhere along the line there was a confusion and say that we would take the obamacare architecture and tinker and repair it. you can't. it is a collapsing law. five states have one plan to choose from. a third of all of the countries in america have one plan to choose from. several counties have one or two plans to choose from, that's a monopoly or duopoly. premiums are going up double digits and deductibles are so high it doesn't feel like you
have health insurance and it's in the middle of a collapse and we have to replace it with something better. >> that was speaker paul ryan and you can see the complete interview on meetthepressnbc.com and let me turn to nancy pelosi. welcome to "meet the press "qwest. >> my pleasure to be here on super bowl sunday. >> let me ask you on the travel ban. would you be willing to work with the trump administration on legislation that if they asked the congress to essentially come up with something that would allow for some temporary suspension, some new vetting, would you be willing to work with the administration on something like that? >> we take an oath to protect and defend the constitution and the american people and as long as we're honoring the constitution we're willing to work. now, as president obama did in 2011 we always have to subject our vetting to scrutiny to see if it's working, but that doesn't mean we institute an
unconstitutional, immoral ban on muslims coming into the country, but what's interesting to me is this is kind of a diversionary tactic. you heard the speaker talk about jobs, and what did we expect? what was the election about? the election was about improving the lives of the american people, about the future, about jobs, financial stability and the rest. where is there initiative for that so that when they don't do something they have a diversionary tactic and a muslim ban. when that isn't working they move up the appointment of the justice of the supreme court. let me contrast it to president obama. president obama on the steps of the capitol eight years ago said i call for swift move to create jobs and educate kids -- >> he's two weeks in and you would say he's not doing that. >> let me gve you the timetable. one week and one day later the
congress passed the aro, the american reinvestment and recovery act. the week or so later the senate passed a bill on the 17th of september, the congress, the president signeded a bill that created 3.5 million or saved 3.5 million to 4 million jobs. where is the initiative? in order to deflect from not doing that they're doing a travel ban which is not making american people safe, that is unconstitutional and even undermines what the evangelicals call -- evangelicals the crown jewel of humanitarianism of america our refugee resettlement. >> let me ask you about the role the democratic party should be playing. i want to play something elizabeth warren said yesterday in a speech in baltimore. >> america elected donald trump, and yeah, the russians helped, and yeah, the fbi director helped, and yeah, he lost the
popular vote by 3 million votes, but we cannot let ourselves off the hook so easily. not as progressives, not as democrats. the excuses end now. >> how do you respond to her because you were just making a case that the obama administration and the democrats were in charge, were being responsive. elizabeth warren were saying no, the democrats weren't? >> i think she went on further to say that it wasn't about what we had done, it was how we did not message it. >> no, she said no. it's not about a new set of talking points. it's actually about policies that aren't working for those folks. >> but they have. let's see the record. the record is what did we do? we bailed out the auto industry, saving so many jobs, millions when you take the indirect increase in jobs in that area. the republicans at the time said this would be interfering with the free market system if we bailed out the auto industry and
they were on their heels and they are now on top of the world and let me go back to the first part of the senator's statement. i want to know what the rugs have on donald trump. i think we have to have that investigation by the fbi to a financial, personal and political connections to russia, and we want to see his tax returns so we can have a truce in the relationship between putin whom he admires -- >> i want to go back to the issue of democrats having lost touch with the rust belt with a lot of voters that used to be -- i guess i want to ask it this way which is the democratic party need new leaders to touch base on this stuff? is it -- is, whether it's hillary clinton, yourself, chuck schumer, you've all been in power a long time and there was a rejection of that in the 2016 election. do you accept that? >> well, we have plenty of room for all kinds of leadership at every level and now we need experience as well as new leadership. was a w leader when i emerged myself so i'm all for
that, but that's not the point. the point is who has the leverage? the american had the impression, some, that donald trump was going to give them the leverage when he became president and what did he do right from the start is go right to his friends in wall street and this is super bowl sunday, so let's give a scorecard. right away, his people said they would overturn dodd-frank, that they would do away with the consumer financial protection bureau, that they were going to do away with the fiduciary rule. all of the things that protect consumers, retail investors, taxpayers. they showed whose side that they were on. so they're about trickledown economics, we're about trickle up. we hope that all of us will be talking about a higher minimum wage and that's the message we have to get across. >> is the democratic party strategy just obstruct the whole time? is it to basically take the playbook that republicans use that politically you can argue was very successful.
>> i think if we can talk about job creation and infrastructure legislation, that's a real infrastructure bill and not a tax break for his rich friends then there's something we can talk about. if we can talk about work and family balance, about child care and early childhood education, paid sick leave, let's see where we can find that, but i want to make this point, chuck, and it's very important because people say to me all of the time, how long will it take the republicans to give up on trump? trump's agenda is their agenda. they have voted over 60 times to overturn the affordable care act and they have voted almost every weekend on the committee and on the floor to overturn dodd-frank and the aspects of it. so they're very much in sync. it's mitch mcconnell and speaker ryan are very much in sync with the trump agenda. so it's not a question of them saying how much longer will they put up with this, and for him to say a "so-called" judge, it's one thing to criticize a
decision and another thing to say a so-called judge. >> i'll leave it there. >> aren't you happy that president george bush and mrs. bush will be tossing the coin? >> we are. >> a beautiful thing. >> you enjoy the super bowl, as well. >> rooting interest or no? >> my family is divided, so -- >> fair enough. as the country is these days. all right. nancy pelosi, thanks for coming in and sharing your views.
welcome back. i have a super bowl data download edition for you and this year even the big game is becoming politicized. take the ad budweiser plans to run which depicts the story of its immigrant founder facing prejudice before achieving success. democrats and republicans may see that ad differently. 12.6% of folks in the top 100 counties have voted for hillary clinton say they've had a budweiser in the last 30 days while the same is true for 6.6% of people in the top 100 counties for president trump. budweiser making a consumer decision with that ad. then you have lady gaga, the halftime supporter is a big hillary clinton supporter and who knows what she might say tonight, but if there's one thing that is bridging the country together it's rooting against the patriots and the evil empire, right? the ppp poll shows fans are pulling for the margin and two to one on each side and for me, i'm already looking ahead to super bowl lii.
back now with the panel, a lot to get to. i want to do the ryan interview and the pelosi interview. first on ryan. this is someone who was in the trump skeptic category and was never a never trumper, but was never a trump lover. he's now trying to find his way. how much patience does that chunk of the party have for president trump, alex?
>> he's appointed a cabinet that that chunk of the party's very happy with. he's taken action as far as keeping the country safe, he's proposing tax cuts and deregulation, opening up the economy which i think is the single biggest challenge that's going to renew this economy and t itoing again. i think republicans are very happy with the substance of everything donald trump is doing, turning the big 1,000-foot ship of state is not like turning a little business speedboat, you know? you rocked the passengers and can't do it quite as quickly, but i think republicans, they see that if the big red wall cracks, if any republicans struck a bail then the whole thing may collapse. >> it's interesting. republicans are getting comfortable hitting them, marco rubio and liz cheney and now a member of congress and obviously the daughter of the former vice president both hitting the president hard over the putin comments, andrea. >> this vladimir putin comment doesn't hold up on justice and morality and it is offensive to democrats and republicans and we
haven't heard yet from mick cane and lindsay graham since we've been sitting here. >> not yet. >> you'll hear a lot more about russia. >> like many thing, if i may, that donald trump says there's context for it and that is this is a president who criticized america for being too expansionist and too many wars and less of an interventionist than predecessors. >> you cannot forgive the murder. >> he was not well expressed. >> it was more than not well expresseded. >> let's talk about the style -- now everybody will know, you were born in australia. so i'll make you our australian expert here. >> thank you. >> if you make the australian people mad there is a long-term issue here if suddenly australia decides china should beware and not the united states. >> first of all, let me sound my most australia. australia will not trn to china. australia and america are allies d that will not change whether
it's trum bul or trump is president. i don't think they would have said to donald trump that he's a terrible person and he would pause on australia. i don't quite understand why obama made it either, but the problem was the conversation. the problem was the way that trump handled it. it wasn't just that he said -- that he said that he wasn't interested in doing this and they were going to send over the boston bomber. it was also that he said worst conversation of the day. gratuitous, unnecessary, but that will not affect the long-term relationship. >> not? really? because the economic moves towards china are now really becoming really pronounced in australia. >> don't agree. >> what troubles me, chuck, too many of us rushed to normalize a racist, sexist, classless campaign that he ran to win this office and now we seem to be
rushing to normalize a supreme court process that trampled on the constitution just a year ago and now it's just -- now we're into this conversation about how should democrats handle this? we're normalizing this too fast. we're normalizing a muslim ban. we're normalizing the religious test and normalizing the things, and it troubles me what this ultimately means for the future of this democracy if we continue in this town and beyond to normalize this kind of unrepentant behavior. >> i think we have to put tavis down as undecided here on some of these issues. >> yeah. >> look, i think the criticism of trump as a racist campaign is way beyond the mark. this is somebody -- let's face it, the country -- look at what's happening in our inner cities. how much better did black america's lives get for the last eight years? it did not. how much better did our public schools get? they did not. so i would say while there are things there are things donald
trump should not have said, yes, but look at what has been done -- >> i think that's a different kind of prejudice. >> i don't want to relitigate the campaign. >> now you don't, and i do. >> what i do want to say is racism, sexism, classless and by other definition, alex is the contestaon of someone's humanity and there are a whole lot of americans who felt that during the campaign and are feeling it right now with the way we're normalizing this nonsensical issue. >> there is a lot of pressure on the democrats. >> if it were a muslim ban he would have banned saudi arabia and indonesia. these are unstable governments and we don't know who is coming from these places. >> i'll pause quickly and sneak in a commercial break and we'll continue the conversation. endgame, we are trying to get to the endgame of our conversation, the endgame of our conversation, but we may go an extram lucky th a shift without a disaster. my bargain detergent couldn't keep up. so, i switched to tide pods. they're super concentrated, so i get a better clean.
back now with endgame and in some ways the conversation tavis and alex that you guys were having leads me to this next issue which is how do the democrats act as an opposition party, tavis? the energy is not in washington. >> sure. the energy is not with chuck sh schumer and nancy pelosi and they've been around a while. >> you asked her a great question whether the policy is obstructionism. there is a difference between
obstructionism and living and governing by i mutable principles and i don't see it as merely of obstructionism and that's what we got from the republicans for the supreme court and merrick garland, et cetera, et cetera. those principles are being played out in the streets by the saturday protesters that you referenced earlier. >> the problem that they have is that they cannot defeat. they don't have the numbers to defeat all these nominees, so they're trying to pick and choose where they can pick up some support among republicans and they have to face the problem about the supreme court nomination. if they go and filibuster there is no question in my mind that mitch mcconnell. >> force it, andre they ought to force it. >>they have to figure this out, but the passion of merrick garland and the humiliation of never even giving him a meeting and no less a hearing with these republicans is not to be underestimated. >> go ahead. >> first of all, live by the sword. by the sword. >> that's what i'm saying. >> that's number one, but it
goes on both sides, and by the way, you think they're picking their battles? the democratic leader in the senate voted against the wife of the republican leader, okay? elaine chao, what was that? was that picking and choosing your battles? >> that was the first time in the history of this country that a transportation secretary got opposition votes. this shows you where we are a little bit. >> that's the problem is -- >> i'm saying that there is enormous pressure. i'm not going to underplay this. there were thousands of people outside chuck schumer's house in brooklyn the other night. we are in a very dangerous place as a country when they can't pick and choose. >> is it dangerous? the tea party, you could argue that what president trump, tea party. straight line, right, alex? >> i was there for a lot of -- >> you call it dangerous. on this i agree with tavis, that you need to be for something. there is a new party of no in town and it's the democratic party. i've been there, and i've seen
where that leads. it shrinks you and reduces your support and you lose the ability to inspire unless, what is the problem? there is an old generation of democratic leadership in this country that is hanging on by its fingernails and if they cede the way what comes next is a very left-leaning democratic party of elizabeth and sanders. >> i find myself quoting the grandfather all of the time, there are fights when you win and other fights to fight even when you lose. they have to fight the fight. >> those are the last words. that's a for this super bowl sunday. if i don't end the show, they'll never stop talking, right? pitchers and catchers report in about ten days and the wizards are in go check out some of the wizards' action. we'll be back next week. if it's sunday, it's "meet the press". you can see more endgame in post game on the mtp facebook page.
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service The Chin Grimes TV News Archive
Uploaded by TV Archive on