tv For the Record With Greta MSNBC February 8, 2017 3:00pm-4:01pm PST
>> would the senator shut his own mouth -- >> i would suggest -- >> wisconsin democrat herb cole presiding at the seem did not grant the point of order on rule 19 and the senate continued to go about its normal business. with all due respect, the entire senate's a bunch of jerks, he said. i'm ki k i'm kidding. that's all for tonight. "on the record with greta" starts right now. to view and there's breaking news tonight, "for the record," in is drama in the senate, a vote this hour on senator jeff sessions, trump's controversial nominee to be attorney general of the united states. senator elizabeth warren hitting back against the gop move to silence her criticism. we're going to go live to capitol hill. president trump blasting the judges about to rule on his travel ban. what will they decide and will the ban really make us safer? plus new debate about the president's defense of his daughter, ivanka, and her
clothing line. is he blurring the line between father and president? and what a jam-packed day today for president trump starting this morning when he brought up the court case over his travel ban. >> i will not comment on the statements made by certainly one judge, but i have to be honest that if these judges wanted to, in my opinion, help the court in terms of respect for the court, they'd do what they should be doing. i mean, it's so sad, and i don't ever want to call a court biased, so i won't call it biased. we haven't had a decision yet. but courts seem to be so political and it would be so great for our justice system if
they would be able to read a statement and do what's right. and that has to do with the security of our country which is so important. >> now the 9th circuit court of appeals says it is not making a ruling on the ban today and the president also meeting with the head of intel to talk about a new factory in arizona. and the president grabbing headlines by taking to fwtwitte to make plain his opinion about nordstrom, "my daughter, ivanka, has been treated so unfairly by nordstrom. she's a great person. always pushing me to do the right thing. terrible." then retweeting that tweet from his official potus account. nbc's kelly o'donnell is at the white house. kelly? >> reporter: good to be with you, greta. one of the interesting things in that treweet is where the president says his daughter is always pushing him to do the right thing. almost a subtle message to some of the women supporters who have not always been so happy with the things the president has said or done. and a suggestion that perhaps
ivanka trump is trying to soften her father or steer him in one direction or another. but this notion of her business being somehow jeopardized by her father's policies is one of the issues that people anticipated could be a part of the trump administration and the wider trump family business empire on a collision course. how to balance these things. of course, president trump has made it clear all along his closeness to his children and especially his eldest children, who have been a part of his business empire and his closest advisers. when you see a president naming a specific retailer, kind of calling them out and suggesting that they aren't treating his daughter fairly, separate from any sales figures or other decisions that might go into why any retailer would carry a line or not carry a line, it raises lots of questions about how far should the president go, especially given the fact that that can affect the outcome of
performance for business, a publicly held company and so forth. now, this question, of course, was put to sean spicer, the president's spokesman, what really cast the president more as playing dad when it comes to this. >> i think this was less about his family business and attack on his daughter. he ran for president. he won. he's leading this country. and i thcink for people to take out their concern about his actions or his executive orders on members of his family, he has every right to stand up for his family and applaud their business activities. >> reporter: and ivanka trump separated herself from the day-to-day management of her fashion brand in part because of her father's role in the white house. of course, also her husband, jared kushner, who is a senior adviser to the president and is also separating himself from some of his family businesses. but it isn't that easy to put some distance between herself and a brand that bears her name
in a political environment that has certainly been volatile. greta greta? >> kelly, thank you. and it is so exciting here on capitol hill, about 16 blocks away from kelly, because we now have live pictures of the senate floor. we are awaiting the vote on u.s. attorney general nominee senator jeff sessions. now, the debate turning bitter as republicans invoked a rarely used rule to silence senator elizabeth warren for reading allowed from a bletter of marti luther king's widow accusing sessions of promoting racial policies. democrats speaking out on her behalf and senator warren defending her actions on the floor. >> this is a powerful letter. it is a deeply moving letter. a personal letter. and also an important historical letter. the facts may hurt, but we're not in the united states senate to ignore facts. part of my constitutional responsibility is to consider the facts of what jeff sessions did when he was the u.s. attorney in alabama.
>> leeann caldwell is on capitol hill covering the jeff sessions confirmation. leeann? >> reporter: hi, greta. yes. jeff sessions is expected to be confirmed tonight. the vote supposed to take place within the next hour around 7:00 p.m. eastern. it's expected to be along a party line vote. you might get one or two democrats who may vote for sessions, but he's going to reach the 50-vote threshold to be confirmed attorney general. i will say, the elizabeth warren flap, what that has done, it's emboldened democrats here on the hill. they already had support from the public to oppose many of donald trump's nominees including jeff sessions, and now with republicans silencing elizabeth warren during his debate, and -- and condemning her for her actions on the floor last night, elizabeth warren is one of the most popular democratic politicians to the democratic base and so what that
has done is it's just made democrats more emboldened to continue to fight the trump cabinet nominees and also the trump and republican agenda. >> leigh ann, thank you. with me, a member of the intelligence committee and homeland security committee. nice to see you. >> great to see you. >> the issue, what happened last night with elizabeth warren, would you have shut her down? >> it's not a matter of shutting her down but build comedy again. a rule affectionally called rule 19, you can impugn another senator directly or indirectly. there had been about six hours of debate about jeff sessions already, a lot of information out there, a lot of statements out there, both parties engaging in debate. when elizabeth warren got up to speak, it was a different level. it was a different tone. and the majority leader saw it. she was using words like disgraceful, talking about reading letters and saying you should have resigned, saying
he's a throwback to an old era, and it became just a different level of personal accusations. that's why people stepped in said, okay, let's just tone the rhetoric down, we can debate but let's talk. >> a couple things, you make reference to rule 19, a fistfight between two senators, in south carolina. we've gotten a little bit farther. it wasn't a fistfight. a couple things. number one is that senator sessions is not there as a u.s. senator. he's there as a nominee for attorney general. it's a little bit different. he's not really there as a senator. the second thing is, the things that basically -- caught most women's attention in this country is that she got shut down last night, but then today the guys got to do it. the guys go the t to read the s letter. >> it wasn't about the letter. i heard a lot after statements about the letter. majority leader mitch mcconnell was coming to the floor, heard the statements, watching it on the monitor. was on his way to the floor. when he got to the floor, he stepped in and asked for rule 19. folks said it was about this evil letter.
we have great respect for greta scott king and for her as a civil rights leader and it's entirely appropriate, there's nothing in that letter. previous statements that were made. that was just the moment the majority leader got to the floor and that's when she was reading at the time. >> as a tactical matter, i problem got money coming in -- for the democratic base, you realize that, right? >> sure. that was a conversation last night. >> as a result of that. >> as a result of that. here's the difficulty of it. the tone of the senate is starting to get so caustic and there's so many tempers that are flaring in it, it was a moment to say, how do we turn the volume down? how do we get back to real debate? if the senators are going to actually treat each other with respect, to disagree strongly, be able to treat each other with respect and debate, let's be a role modden to tel to the natio >> i don't like rudeness. i thought merrick garland should have gotten at least a hearing. the republicans wouldn't put him up for a hearing. >> right. >> there's a lot of games playing going back and forth, right? >> thabs tt's the thnature of t body. those are the rules part of the
conversation that are here. >> you don't mind the rule being invoked against her? >> i don't mind the rule being invoked against anybody, republican or democrat. immediately after that, amy klobuchar had a great speech, marco rubio had a great speech, orrin hatch stepped up and said how do we get back to having real conversation? there's a bipartisan conversation to say how do we tone this down? dis agragree strongly but don't personal about it. >> your position on the travel ban. >> it's a temporary ban. >> do you have any sort of thought on how you think the court's going to rule. >> what's your guess? i realize it's voodoo. >> everybody is looking at the arguments in the front of the court trying to guess what whay they're going to go. it's a temporary ban, not a ban on muslims. there's a lot of argument to say this is some religious ban based on statements of president trump when he was candidate trump made about banning muslims which i didn't agree with then and spoke out against them. this is clearly not a muslim ban. >> i think one of the questions
last night which would tip off how one of the judges -- said something in effect this covers 15% of the muslims in the worlds, something like that. i think that's the way he said it wasn't a religious ban. >> yeah. here's the judge -- there are 40 countries that are muslim countries, the largest countries in the world, indonesia, pakistan, go on and on, saab rain ya, they' saudi arabia. a list agreed on by congress and president obama, state sponsors of trriserrorism, countries whe they're war torn, is a moul ya, ye yemen, syria. we don't have good connections with government. it was a reasonable statement. president obama did a temporary ban on movement when he was president for a short period of time to be able to valts whevalt we were going to do. it's not unreasonable for president trump to say let's look at everything, now it's working. that was incredibly sloppy in the implementation. general kelly has already stepped out and said, hey, we handled this wrong, it was four days of chaos. thy they should have let everyone in. cuss
>> senator, thank you. >> you're going to go vote, right? >> i am going to go vote in a few minutes. >> i think you're going to vote for senator sessions. >> i'm going to vote for senator sessions. i encourage everyone to watch tim scott's feature son the flo speech on the floor. tim scott, african-american senator, laid out a great -- >> senator, nice to see you. more on the travel ban. president trump saying judges are taking away weapons needed to keep america safe. >> i listened to a bunch of stuff last night on television. that was disgraceful. it was disgraceful. i think it's sad. it's a sad day. our security is at risk today and it will be at risk until such time as we are entitled and get what we are entitled to as citizens of this country. they're taking away our weapons one by one. that's what they're doing. this is a bepweapon that you ne. they're trying to take it away
from you. maybe because of politics or maybe because of political views. we can't let that happen. >> so how does the public view all this? well, that's not clear. today a new poll shows 55% of voters approve of the president's executive order. but another national poll released earlier this week shows 51% of voters oppose it. ann geren, national political reporter for the "washington post" and jonathan swan, national political reporter for axios. first to you, anna, the whole sort of elizabeth warren, i don't know how to describe, dustup. >> yeah, i think it was a giant political gift to elizabeth warren if she chooses to run for president in 2020. i mean, it was a galvanizing event for democrats. they were trying to raise money on it. today it was absolutely the talk of all democratic politics today. it touches gender, touches race,
it's black history month. she was reading k inin ining sc letter and emboldens democrats to go after mcconnell harder. >> jonathan, do you think some the democrats, more moderate democrat, are a little worried because as she sort of becomes the democratic idol for the moment, push it all the way to the left, and if you look at the lekts of 2016, moderate democrats really felt left out in some ways have been responsible for the reason that secretary of state hillary clinton never became president clinton. >> i was talking to a senior democrat today and i was sort of -- i mentioned the sanders wing of the party and she said, what are you talking about? that's now the mainstream. there is no sanders wing. that is exact ly to your point. if the party is now -- if these are now mainstream figures, not seen as some far left fringe, if you're joe manchin or you have
to be slightly nervous. >> thinking down the road to 2020, if they're pushing the democratic party farther to the left and all the people who feel left out, there's no reason for them to go back to the democrats, all of a sudden to give them another look. >> the only thing i would say to all that, there doesn't seem to be much concern. i talked to nancy pelosi on the hill, i said are you worried about backlash? she sort of laughed. >> she has a hugely democratic -- she's not worried at all. >> off the record conversation. >> she ought to worry. she lost the house. she ought to be worried a little bit. she lost the house. they lost the presidential race they didn't think they could lose. >> i hear you. generally off the record people don't seem that concerned. they're happy about the protests, the energy. >> in that case the republicans are really happy, if the democrats are happy. okay, anna, let me go back to you. the numbers, polls at least today, 55%, that's the poll today, politico, 55% of registered vote errs approve of donald trump's executive order on this temporary ban.
>> yeah, i think that's -- you saw trump referencing it today. i mean, that's what -- that's the crux of his argument that if the court rules against him, that it's about politics. he's trying to kind of -- >> if it rules for him, is that politi politics? or is that national security? >> that would be the logical question to ask. no, we would expect him to then argue they ruled correctly on grounds of national security and keeping the country safe. he appears to be working the refs here a little bit and laying the predicate for, hey, look, country, you're with me, see these numbers and if the court rules against me, it's all politicses >> jonathan? >> he's put neil gorsuch in a really uncomfortable position. we've just seen literally minutes ago there was a "new york times" piece that broke that said gorsuch described trump's comments about the independent judiciary as demoralizing. we're seeing him do his charm and woo tour on the hill and having to deal with questions, you know, from all these democrats about donald trump's comments. so i think that's going to become more of a story line.
>> we're going to talk more about that later. that whole gorsuch thing. there has been at least some history for withdrawing a nominee, you know, gorsuch, i mean, he's been nominated by the president but i don't know if he should feel so secure if he goes around trash talking the president. he would not describe -- he would say it's more heartfelt, honest. >> senator blumenthal asked him his opinion and he answered. if you're gorsuch, i would think the argument he would make to the white house is,interviewed it's a job sbriinterview, if th ask me a question, i'm going to answer it. >> on the screen, that is the u.s. senate. we're taking it live. exciting night. at least for the republicans. not so much for the democrats tonight, is it, jonathan? >> well, the democrats seem to not care. this is what i was getting at before -- >> they like being the minority party? >> of course they don't. they know they're going to lose all these fights. they didn't think they were going to win the devos fight. they seem surprised by the
intense city of the protest. the devos thing was a huge backlash. they're going to lose tonight, make all their speeches, make their viral videos, do their fund-raising and the world will move on. >> thank you, both zblchbl. ahead, we're tracking the breaking news out of the senate. voting to get under way this hour for president trump's pick for attorney general. it's turned into a slugfest. nordstrom's decision to drop ivanka trump's clothing line, is this about declining sales or politics? president trump's supreme court pick, calling atta ining attacks on judges demoralizing and disheartening. that's coming up.
with advil, you'll ask what twisted ankle? what muscle strain? advil makes pain a distant memory nothing works faster stronger or longer what pain? advil. bounty is more absorbent,mom" per roll so the roll can last 50% longer than the leading ordinary brand. so you get more "life" per roll. bounty, the quicker picker upper
mobility is very important to me. that's why i use e*trade mobile. it's on all my mobile devices, so it suits my mobile lifestyle. and it keeps my investments fully mobile... even when i'm on the move. sign up at etrade.com and get up to six hundred dollars. wonly new alka-seltzer plus st want powerful relief. free of artificial dyes and preservatives liquid gels delivers the powerful cold symptom relief you need without the unnecessary additives you don't. loudspeaker: clean up, aisle 4. alka-seltzer plus liquid gels.
>> president donald trump saying today that his immigration order will make the country safer. is the president right? speaker paul ryan backed trump's vetting measures saying trump is right, though he says the rollout of the travel ban was confusing. but senator john mccain doesn't agree. he says the order could undermine anti-terrorism efforts. here's what he told me last night. >> wonder what would have happened if there had been notification to the leaders of congress, the usual vetting by the agencies that are involved rather than this kind of out of the blue explosion that took everybody by surprise. it seems that the m.o. of this white house is on a shakedown cruise. >> ten former diplomats and national security officials, most democrat, told the court of appeals the order, "undermines the national security of the united states." john mclaughlin was acting director of the cia under president george w. bush, now at
johns hopkins and signed that letter that was submitted to the court. nice to see you, sir. >> good to see you, greta. >> who was the organizer of this letter? >> came basically from a law professor at yale, john ko. >> why did he happen to mutt it together? >> i think he just had a view that this ban was not appropriate and had negative effects and circulated it. came to me very late on the night before it was issued and i read it and fundamentally agreed with it on several grounds and signed on. >> all right. you have said, or at least it's attributed, you warn of long-term damage from this executive order. first, is that something that you've said or something similar? >> i don't recall saying exactly that, but i wouldn't -- >> maybe the letter says -- >> i wouldn't dispute that. that's in the letter. >> and what is that long-term damage? >> well, let me back up just a bit here and say there's nothing crazy about looking at our visa policy and asking can it be improved? i think -- my first reaction when i heard about this is a
little bit like senator mccain just laid out, that is it say, it's largely the way this thing was implemented and the way it was phrased that i think causes the problem and ultimately pose z a threat to security. >> in light of that's where we are, it's now in part -- it doesn't apply, for instance, to people who have green cards. there are certain people -- >> there have been some changes. >> there have been some changes. in light of how it is now, a temporary ban for seven nations that are muslim majority nations, is that likely to have long-term damage? >> well, here's the problem i think we're still dealing with. whether it is really a muslim ban or not, after the presidential campaign in which the president said repeatedly that he was going to do that, and then you put out a letter that basically bans citizens from those seven countries, that's how it's going to be perceived in international politics. perception is as important as reality and perception often defines reality. that's the first point.
second point is, in countries where we have good relations with muslim societies, muslim governments who are working with us, this is going to make it much harder for them to be supportive of us. and in all likelihood, will inspire terrorists to attack facilities there and demonstrations and it also plays into propaganda for isis and al qaeda. it's the sort of thing that they embrace and celebrate. >> all right. would lifting that reverse -- are we already there now so that so-called damage, whatever, so-called, whatever effect it created has now been created. does lifting it at this point make any difference? >> here's what i would do. i would go back to the drawing board. one of the problems with this administration so far, and let me back up a again and say, everyone who signed that declaration has spent a good part of their life fighting terrorism. no one here is saying that we have a perfect counterterrorism
policy. but at this point, i would say go back to the drawing board. do this by good government. assemble the people who know something about this. who spent their lives doing it in the government, still in the government, and put together something that's more sensible and more balanced. there's a lot of things that could be done to improve our current system. for example, you could look at the degree to which we are helping european services to detect terrorists in their midst who could come here and are we getting all the information we need? we could develop a warning system in the united states, better than we have, for detecting activity by lone wolf terrorists. we could look some countries that aren't on this list, for example, take a look at tu dmeesh s tunisia. so there are things you could do, start over. >> start over. anyway, sir, thank you very much for joining us. >> sure. breaking news, we're getting new video from a rally outside
the whouite house over the dako access pipeline. the engineers acting after president trump ordered them to speed up the review process. with the scene tonight, it looks like the opposition will continue. next, what president trump's supreme court nominee is saying behind closed doors about the president slamming federal judges. you want to hear this. and more on the story dominating conversation today. the president, ivanka, and a retail store. we've got some reporting on sales ahead. ♪
why do so many businesses rely on the u.s. postal service? because when they ship with us, their business becomes our business. ♪ that's why we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ here, there, everywhere. united states postal service priority : you ...one of many pieces in my life. so when my asthma symptoms kept coming back on my long-term control medicine. i talked to my doctor and found a missing piece in my asthma treatment with breo. once-daily breo prevents asthma symptoms. breo is for adults with asthma not well controlled on a long-term asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. breo won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. breo is specifically designed to open up airways to improve breathing for a full 24 hours. breo contains a type of medicine that increases the risk of death from asthma problems and may increase the risk of hospitalization in children and adolescents.
breo is not for people whose asthma is well controlled on a long-term asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. once your asthma is well controlled, your doctor will decide if you can stop breo and prescribe a different asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. do not take breo more than prescribed. see your doctor if your asthma does not improve or gets worse. ask your doctor if 24-hour breo could be a missing piece for you. learn more about better breathing at mybreo.com.
-- i just want to say jeff sessions has been my colleague. i've been here for you're looking at a live picture of the senate floor where moments from now the united states senate will vote yes or no on senator jeff sessions for attorney general. this has been a very controversial road for the vote. for many democrats aggressively are fighting it, but sessions is expected to be confirmed. and there is no sign that any republican senator will vote no to senator sessions becoming the next attorney general, even after senate democrats last night held an all-night talkathon. right now house democrats are
not in washington, d.c., but 45 miles away holding their annual retreat in baltimore. democrats are trying to figure out a way out of the political wild wilderne wilderness. do they go with presidebrawl wi trump or put out a hand? >> if you don't win, you don't make the public policy. i say that because it's hard for people in our party to accept that principle. our party likes to be right. even if they lose. >> congressman, a democrat from maryland, joins me from the democratic retreat. nice to see you, congressman. >> good to see you. i'm glad to be in baltimore. homegrown. i love it. we have our democrats here conferences. not a retreat, now. we're not retreating. it's a conference. >> i'll get that right. i'll call it a conference. >> okay, okay. >> when you were last term you were the ranking member on the house intelligence committee. as a democrat. and worked very closely with the
republican, mike rogers, he was the chairman. the two of you got a lot done. now, there a poll out that says from politico that says 56% of democrats want their leaders to block all gop legislation and nominees. so two questions. how were you able to work with republican, rogers, and get things done, and why do the democrats -- the democratic voters want you to vote all the legislation and nominees? >> well, the first thing is that my philosophy in politics, and always has been, is when the election's over, the people have spoken, you need to work together. i'm a democrat because i believe in democratic principles, social principles and i feel very strongly and hope we can get the leadership back. you played rahm emanuel. i agree with rahm. what rahm said, you need to be back in the majority so you can set the policy, you can make a difference. we're in the minority. we are in the minority. whether or not it's the presidency now, it's the house
and the senate. we don't have the authority to set the policy. we need to work with our brothers and sisters on the other side of the aisle to try to get our agenda through as much as we can. >> all right. if winning is everything, that means you got to win the election, but if you've got 56% obvious the democrats just want you to fight, and fight and fight, unless you do that, if you work together, for instance, like you did with mike rogers, the republican, if you just fight like the democrats warranwarrannt, you may not be winning. >> well, it depends on what you fight on. mike rogers and i worked together because national security is very serious and we need to protect the american people. he was a former fbi agent. i was a former prosecutor. and we did work together to protect our country. now, you know, there are things that we're going to fight for. there's basic principles. and, you know, what my philosophy would be, i hope would be our philosophy generally, is that what we're going to try to work on with the new administration on issues that are important to our
country, and to democrats. we're going to work on education issues. we're going to work on infrastructure issues to create jobs. jobs are extremely important. there are certain things that are very important to us to get done. for my constituents, not only in my own district but for america. but what's happened in the last week has really bothered us and we're not going to stand for certain things happening. we're going to hold the new administration accountable. but what we need to do is to say to the new president, if i could have a conversation with him, what i would say is number one, you are the president of the united states. words matter. and the last three weeks, your words have gone all over the world, my opinion, they've hurt our country. you have empowered isis and by going -- by your immigration ban, which yat you have done is allowed isis to recruit people saying the united states is against muslims generally. what i would like to see the president do is learn more about national security. he was a businessman. he has no experience. and there are a lot of us on the republican and democratic side
who have a lot of experience who've been to iraq, afghanistan, yemen. go -- go, a trip with us, with both groups, republican and democrat, and go to these countries and see the men and women of the military on the front line protecting us and our country. see the members of the intelligence community out there protecting us and hopefully he will understand the magnitude of what his job is. and if i had any way to influence him to stop the tweeting, because the words do matter, and, you know, you don't take -- australia, we work with them all the time. we have a good relationship with mexico. we didn't years ago but they're one of our best trading partners. we are working with them on oa lot of the border issues and drug issues that are important to our country. i would hope the president would try to learn these issues and get people around him. you don't need yes people when you're dealing with so many dangerous issues. you need people to speak truth to power and general mattis and
general allen are those two people. >> all right. i hope that general mattis and some of the others that you all can get together and talk. i hope president trump invites you down to the white house and you can tell him what you think. anyway, congressman ruppersberger, thank you very much. >> we're all americans. thank you, greta. >> yes, indeed, we're all americans. the senate pick for president trump's pick for attorney general. we'll bring it to you. president trump's supreme court pick is calling his attack on judges demoralizing and disheartening. i'll talk to kelly ayotte, now in charge of getti inting judge gorsuch ready for those hearings. approved for the signs and symptoms of dry eye. one drop in each eye, twice a day. common side effects include eye irritation, discomfort or blurred vision when applied to the eye, and an unusual taste sensation. do not touch the container tip to your eye or any surface. remove contacts before using xiidra
by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing;
a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option click to activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. companies across the state are york sgrowing the economy,otion. with the help of the lowest taxes in decades, a talented workforce, and world-class innovations. like in plattsburgh, where the most advanced transportation is already en route. and in corning, where the future is materializing.
let us help grow your company's tomorrow - today at esd.ny.gov zblnchsz n zblnchsz . now to the supreme court fight, it could be a bruiser. senator richard blumenthal met with nominee neil gorsuch. listen to how he said gorsuch responded when asked about the president attacking federal judges. >> my strong hope is that he will be more vehement. president trump about the judiciary. but i will be asking for more specific and forthcoming responses s ts to those kinds questions before i determine how i will vote.
>> a spokesperson for judge gorsuch confirms that senator blumenthal's version of the conversation took place and gorsuch did use the words disheartening and demoralizing. joining me, former senator kelly ayotte, she has been tasked by the trump administration to be the so-called sherpa for supreme court nominee judge gorsuch, she's in charge of getting him through what could be a rough and tumble confirmation process. ever thought you'd be called a sherpa? >> never thought i would be. >> okay. i'll give you an easy one first. is that senator feinstein, ranking democrat, this is good for you, she says judge gorsuch is impressive. but you've got this other problem, now everyone's talking about is he said that -- the judge said about president trump's attacks on the judiciary that it's demoralizing, disheartening. >> well, greta, i have to say, having met with 24 senators at this point and been with the judge in each of these meetings, you know, he is someone just of an impeccable background, a great choice by president trump and he's having these very direct conversations with senators answering their
questions and it's very clear that he takes the seriousness of this position. he feels very strongly about the independence of the judiciary. he's talked about that in every single meeting we've been in. >> so demoralizing, disheartening. senator blumenthal isn't making that one up. i'm not saying he would make things up. he said that -- >> senator blumenthal asked about the president's comments about judge robart and certainly what judge gorsuch said was he made clear that he couldn't comment on any particular case and that's his responsibility. and he had to comply with judicial ethics. but he did say that any comments from any source that didn't talk about the merits of the case went to either the personal integrity or the independence of the yjudiciary he found disheartening and demoralizing. vy i have to tell you, this is a great record to serve on the supreme court.
it's clear he understand the important role of the supreme court and independence of the judiciary. >> senator blumenthal says he wants to be more vehement publicly. this looks like a low-key guy. saying the words demoralizing, disheartening -- he has stated his position. we got it. okay. now, you might get senator feinstein -- she didn't say she was going to vote for him. she's going to hear evidence, going to hear information, testimony at the hearing. what about some of the other democrats? what did they say? >> i think we met with a number of democrats who said they're open minded. the judge has had very good conversations with them. and, of course, senator feinstein, they had a very good conversation. she's the ranking member judiciary. and i think she was impressed with his qualifications. so, you know, i think these conversations are going to continue and there are democrats that we are meeting with that are very open minded and the judge is looking forward to meeting with each of the members of the committee and at this point met with 24 senators, we're going to keep meeting with these senators >> the hearings won't be until about when? >> they will be in march. >> early or late?
i mean, we only have eight justices. we've only had eight for a long time. what's the holdup? >> up to the chairman of the judiciary committee working with the ranking member but i would expect that the hearings will be in march. and we certainly expect that this will be a fair confirmation process and the judge deserves that. >> the merrick garland thing is, i mean, i always thought that merrick garland deserved a hearing. republicans could have voted no on him. but are you finding -- that so the merrick garland, a lot of democrats are very upset. is that out there, isimpact, yo? >> system ome of the democrats merrick garland but one of the things that'll telling about judge gorsuch, the first call he made when the president told him he would be nominated to serve on the nation's highest court, was to merrick garland. >> that was nice. very nice. >> he made is clear in each of these meetings he has great respect for judge garland. >> that was very nice of him. well, we have siecivility in
washington. >> yes. >> that's a first. anyway, very nice to see you. >> great to see you, greta. after the break, controversy over president trump, his daughter, ivanka, and a department store. is this about business or politics? in a minute now, the senate to begin voting on president trump's pick for attorney general of the united states. to err is human. to anticipate is lexus. experience the lexus rx with advanced safety standard. experience amazing.
and we're back with more on president trump using twitter to slam nordstrom for dropping his daughter, ivanka's, clothing line. nordstrom fired back with a tweet that said this was not a political decision based on the brand's performance. courtney reagan is cnbc's retail reporter. courtney, nice to see you. courtney, what's the sales claim? is it selling or not selling? >> what nordstrom says is every year they look at their assortment and they cull through 10% of it, replacing what's not selling and bringing in brands that they hope will sell. so perhaps this was a business decision, but maybe it was driven by politics.
there was a pretty big social boycott, using th the #grabyourwallet, that happened before the election, asking many folks to boycott retailers that sold both ivanka trump and other trump-branded products. so that may have led to the sales decline and nordstrom actually gave me a little bit more color which is kind of rare for a retailer that sells many brands to give you any granular detail on sales but nordstrom did tell me over the past year and particularly in the last half of 2016, sales of the brand have steadily declined to the point where it didn't make good business sense for us to continue with the line for now." nordstrom added that ivanka was personally informed of that decision in early january. >> all right. well let me push back a little bit on nordstrom, if viewers go to my facebook page, i'll show them a tweet from a nordstrom executive that may cast a very different light on, make it look much more political. anyway, let any oomove on to th second question, courtney.
the stock. today president trump took to twitter. ny any impact on the stock of nordstrom? >> initially the stock dropped of nordstrom, half a percent at the low but rebounded and steadily gained throughout the day actually closing up 4%. that isn't necessarily the case every time that the president has come out and sort of bullied around a company. we have seen share prices fall, but that wasn't the case today for nordstrom. >> thank you very much, courtney. >> thanks. annie linkskey for the "boston globe," and jake for politico. everyone is up in arms because the president went out and tweeted. frankly, i would have thought it terrible if a father didn't defend his daughter and if he didn't do that, we'd be saying the horrible president, he doesn't defend his daughter, he just defends himself. >> that's right, greta. one way to read that is a naur who's father who's defending his daughter. the most charitable way to see it. in history you had president truman at one point, his
daughter was a musician and got a bad review from the "washington post." the president of the united states wrote a letter to the critic saying he was going to punch him in the face. of course it's a different era and you didn't have the comment visible to the entire world. so i think that's a difference. i think there is a human aspect here. >> jake, i know everyone jumping up and down about this. i just, you know, i really do think -- you know, i'd be app l appalled if he hadn't defended his daughter. >> what's really going to upset the president, i imagine, is that nordstrom said that his daughter's line isn't doing good business which is probably the biggest insult to donald trump. now listen, i think the big issue here going forward is this is what republicans have been talking about that they don't want the president to do. stay out of the business stuff. you're president of the united states. you have enough issues at your hand here that you need to concentrate on running government. forget nordstrom. forget all -- >> is the expression, fat chance -- i mean, he's just not -- he's -- yes, of course, republicans want him to do that,
they're begging him to do that. he's not listening. he doesn't care. >> it gives democrats more ammo. he needs democrats to pass a tax bill, pass an infrastructure bill, pass a supreme court justice. if democrats have something to use against this president, they're going to do that. we've seen that today specifically, seen that in the last couple weeks. i think donald trump to the extent he listens to his advisers and is preswaz ersuadp would be wise to stay off the nordstrom corporate bashing. >> i think you're right he should stay off that. i don't think he's going to do that. i don't see any sign. >> not at all. this gets at this intersection of trump and his businesses and his brands and said he would step away from his brand, his daughter -- >> ivanka isn't his brand. >> right. >> that's not his brand. it's not the donald trump perfume. >> there's still a trump name on that. i think democrats want him -- ethics officials want him to step away from that. and it just shows that over the next four to eight years, i
don't think we're ever going to see him truly separate himself from his business empire. >> well, i think it was early january that ivanka divested herself from this. i mean, she's -- she has turned over -- some other ivanka trump line. >> she doesn't have day to day management. yesterday she tweeted a picture of herself with her son, theodo theodore, making calls at the white house. she's clearly not involved in the day-to-day operations of the brand of her clothing line but still, again, the president, donald trump likes to say he has no conflicts of interest. i think people in his party and people on capitol hill think otherwise. and i think you're going to see a drum beat of pressure from democrats and some republicans to go after and look into some of this stuff. >> i think in the code of professional responsibility for lawyers, there's something called appearance of impropriety. not actual impropriety but the appearance of impropriety. that's really the problem, it doesn't look good. it doesn't look good. even if there's nothing wrong with it, doesn't look good
except for the fact i expect a father to defend his daughter. >> i would hope my father would defend my sister. >> how about you? >> he doesn't have to defend me. >> anyway, thank you, both. senator sessions, senator warren, politics going too far. former vice president biden makes a big cameo appearance "for the record" next. [burke] at farmers, we've seen almost everything, so we know how to cover almost anything. even a rodent ride-along. [dad] alright, buddy, don't forget anything! [kid] i won't, dad... [captain rod] happy tuesday morning! captain rod here. it's pretty hairy out on the interstate.traffic is literally crawling, but there is some movement on the eastside overpass. getting word of another collision. [burke] it happened. december 14th, 2015. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ that just tastes better. fresher. more flavorful. delicious. only one egg with better nutrition- like more vitamins d, e, and omega 3s. and 25% less saturated fat.
only one egg good enough for my family. because why have ordinary when you can have the best. eggland's best. the only egg that gives you so much more: better taste. better nutrition. better eggs. better nutrition. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis like me, and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication... ...this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain... ...and protect my joints from further damage. humira has been clinically studied for over 18 years.
humira works by targeting and helping to... ...block a specific source... ...of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain and... ...stop further joint damage in many adults. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas... ...where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flulike symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com this is humira at work. dearthere's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced, our senses awake,
to get here has been absolutely wicked to say the least. last night this happened on the floor when senator elizabeth warren was reading a 31-year-old letter, that's from 1986, written by martin luther king jr.'s widow, criticizing senator sessions. >> and brothers -- >> mr. president. >> the majority leader. >> are not suitable for debate in the united states senate. i ask leave of the senate to continue my remarks. >> is there objection? >> i've got -- >> i appeal the ruling -- >> objection is heard. the senator will take her seat. >> now my opinion about this may surprise you. first, i think senator warren should have been allowed to speak. yes, there is a rule the senators are barred from insulting other senators on the floor. but this was a senator being
critical of a nominee for attorney general who just happens also to be a senator. that's different. warren would not have been stopped if she were saying the same thing about a nominee who was not also a u.s. senator. but, and here's where i depart. i think it's so unfair to go back 31 years, that's just too old. you don't agree with me? well here's what former vice president biden who led the charge against sessions 31 years ago back in 1986 recently said about sessions. >> i wouldn't have appointed jeff but, you know, people learn, people change. >> vice president biden is right. yes, people change. and i don't know if that 1986 accusation was accurate or not but i do bet you are not the same person today you were 31 years ago. and by the way, as to the senate rule 19, i think it's really weird the senate needs a rule to tell them to be polite. the rest of us know that without rules. or at least we should. thanks for watching. we'll see you tomorrow mignight right here at 6:00 p.m. eastern.
if you can't watch live set your dvr and follow me live on facebook at greta. "hardball" with chris matthews starts now. get ready, a big vote tonight. we may have an attorney general very soon. court drama. let's play "hardball." >> good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. debate on "hardball" tonight, who guards the door, which office of the american government decides how to protect this country? who decides where the danger lies and how to guard us? what constitutional limits stand in the way of that decision-making? and finally, who do we blame when that essential accountability fails us? tonight, we debate those questions. even as the united states senate begins to vote on the confirmation of alabama senator jeff sessions for attorney general.