also, what president trump is trying to do about it. this is "chicago in the crosshairs." that airs tonight 8:00 eastern live on msnbc. you are not going to want to miss it. that will do it for this hour here in new york. i am steve kornacki. "mtp daily" starts right now. it's thursday. is it midnight in america? tonight damage control. a white house on constant offense to scare voters and shut down its critics. >> what you should do is ask senator blumenthal about his vietnam record that didn't exist after years of saying it did. ask him about his vietnam record. >> is this really the new normal for this new white house? what's left? should the democrats listen to their base and try to stop the gop at every turn? and trump adviser kellyanne conway criticizing after promoting ivanka trump's fashion line. >> go buy ivanka's stuff is what i would tell you.
>> this is "mtp daily," and it starts right now. good evening. i am chuck todd in washington. we now have a pretty clear picture of how the white house reacts to criticism. it's blame. it's fear-mongering. sometimes it's conspiracy theories and to shut down critics they often paint a dark and dystopian view of america. what we saw today looked like a case of trump's white house shooting the messenger. after its supreme court pick criticized the president. we saw what some would consider an attempt at a character assassination. president trump ripped into democratic senator richard blumenthal during a bipartisan meeting at the white house with his senate colleagues sitting around the same table. this came after blumenthal said the president's supreme court pick, neil gorsuch, told him
that mr. trump's attacks on the judiciary were, quote, disheartening and demoralizing. here was the president's response. >> his comments were misrepresented. and what you should do is ask senator blumenthal about his vietnam record that didn't exist after years of saying it did. so ask senate blumenthal about his vietnam record. he misrepresented that just like he misrepresented judge gorsuch. >> i know what you are, but what am i? what's -- you figure that's what's coming next. what judge gorsuch told senator blumenthal has been confirmed by gorsuch's own spokesperson and all but confirmed by gorsuch white house team in spite of the white house spin. ben sasse went further saying he even teared up at times in their meeting over the attacks on the judiciary. senator blumenthal says gorsuch explicitly okayed him to relay these concerns to the public.
still, president trump is attacking the messenger, senator blumenthal. he also slammed an interview that blumenthal gave this morning as fake news. but, folks, this is a symptom of a larger issue. the administration's response to criticism often takes a darker tone. they blame the press by falsely claiming it covers up terrorist attacks. they blame the courts for temporarily stopping the white house travel ban by warning that america is under the threat of terrorism and also warn to blame the courts if something happens. this week the president defended his bleak portrait of american security by falsely claiming the murder rate was at a 47-year high. it's actually near its lowest point. white house adviser kellyanne conway obviously referenced a fabricated terrorist attack, the bowling green massacre, three times to defend against criticism of the travel ban before acknowledging the mistake. president trump is blaming senator john mccain today for emboldening the enemy because he called mr. trump's yemen-approved raid a failure.
he wasn't attacking the mission. it just happened to not work. president trump has pushed back on criticism of his election mandate by falsely claiming that millions of, quote, illegals infiltrated the election and all of them, of course, voted for clinton, not him. folks, this kind of dark view of america looks strikingly similar to white house chief strategist's steve bannon's philosophy. he has said in interviews, fear is a good thing. fear will lead you to take action. darkness is good. well, if that's what they claim, they've painted a dark portrait right now. joined by republican senator jeff flake of arizona. senator flake, thanks for coming on. always good to talk to you, sir. >> thanks for having me on. >> let me start with these comments by the president on the judiciary and on senator blumenthal. any of them appropriate in your mind? >> i met with judge gorsuch yesterday. this did not come up during that
time. but he did bring up the importance of the independence of the judiciary. and he feels very strongly about that. so i wasn't surprised at all when i heard the comments that he had made to ben sasse and apparently to senator blumenthal as well. >> look, i know you have been on the other side of trump tantrums. you have been the target of them in various ways. and i know you have probably had people either try to reach out to him, maybe you have tried to reach out. why do you think that, when he is criticized, that the knee-jerk response is criticize back and make it ten times worse? >> i don't know. i don't want to get into that at all. i just want to say that judge gorsuch did himself well yesterday in his meetings around capitol hill from those that i have talked to. he is a great pick. i applaud president trump for picking him. i think that he will get north of 60 votes in the senate.
saying what he did about the independence of the judiciary will do nothing but help him get the 60 votes that he needs. >> i understand that. but you are not troubled at all by sort of the way this is a consistent and constant way that the white house has practiced? it was one thing -- a lot of people said, well, the campaign is the campaign. they won't do this once they're in the white house. >> of course i was troubled by the comments about the judiciary. you can criticize opinions or, you know, the way they got to it, but you don criticize judges. and i tnk that's the way, you know, it ought to be, that we respect the independence of the judiciary. obviously we complain a lot about decisions. living in the ninth circuit, i am used to doing that, but we don't go after individual judges. >> let me ask you about the larger darker portrait that the president paints of the country. today he said, criminal cartels destroying the blood of our
youth and other people. yesterday in a law enforcement meeting he said i think our security is at risk today. tuesday he said this is a very dangerous period of time. monday at centcom. we will not allow radical islamic terrorism to take root in our country. saturday. many bad and dangerous people may be pouring into our country. is this the picture of america that you see from arizona? >> no! i live in bright and sunny arizona. we have a different view there. i am very optimistic about our future. i do agree -- i think the court will come out and affirm the president's ability to have a ban on travel. having said that, i don't agree with that ban on travel. i think that that's the wrong way to go. i believe we ought to have vetting, certainly. we ought to make sure that those who come here don't want to do us harm. but i think we have some of those procedures in place and we can get others in place and welcome people here. and in terms of where america is going from here, i am a lot more
optimistic. i think we have a great country and we can make it even better. >> final question. later in the show i'll have the foreign minister of mexico on. he was visiting with secretaries kelly and tillerson yesterday. you know what their position is on the wall. where are you on the wall in arizona? do you think it is necessary, it's something that you would like to see across the entire state's border? >> i am more having a secure border. a wall in certain places, a fence in others and a river, as we have in other parts of the border. it doesn't make sense, obviously, to have a 2500 mile border -- i'm sorry, wall. we do need a secure border and we need good relations with mexico. we have those. we cooperate with them on security measures. one thing we need to do is help mexico secure their southern border. we have a net migration south of mexican immigrants. guatemalans. el salvadorans and hondurans
coming up through mexico. the key is to work with mexico to secure their border and our own. also our trade relationship. nafta has been great for america and for mexico. that's part of the reason we don't have mexican migrants north as much. the economy is better in mexico. we need to continue to work with them to make it even better. >> are you concerned that the focus on the wall will increase anti-americanism in mexico. i have talked to mexican leaders who believe that the next presidential election will be a campaign that is about who can be tougher on trump and that that inevitably will lead to bad relations with mexico. >> i do have those fears. i was in mexico city in november. there is obviously concern about some of the rhetoric during the campaign, particularly on trade. but i think that they were certainly willing to give the administration a chance and see where we go. i am still hopeful that we can
have good relations with mexico, both trade relations and on the security front. so i am not willing to say that we're going to end up in a bad place. i think we have got a ways to go and we can get there. >> senator jeff flake. being the optimist. always good to hear from you, sir, thanks for sharing your views. >> thank you. >> you got it. bringing in tonight's panel. bill crystal. editor at large of the weekly -- >> at large. >> we can talk about at large later. always an odd phrase. stephanie cutter. president obama's deputy campaign manager in 2012 and evan smith, the texas tribune co-founder and ceo. you too may be an editor at large. you are not in texas. you are here. >> i'm wherever you want me to be, chuck. >> this issue from president obama's critics. we put together a scroll here because you can't just do it in one graphic. this is everybody the president has attacked since he took the oath of office. and it's just on twitter. so it goes from arnold
schwarzenegger. the crowds. apprentice ratings, all this stuff. bill, there was always the idea that there was going to be two trumps. candidate trump and he said i am going to be so presidential you're going to be impressed with how presidential i am. he has been -- he is full candidate trump right now in the last ten days. >> he is. and people kept expecting -- i remember he gave the inaugural address. i was the next place the next morning and people saying, well, he got it out of his system. wait until today. today he says, i'm going to the cia. he goes on about the crowd size at the inauguration and other such things. yeah. he is attacking everyone. he is attacking john mccain. put aside the impropriety of what he said -- >> quick breaking news. the appeals court did let us know that they will rule tonight. the ninth circuit will rule tonight on the travel ban. that will happen in a couple
hours. there you go. here it comes. >> the main thing. it's one thing to find the attacks, a bunch of bad actors, actresses. arno john mccain is an important senator. from a pure tactics point of view, is it wise? the kind of attack. the nasty, personal attack he has been losing for so long, he forgets what it is to win. and richard blumenthal. 48 democratic senators opposing you on everything? launch a nasty personal attack on a democratic senator. >> in front of colleagues sitting in front of him. it was the ultimate -- it's a rude power move. i guess that's what it was. >> it's short-sighted. he is thin-skinned, he is egotistical. we know that about him. also, he is the president now. >> other presidents are thin-skinned and egotistical. he may be on another level. >> very few of them will let anybody else see it except for
their close personal aides. lucky us. >> right. >> it's short-sighted, like bill said. he is president. he now has to get something done. on the gorsuch thing, you know, if he could look a little further ahead, what gorsuch did was actually good to demonstrate his independence. it's not enough to get democratic votes, but he did demonstrate some independence. nothing happens in those meetings. i have been in them. sherpa meetings. that is not completely planned. i am sure the white house knew exactly what was going to be said in the meeting. it was no surprise. they knew the question would come up. so it was a pretty good handle li ing of the question. further than you would expect other nominees to go. they should have let it go rather than knocking it down. >> i have had plenty of people in trump world even admit, if they could sit his twitter away for the last three weeks they think he'd be sitting at at
least 50% job approval and maybe democrats would show up to meetings. he is making it harder on himself by doing this. >> i take bill's point. taking john mccain, where are the consequences? republicans are not breaking with the president over his tweets, over his bullying, over any of it. >> they didn't come out in support of his travel ban. >> it's one thing to vote for nominees. you give a lot of latitude to the president of your party. legislation. when you talk privately to a republican. you find senators and congressmen. judge gorsuch will get support because they respect the judge. democrats may let it go without a filibuster. you may see eight, ten, democratic votes. >> especially today. in a weird way this may have ended it. >> let it go. you get a nice win early on. the nuclear option doesn't have to be invoked. gorsuch, classiest thing he has
done. united everybody. now he is sort of -- not poisoned but contaminated -- >> contaminated is a pretty good word. >> the pride one could take in saying. i was reluctant to vote for trump but he did the right thing with gorsuch. >> i think what it probably means, that after he gets the nominations through that he is not going to control the legislative agenda. mcconnell and ryan and republican leaders will control the legislative agenda. it's because there is no built-in trust there. there is no, you know, team building of how they're going to drive things through. that's, you know, as -- i am not a republican. i am a democrat. they control the white house, the house and the senate. i have -- i was in the white house in the early days of the obama administration. and we worked very closely with the democratic party. i think it really says something that house and senate republican leaders are taking the agenda on
their own. >> what's interesting here, and you bring up, this is what we could have led with today. the fact that actually, for all the action that there is around the trump white house right now, it's very -- it's actually -- they've done minuscule. there is no big thing they've done. there is no big legislation. >> it's a travel ban. >> i would argue it's actually a small thing. it didn't -- they've done a lot of big symbolic things. but where is the -- george w. bush at this point in time had sent his entire tax cut plan to congress. >> there was already a tax plan. we heard in the campaign about on day one we'll do thus and such. >> we were passing a stimulus bill. >> within three days i think you were signing it. >> he is doing -- it's like -- well, you know, you have touched on this, steve bannon is setting the white house agenda. he is doing symbolic things to play to a very particular part of his base. and, you know, it's a very political way to handle a white house. >> how much patience do
republicans on capitol hill have? >> they would say the trump administration, they haven't gotten the cabinet people confirmed as quickly as president obama. >> fair enough. >> wait. this is what i don't understand. they're rushing to annoy people without rushing to get legislation passed. why not wait until you have people in place. why not wait until you have an attorney general and solicitor general whom you have chosen to defend the travel ban. they talked themselves into we've got to go early. have momentum. fulfill every campaign promise on day one. that can be a mistake. important things require legislation. you can only do so much by executive orders. that's the unwritten story. what support will he have in the congress. >> i have to go. i have to go to break or i am in trouble. you guys are coming back. you are here for the hour. coming up, it worked for republicans. stop the democrats at every turn. is it time for democrats to turn the tables on the gop? we'll talk to one senator whom i
welcome back. there are some fun names in the senate that people like to have fun with. angus king. heidi heitkamp. paling in comparison to the newest member luther strange. we here at "mtp daily" agree he has now got the best name in the senate. strange officially appointed by alabama's governor today, sworn in this afternoon. taking the seat formerly held by jeff sessions, the new u.s. attorney general. he'll hold the seat until 2019. he'll have to run in the primary in june 2018. if he wins a general election mid november. a former basketball player at tulane. he stands 6'9". the tallest member in modern history. allen simpson, the former tallest member, was reached by phone call and got the news he
was no longer the tallest senator. what did simpson ask, quote, what son of a bitch did that? he later give in when he heard strange's height. simpson said, quote, tell him he's got me beat hands down. not only was i 6'7" but i am shrinking. now that i'm 85 i have shrunk to 6'5". who names are we missing? tweet us with the #"mtp daily." senator strange, welcome to washington. it can be a strange place. maybe you'll end up fitting right in. guess what, people are strange when they're a stranger. we'll be right back. ♪ 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 why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis. we are back. it's been a tumultuous week in the senate for democrats. but is the party starting to find its voice when it comes to being the opposition. democrats came up short on blocking two cabinet nominees on
largely party-line votes. the fight created a moment that quickly became the rallying cry of what is becoming a democratic party resistance movement. senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts shut down by senator mcconnell during the jeff sessions nomination debate. ended up firing up the base. it also scored them campaign cash and a whole lot of headlines and tv time, all while democrats continue to do all they can to throw a wrench in the gears of a united republican government. will gumming up government be a winning strategy for democrats on the hill or endanger red state democrats whose constituents voted for president trump in the election. the delay tactics worked for republicans in the obama years collectively even if they didn't in specific instances. joining me now, oregon democratic senator jeff merkley. nice to see you. thank you for coming in. let me start with, is this the strategy now? is it oppose the president at every turn? have you gotten to that point yourself?
>> no, not at all. certainly there may be opportunities. we're not sure there will be many of them. i believe that, if -- simply it's opposition for opposition's sake that we will miss opportunities to address problems in america. we have to at least be prepared to see the opportunities. quite frankly, when we see the cabinet nominees, when we see who are the strategic advisers close to the president, i don't think there will be many chances that we're going to have real positive chances. >> you used the phrase opposition for opposition's sake. one could argue that the strategy you're using on the cabinet nominees is opposition for opposition's sake because we know what the vote will be. you're making it take longer to get there. how is that not opposition for opposition's sake? >> let's start with the fact that these individuals are terribly suited for the offices they'll hold. someone who opposes public education, nominated as secretary of education, dbetsy
devos. >> many people disagree with you on that. elections have consequences. >> that's right. our responsibility under advice and consent of the constitution, to see if the individual is a fit character for the office. it's required. the proper vetting. it's important for the american people to see what the individuals are as well. it's not a lot of time. one day and a few more hours to see who the individual is and hear the commentary from the senate floor is important and valuable. we had at least a passing chance of defeating that nomination. >> betsy devos. i get that. >> first time in history. >> you were one vote away. on the other votes, though. this happened to the republican party when they sort of -- when their base was telling them, don't work with them. oppose it at every turn. but when they didn't successfully defeat items, then the base got rambunctious and angry at the electeds. are you worried that failure after failure, even if you're
fighting the good fight as far as the base is concerned, that over time that takes a toll and there is disappointment? >> no. ill tell you what deflates the base, if they see that we are not fighting for the issues. there has been a sense of that over the last couple of years that we haven't been in there fighting hard enough to make the things happen that should happen. the infrastructure package that we fought for, improvements to the health care, getting a public option in place. a whole host of things. so i think there is so much energy right now in part because of the reaction to trump, but also a real sense that, thank goodness the democrats are in there fighting for us. >> what would you say to john corner who said this? i don't see how they sustain the anger and lack of participation in the governing process very long and still come back in 2018? i don't think it's an agenda for success. >> i would say it's wishful thinking and he probably knows that already. you are starting to see the republicans get really worried about actually breaking our health care system, get really worried about actually
de-fundi de-funding planned parenthood. they are seeing a mass reaction that there is no mandate for this president, his agenda and what the republicans want to do in congress. >> do you think, because -- and let me go to the supreme court fight here. because you have been particularly upset on the merrick garland aspect of this. do you think, because of how republicans treated merrick garland, that no matter wh, democrats should force mitch mcconnell to change the rules if he wants to get him confirmed? >> well, it isn't just about the way they treated him like they insulted him. what they did is unprecedented in u.s. history. they stole the seat from president obama. refused to do the responsibilities under the constitution. they did not vet or vote on the candidate. therefore, they put it in a time capsule. they took the seat, stole it, put it forward a year hoping it would arrive with a republican president and they succeeded. it diminishes the integrity of the supreme court and sets up a
precedent that will be difficult to deal with over time. it's a huge mistake. if you care about the supreme court and care about the integrity of the court, think about every 5-4 decision in the future. because the seat was stolen from one president and delivered to another. >> if they had taken up the motion and voted it down on political grounds, basically saying, hey, we want to wait until the election of the fine, we had a confirmation hearing. we heard it out, voted it down, what would you say to that? >> first of all they didn't think they could defeat the nomination on the floor. he was widely respected on both sides of the aisle. >> you think that's why they didn't do it? >> yes. >> if they had, would that have been a better way to oppose? >> yes. absolutely. it would have set a different precedent. people could have said, here is where my senator stood. this is how the senator voted. i can respond to that. that's much better. they had difficulty voting him down because they didn't have a good reason. that was the fear of mitch
mcconnell and the fear of the koch brothers, that the justice would be confirmed and that the justice would vote against the dark money that is corrupting our nation. >> you're going to have a base in the democratic party that's so fired up to take on donald trump. you're going to have seven or eight, maybe ten democrats who are up for reelection in 2018, in states that trump carried. and they're very nervous. what do you tell, you know -- are you -- are you going to be comfortable watching joe manchin or bob casey if they end up deciding that they've got to work with trump, it's going to cause a democratic party to not be as united in opposition? is that a problem for you? >> each senator understands their state better than any of the rest of us do. we want those senators back. we won't second-guess how they'll work in the state. i'll work to try to persuade them on issues we care about but they'll make judgments based on their own philosophy. >> do you encourage activists
not to primary those guys and gals? >> i would, actually. >> it would be bad for the party. manchin shouldn't be primaried because you're better off getting -- >> i wouldn't encourage anyone to perform them. they're wonderful colleagues, with us on most of the issues that we care about, and we need them back. >> all right. senator merkley, i have to leave it there. thanks for coming in. >> thank you. >> we'll be watching. still to come, why i am obsessed with the wrong fix for a real problem. keep it here. every click...call...punch... and paycheck... you've earned your medicare. it was a deal that was made long ago, and aarp believes it should be honored. thankfully, president trump does too. "i am going to protect and save your social security and your medicare. you made a deal a long time ago." now, it's congress' turn. tell them to protect medicare.
...stop clicking around...travel sites to find a better price... the lowest prices on our hotels are always at hilton.com. so pay less and get more only at hilton.com. tech: at safelite, we know how busy your life can be. mom: oh no... tech: this mom didn't have time to worry about a cracked windshield. so she scheduled at safelite.com and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there, so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much! (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.
we got more "mtp daily" ahead, including potential ethics trouble for kellyanne conway, but first, it's time for deirdre bosa and the cnbc market wrap. >> strong earnings from u.s. companies and president donald trump's promises to release a phenomenal tax plan helps stocks close further into record territory. toyota reporting weaker than expected revenue and a user count short of estimates. shares plunged 12%. the job market continues to stabilize. the number of americans seeking unemployment benefits fell by 12,000 to a 12-week low at the start of february. that's it from cnbc. first in business worldwide. my ancestry dna results are that i am 26% nigerian.
i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. bp engineers use robotic ultrasound technology, so they can detect and repair corrosion before it ever becomes a problem. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.
secretary john kelly and secretary of state rex tillerson met with mexico's foreign minister. in the meetings both told them they'll be traveling to mexico soon. i sat down with the mexican foreign minister. luis videgaray after his meetings and asked him whether or not mexico needs help from the united states in fighting the drug cartels. >> i think both governments need the help of the other one. there has got to be a collaboration. it cannot be a blame game. i explain myself. what do i mean by a blame game? for years, from the mexican perspective, people say, okay, the problem with drugs, it is creating so many violence and so many deaths of young people in mexico, is because there is the demand for drugs in the u.s. and because we happen to be neighbors to the largest market for drugs. from the american participate it's the other way around. >> right. >> we have all these drugs because mexico is selling these drugs to us. it's a blame game. and it's -- it's not -- but that's a totally incorrect
approach if we want a solution for the problem. we need to understand that it is a market where there is supply and demand. we need to work together, collaboration has to be mutual. not only from the u.s. supporting mexico but also from mexico supporting the u.s., to completely disrupt a business model, a criminal business model, that is creating large profits for these cartels but is also -- but is killing people on both sides of the border. >> the violence of the cartels, what do you believe is the best practice in trying to eradicate? >> help we need from the u.s. that is very important. stop illegal abutments flowing from the u.s. into mexico. we think about illegal stuff moving from the border south to north. but people forget that most guns -- we are not talking small guns. we are talking heavy weapons, that get to the cartels and create literally small armies out of the cartels.
come from the u.s. illegally. we need the u.s. government to commit to collaborate in stopping that. also, cash. the cartels get a lot of cash from the u.s. and these are not wire transfers. this is actual cash moving from one country to the other, from the u.s. to mexico. and that cash gives them a lot of power. >> the president, on wednesday, said i know people don't believe me. this wall is going to be built. it's going to happen. is that the message you get from secretaries kelly and tillerson? >> i think it's very clear from the president himself. and what we've said is that, while we acknowledge that the u.s. is a sovereign nation like any other sovereign nation, has a right to protect its borders the way the country best -- it best thinks, we don't like the idea of a border wall. we think it's not the most friendly gesture. and it might not even work.
but that's not for us to decide. it's -- it's something that creates a lot of negative perception in mexico about the relationship with the u.s., and that's the things that we want to work with both secretary kelly and particularly secretary tillerson. >> is the wall and the nafta renegotiation threat made it so that you can't work on the other issues? >> mexico will not do anything to hurt our national interests. it's very clear that the u.s. is very important to mexico. mexico is also very important to the u.s. and the -- there are some -- there are some limits that we will not cross, and particularly anything that damages our sovereignty and our dignity. our pride as a nation. nafta is an old agreement. it's been good, i think, to both countries, not only to mexico. i think nafta has been good for both economies. it's an old agreement.
it could be made better. >> you are open to some negotiation. >> absolutely. it can make us better for both. it doesn't have to be a winner and a loser. this is trade. there is always room for making it a win-win situation. >> i want to talk to you about this idea -- mexico has made it clear. you have made it clear you're not paying for the wall. >> abundantly clear. >> some sort of 20% border adjustment tax that would fund the wall. >> this is not a one-sided relationship. there are many things that mexico does every day that are important for the u.s. just as there are many things that are important for mexico that the u.s. does every day. i want to make -- want to keep the relationship to be constructive. we don't want this to be an either a blame game or a reciprocal threats, retaliation. if we do that, it's going to be a lose-lose game. both for the u.s. and for mexico. we don't want to do anything that is equivalent to shooting ourselves in the foot. but the u.s. shouldn't do the
same. about this idea of taxing imports from mexico. just think about it. who is going to pay for that? it's the american consumer. this is not going -- this is not making mexico pay for anything. this is actually hurting the -- >> you do have an american public according to many polls is willing to pay more if it means the jobs stay in the united states and don't go to mexico. are you concerned about the economic impact that you suddenly have an american population that the pocket-book isn't going to be the primary motivation? >> this is where the real facts become very important. because trade with mexico is critical for many millions of jobs in the u.s. at least 5 million jobs. some people say it's closer to 6 million jobs. depend directly on the ability to access the mexican market. many in agriculture, many in manufacturing. >> right. >> so, we are -- this is -- if
this is about jobs, the first thing that we need to do is look at the actual data. and hurting mexico and restricting access to the mexican market will have a very negative, very immediate effect on american jobs. >> all right. mr. foreign minister i'll leave it there. appreciate you coming in. hope you enjoyed your visit. >> thank you very much. you can see my full interview with mexico's foreign minister at meet the press.com. about twice as much on the website. you'll want to hear what he says about where mexico will turn if the united states isn't going to be what they think is a good trading partner. we'll be right back.
all seems beautiful to me. . tonight i am obsessed with a genuinely stupid idea that tries to address a real problem by fixing something that isn't broken. here is the proposal. to speed up baseball they're considering starting every extra winning with a runner on second like whiffle ball. the idea is that would increase scoring and prevent games from going 18 innings. fine. it would prevent 18-inning games. so what! it would also lead to lots of bunting. is that a national movement for more bunting and sac flies? extra innings are not the problem, people. the problem with the base of baseball is endless pitching changes. thank you for that, tony larussa. how about limiting the number of
pitching changes at least in the regular season? shorter breaks between innings. how about preventing hitters from stepping out and adjusting h their gloves after every pitch, not slowing pitchers to turn every pitch into performance art. you want to speed up baseball? fix those problems. leave extra innings alone! it's free baseball. who can argue with that! so come on, aim your solutions at the real problem. we'll be right back. (vo) this is not a video game. this is not a screensaver. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪
at bp, we empower anyone to stop a job if something doesn't seem right, so everyone comes home safely. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. time for the lead. moments ago the leaders of the house oversight committee sent a joint letter to the office of government ethics and the white house council saying comments from kellyanne conway today appear to violate federal ethics regulations and deserve prompt action. what are the comments? here is what she said which prompted this letter. >> go buy ivanka's stuff is what i would tell you. i hate shopping. i'm going to get some myself today. this is just -- it's a wonderful
line. i own some of it. i fully -- i'm going to give a free commercial here. go buy it today, everybody. you can find it online. >> with the symbol of the white house behind her as well. the panel is back. bill white house behind her. i want to make a correction, he never said neil gorsuch teared up, welled up with emotion. i took that and went too far. my apology. >> see. exaggerate everything. it was welled up with some emotion. evan, this issue, i turn to you does anybody out in the hinder lands care about this issue? that's what the trump administration is banking on that nobody case. >> i'm here and i'm still an
elite. >> it's an island. >> it's going to have to bubble up. this seems like a line was crossed. period. paragraph. >> donald trump, jr., last night was not ethical either. some people would like at it as frivolous. >> this is president of the united states, these are tax paid employees in the white house. they can't be pushing products where they can be benefitting. we don't have information on donald trump. we don't have tax returns. that's why the rules matter. what's motivating president to make certain decisions.
there may be not a complete outcry from the american public for kellyanne conway's comments on ivanka trump, so it's difficult to break through, but i think is a going to add up overtime. it's a example of them understanding they moved from campaign to the white house. this is real deal. >> it's going to be tweet that hunts him for months. it's going to lead to the attorney general filing suit. the thing they should be afraid of is discovery of the tax returns. >> they have to be afraid of congress. jason chaffetz is a leader of the house -- is co signing a letter asking for inquiry. asking that the president --
>> not yet. >> because president not be pardoned. that's significant. this could be a moment where we have yes, it's begun. >> why should republicans care about this, evan, and someone says mark zuckerberg. imagine in he is president ask decides i don't have to invest in facebook. >> it goes back to whether the public care enough -- >> the public would care about that, about a president controlling a media. >> the public doesn't care where the legal investigation can go. things happen that cause people to cover up. they get asked about conversations, who -- when you
at it on the surface, nordstrom, ivanka trump's clothing line -- >> you talked about draining the swamp, he is the swamp. he is stilling the swamp. >> we knew that before the election. >> i go back to does it penetrate his base? >> these things are not an is o solation. for the vast majority of the american people they see chaos and fear mongering. we need to -- >> how more hits can kellyanne conway afford as taking all the hits for the president she is taking? >> successful president usually
get big piece of legislation passed in the first year. for me the question is you can do the executive order, but they can backfire. can he pass legislation. that does require working with congress, holing 52 republicans and he doing a lot it make it difficult for himself. >> three days in a row where we've had this. >> thank you all we have to leave it there. we'll be right back. tech: at safelite, we know how busy your life can be.
mom: oh no... tech: this mom didn't have time to worry about a cracked windshield. so she scheduled at safelite.com and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there, so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much! (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.
in case you missed it not every election happens on tuesday. if it's thursday someone is voting somewhere and this time it's in kansas for a special election kansas's fourth congressional seat. the state's parties three parties will hold nominating convention and republicans are holing their today. democrats and libertarian will told there's on saturday. it's first time we'll see the trump affect. that said this one suspect bell weather of what's to come. one we could be watching if congressman time price is confirmed as hhs which is likely his district is becoming
swingish. to see how trump is playing in the suburbs. that would be first special we'll be watching as the months wear on. we'll be back tomorrow where "mtp daily." "for the record" with starts now. we begin at any moment. after a seattle judge put it on hold last friday. you heard it right here. airy melber, it could be coming down at the close of business; is that right? >> it could come out any minute. they could number one, reinstate entire travel ban, a big victory for prid