tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC November 30, 2017 11:00pm-12:00am PST
because they know how important their classroom is and how much those classrooms are improved by those desks. msnbc.com/desk is where you can go to help. everything you've done for the fund that's tonight's "last word." "the 11th hour with brian williams" starts now. the breaking news tonight. a "new york times" bombshell. trump press top republicans to end senate russia inquiry. chairman of the senate intel committee going on the record about his conversation with the president. plus, is there a white house plan to replace secretary of state rex tillerson with cia director mike pompeo, the reporter broke the news is here with us live this evening. backlash glowing from donald trump from our greatest ally. another busy night in this administration as "the 11th
hour" gets under way. >> good morning again, nbc news headquarters here in new york. day 315 of the trump administration. we have breaking news. the top of the broadcast on the matter of the russia investigation. late tonight, the "new york times" posted this headline, trump pressed top republicans to end senate russia inquiry. "the times" cites half a dozen lawmakers and aides in this reporting, including the chairman of the intelligence committee, who is running that committee's investigation into russia's interference in our election, and whether trump's campaign helped them in any way. "the times" reports it this way --
>> several republicans interviewed by "the times" said trump's appeals came across as words of a political newcomer who does not know what is appropriate. and listen to this from tonight's rachel maddow program, when former u.s. attorney joyce vance was asked just how significant a development this is. >> this is really damaging evidence, right? this means that the president tried directly with senator burr, wasn't successful, and then proceeded to go to everyone around him in an effort to put pressure on him. and rachel, one thing we have to remember is it's unlikely we'll ever see a bob mueller indictment of a sitting president, it's more likely we'll see this evidence, this information packaged into some
sort of a report that goes to the -- that will then be used by folks in the house to gauge whether or not impeachment is appropriate. >> important stuff right there. more on that later. also today, attorney general jeff sessions met with the house intel committee behind closed doors about the russia matter and the democrats on the committee were less than thrilled with how he answered their questions. >> i asked the attorney general whether he was ever instructed by the president to take any action that he believed would hinder the russian -- the russia investigation, and he declined to answer the question. >> either the attorney general is one of the most forgetful persons who works out of washington, d.c. and in our nation's history, or he's being less than candid with the american public. >> the justice department later said sessions answered questions today the same way he has before, saying he's never been directed to do anything illegal
or improper. nbc news is reporting donald trump, jr. will meet with the same committee next week. now to our leadoff panel on a thursday night. michael crowley, national security editor and senior correspondent for politico. jennifer rogers, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. these days a lecturer at columbia law. and ken thomas, white house for thor for the associated press. welcome to you all. michael, we knew that russia set the president off. we know the president used the same kind of reasoning with comey face-to-face, as comey testified. we didn't know about a telephone lobbying campaign, right to the people running the investigation on the hill. >> that's right. we did know that he has made phone calls to other members -- >> mitch mcconnell. >> -- not only on capitol hill, but also for instance figures in the intelligence community appears who he was pleading a
similar case to. so this fits with a pattern of the president. brian, i think that joyce vance i believe her name is, made a very astute point, which is that at this point, we still -- there's a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest there could have been collusion with the russians. but it's still circumstantial. it's still vague. we have characters hike carter page or george papadopoulos, who might be fringe on the margins, but was there a collusion, quid pro quo relationship? but whereas the obstruction of justice evidence is piling up and starting to look crystal clear. there's a very consistently discernible pattern. what's interesting to me is despite all that, because a lot of it has come out in a factual, credible way, it still doesn't seem as though the republicans in congress, who may be the ultimate arbiters of the president's fate if it comes to impeachment, are particularly
bothered by it. they describe this behavior as an american comes to london and drives on the right side of the road and is clueless. and not that they think this is some true transgression that deserves a punishment. and that is a remarkable state of affairs. >> kons locounselor, joyce vancd about the president calling burr, but then the people around burr, if everything as reported in "the new york times" tonight is correct, were any laws broken? >> well, i think this is pretty good evidence of the obstruction case that we had going already, the obstruction of the russia investigation that the justice department was undertaking. i don't think it's strong enough for a separate case. sit a crime to obstruct a congressional investigation. but he was definitely trying to persuade, but he doesn't have the same sway as congress that he does over his employee, effectively the fbi director. so i suspect it's not quite
strong enough for a separate obstruction case, but it's very good evidence of his intent, his motivations with respect to the other obstruction case with firing comey. so i think it's important. i don't think it sets up a separate criminal case. >> i have a recollection being a young man that ignorance of the law was no defense. and i see this emerging in "the new york times" reporting, people are saying look, he was new to government and the ways of the federal government. is that a defense? >> not to me. it's not a defense under the law. but it's also not a defense in this case, because we know that before this happened over the summer, he already had fired comey, and the blowback from that led to the mueller investigation. so we know that he knew by now that you're not supposed to obstruct investigations, particularly when they are into you and your campaign. so that doesn't fly at all. >> ken, how surprised were you to see these on the record quotes from burr, right there in "the new york times" piece tonight?
>> i thought that was one of the most striking parts of the piece, that senator burr felt compelled to talk to "the times" on the record, and there were other senators who -- and their aides, who were willing to help paint the picture, as well. you know, this comes in advance of some important meetings on the hill. don junior will be meeting with the house intelligence next week. senator burr remember has said that he also wants to meet with don junior before the end of the month, before the end of the year. so this could be a way for the senate republicans to put that out there right now that -- to make cheer that the president was in fact lobbying and trying to make them move a certain way. >> michael, the verbiage, i'm looking at side by side quotes. the president to james comey, the president to senator burr.
as quoted by the principals as turned around and reported by the news media. we can hold them up to a wright light and see the similarities. patterning doesn't make something true. but patterning makes subsequent cases of it more believable. >> absolutely. again, there is a consistent pattern here. the president has exhibited this behavior toward a variety of different people. and the question -- the final question is, is this a man who truly believes that this is all overblown and unfair, and should be wrapped up because it's some kind of great injustice? or is this someone who has something to hide? and the white house argues the former. the reason to take seriously the latter case is the number of inconsistent, inaccurate, false statements we've been getting from jump associates about their behavior in the campaign, and
since the inauguration stories that have changed, people have not been forthcoming. so the benefit of the doubt is not what the president and his associates, and when you see this behaviobehavior, you have is there something to hide? and he's trying to paint it as a need for a quick exoneration for the greater good of the country, because as "the times" article reported, he seems to be telling people, this is deminishing my stature overseas, my ability to deal with foreign adversaries. so do it for the good of america. and you have to womder if that's what it is about. >> "the new york times" piece takes pain to point out that some of these calls were made without aides present. a lot of the business of the presidency is conducted with a crowd listening. you've got your legislative liaison or your chief of staff. what's the -- what would be the indicator there? >> it says to me that again he knows exactly what he's doing when he makes these calls and he administers this pressure. it's not that he doesn't know
what he's doing and he doesn't understand telling them to wrap this up is problematic because they're investigating him. it tells me that he know he's not supposed to do that. >> can his defense be, there was no collusion and i'm in this to get the best for our country to represent us overseas, this is a distraction? >> well, again, i don't think we have a case of obstruction based on this conduct with the senators and the aides but it adds to the pile. i don't think -- if he fires the fbi director, that's more than just let's move this along, right? that's like, let's take out the person lead thing charge. i don't think that's credible with respect to firing comey. you know, he can try it, he's trying it, but it wouldn't nigh in a court of law. >> hey, ken, that building behind you scheduled the state of the union address for 2018. the president's first official state of the union as president.
set the scene on the evening where all our attention is gathered beneath the dome and the president walks in the house chamber. >> well, it will be interesting at that point will this investigation still be cranking away. you know, the lawyers for the president have assured him that, in all likelihood this investigation will wrap up by the end of the year perhaps the beginning of the year. but i think this is the story is another example of why this investigation and the work being done behind me is likely to drag on. these committees are probably not going to file their reports and release their findings until the spring, and, you know, the mueller investigation it seems like with each week, we peel more of the onion and find more. so in all likelihood, when he does go into that building and deliver his state of the union address, he very well could
still be dealing with this issue. >> you were nodding while ken was speaking. do you think we're just getting started sneer >> absolutely. the news is that mike flynn is likely cooperating. we're just getting under way. >> you concur? >> there was multiple reports we've been hearing similar things, the president's lawyers are telling him mueller could exonerate him by the end of the year, which i find baffling. it seems almost impossible that's the case. why would his lawyers be telling him that? and even if that's not exactly right, why would someone be telling the media that? it's raising this expectation that seems unrealistic. >> new year's eve at mar-a-lago. our thanks to michael crowley, jennifer rogers and ken thomas for being our leadoff panel here tonight. as we approach our first break coming up, first years it's been called the special relationship. but with just his cell phone, how much damage has the president done to america's friendship with the uk?
in his case, he's much more than a business executive. he's a world class player. you bring the unique skills and deep, deep insights, and i've gotten to see it firsthand, into foreign diplomacy, our nation needs to foster stability and security. >> do you want rex tillerson hon the job, mr. president?
>> he's here. >> do you want him to stay in his job? >> that is a quick snapshot of the evolution of president trump's relationship with his secretary of state rex tillerson, former ceo of exxonmobil. today, "new york times" broke this story detailing a secret plan being hatched to push tillerson out and possibly replace him with cia director mike pompeo. a plan reportedly developed by white house chief of staff john kelly. peter baker, who joins us in just a moment, co-author of the article that reads -- >> secretary tillerson has not been on the same page often as the president. you'll recall this nbc news report on a july pentagon briefing when --
>> well, today the white house was all public denials on any plan to push tillerson out. >> when it comes to questions like this, of senior staff and cabinet secretaries when the president loses confidence in somebody, they'll no longer be here. >> what i can tell you is that chief of staff kelly called our department this morning and said that the rumors are not true, that those reports are not true. >> but a senior administration official did tell nbc news that tillerson has been recently discussing a year-end departure with colleagues. "washington post" report says cia chief pompeo has already been preparing to take over the state department. if pompeo actually does get state, several reports point to arkansas republican senator tom cotton as his successor at the cia. all of this reminded us of
something secretary tillerson said almost exactly a month ago. >> some days i feel like i need to do that. >> that brings us to our panel to talk about that. peter baker, chief white house correspondent for "the new york times." anita kumar, white house correspondent, and rick stengel, notably a state department for public diplomacy, public affairs and the former managing editor of "time" magazine. welcome to you all. peter baker, is this a fish wrapped in paper wrapped in a bullet proof vest? was this the most public message, signal to rex tillerson? >> well, it would be hard not to get the message after today. the president has been on the outs with the secretary now for several months, and people have been expecting at some point down the road they would have to come a reckoning, and it feels like it may be coming up close to the end of the year, maybe right afterwards.
but if the secretary was at the white house today, he was there today for two different meetings. you know, he's going through the motions of still doing the job. he's planning to go to europe next week. but imagine what that is going to be like dealing with foreign counterparts who are wondering will he be around much in the new year, and what does it matter if they make a deal with him if they don't have that deal signed off on by the president? >> also, peter, the president is asked do you want rex tillerson on the job? his response "he's here, rex is here," was immediately inducted into the faint praise hall of fame. >> not exactly a rousing endorsement. and sarah sanders just said there are no personnel announcements to be made at this time. well, okay, at this time is today. we'll see what tomorrow brings, we'll see what a week from now brings. it may be it never happens. but john kelly is putting together this plan, because he's hooking to the future and he sees a future in which rex
tillerson may not be secretary of state and they need to be prepared for that. mike pompeo is a guy who seemed to have the president's favor. he's impressed the president in these daily intelligence briefings as the cia director, and to replace him, we're saying this is what the people from the white house are telling us, it could be tom cotton. >> so anita, mike pompeo brings an interesting resume. first at harvard law school, came into the house as part of the tea party coalition. what would he bring to state that tillerson doesn't? >> they differ very, very much. all these things that we have -- that the president has differed with rex tillerson on, north korea diplomacy, the iran nuclear deal, the paris climate talks. this would be something that mike pompeo is much more on the same page with the president. much more of a hardliner, less about diplomacy, which is an interesting job for him to be talking about taking the top diplomatic job in the united states.
so it would very much change the tone and tenor of the state department. but a lot of people i talk to, even people that support him, think he's a smart guy, a nice guy, find it curious that he would get this job, that this job is the one for him. it goes back to this connection that the president has with him. even during the transition when they were trying to find a place for him, there was talk about him taking the secretary of state's job. the president has gotten closer to him over the -- over this year, this full year here. as peter mentioned, they have these daily intelligence briefings every morning and he often sticks around the white house. they just have a connection and the president likes him. >> rick, i know this has been hard for you to watch your former colleagues at the state department. 2,000 career diplomats gone. draconian budget cuts. what will it be like if there's a change of power at the top then to deal with? >> you know, brian, the more i think about this, this first year of the trump presidency may
be looked back on as the year of the moderates in the trump administration. every time somebody leaves, they're going to be replaced by somebody that's a hardliner. the way the state department, as an institution, it will look at pompeo as how does he regard the state department as an institution? less so in terms oh of what his foreign policy is. i do think, and i agree with what everybody has said, he's much more of a hardliner. tillerson was there with mattek and mcmaster, who are globalists and we're going to miss tillerson's moderation. he's singing, you're going to miss me when i'm gone now. >> people should write down that quote. peter baker, on the story by your newspaper tonight on these phone calls the president was making on the russia investigation, other than the apparent integrity and forthrightness of senator burr of north carolina, what stands
out to you? >> well, it's a reminder of how much this is bugging him, how much this is under his skin. this inquiry now has gone on for the entire ten months of his administration, and he considers it to be the albatros around his neck. aside from his professed belief there was no collusion and there's nothing to investigate, he worries that it's hindering his ability to conduct foreign policy, that it influences other country's reactions and interactions with the american government on important issues like syria. that's what you'll hear from the president's defenders. at the same time, obviously, the idea that you go to congress and tell them to knock it off and you tell republicans to shut down an inquiry, you know, does cross lines that most presidents recognize are dangerous and they probably wouldn't do it. >> rick, "the times" mentions
not my words, theirs, just rookie mistake, not knowing the ways of government. it's no defense as we established earlier in the broadcast, but it will in this case make things worse? >> yes. and i think -- unfortunately, he conducts the presidency as those he's still a real estate dealer. i look back at the months, the gravity and the grandeur of the office is going to change it. it hasn't changed him one bit. i don't think he understands the law. i don't think he understands norms. i don't think he understands customs. he's just bothered by this. he has a pebble in his shoe and wants to get it out. >> anita kumar, how do you parse the white house statement to this "new york times" article. i found the wording curious. >> right. what are they going to say, roux it? they have been say thing all year as, you know, we heard about him trying to, you know, circumvent the investigation other times. they don't have much to say, but they'll just say he wasn't
trying to do anything, and it's just the normal conversation, or whatever. but they -- there's not much they can say basically. it is a damaging story for them. >> terrific conversation, based on tonight's breaking news with three great guests. our thanks. coming up, members of parliament in great britain blasting the american president, calling on the prime minister to uninvite donald trump. the damage done to what we always call the special relationship when "the 11th hour" continues.
it's christmas, but trump is just beyond the pale, says more or less everyone. >> on the basis of what we already know about this president, that mere words are not enough. action is needed now! not a slap on the wrist! cancel the state visit. >> the president was stupid in what he did. >> donald trump is activity sewing seeds of atread in our country. >> by sharing it, he is a racist, incompetent, unthinking, or all three. >> can you believe what they're saying in parliament, as the white house continues to stand by anti-muslim videos, shared by the president. relations between the united states and one of its oldest, closest allies have deteriorated
since president donald trump retweeted videos originally posted by a group called britain first. the organization has been condemned by the british government as anti-immigrant, racist, and hateful. the white house today acknowledged the president wasn't familiar with the group before retweeting and had this defense. >> look, i think what he's done is elevate the conversation to talk about a real issue and a real threat. that's extreme violence and extreme terrorism, something we know to be very real and something the president feels strongly about talking about and making sure is an issue every day, and we're looking at the best ways to protect americans. >> president's actions are escalating calls for the prime minister to rescind an invitation for the president to vis visit. a working visit planned for january is off.
>> downing street has not confirmed the report. the state department is also cautioning that the anti-muslim videos could put american security personnel overseas in danger. with us to talk about this tonight, jaer michigeremy bash, national security analyst. jeremy, you're often with us as part of our coverage when we're covering the first moments of a terrorist attack, and you have often had the opportunity to point out the lightning fast and constant communications between scotland yard and the united states. between the u.s. and the uk as part of that relationship. really, their goal is getting together to form a safer world.
talk about the relationship and how much damage this could cause. >> brian, this episode perfectly encapsulates the trump presidency. why do i say that? because it encapsulates four essential elements. first, he embraces conspiracy theorys, he embraces alternative facts, down right lies. second, he promulgates islamaphobia. third, he's undermining our ally, a key ally, the most critical ally, an ally that has fought and died with us on battlefields all over the globe. and fourth, he's endangered our national security and put our own troops and personnel at risk. so i can't think of a single act that's more irresponsible and more dangerous than what the president did today. >> beyond the u.s.-uk relationship bihat rally, what does this do for our image
around the planet? >> those were our friends talking about the american president, just imagine what our adversaries are saying. it really gives credence to those who engage in propaganda about what america stands for, and those that want to rally the jihadists, the radicals to rise up, attack not just our country, but in fact our way of life. so again, when our president uses conspiracy theorists and advances islamaphobia, and undermines allies, that gives an open playing field for our adversaries to do the same. >> the one resume idem i left off your bio is former house intelligence. i asked you about "the new york times" reporting tonight that the president made this round of calls saying in effect can't we just wrap this up and let it go. >> yeah, brian, my reaction to that is, when you're under federal criminal investigation for obstruction of justice, it's not a good idea to engage in
obstruction of justice. that's just a pro tip. this was an effort clearly by the president to shut down a valid federal investigation. if people destroy documents or tamper with witnesses in the context of a congressional investigation, that is a violation of federal law, and the president putting the arm on senators to shut down this investigation is not much different. >> jeremy bash, always a pleasure to have you. thank you so much for joining us on a thursday night. and coming up, some drama tonight in the u.s. senate that the republicans in charge were not counting on. a late live report when we come right back.
republican senators who have traditionally been deficit hawks, and there's corker of tennessee who was quickly surrounded by management on the senate floor tonight, those deficit hawks may be digging in. they had hoped to schedule a vote for tomorrow, despite a singular detail that few people know what's in the bill. mercifully, we have someone with us that can explain all of this, as she does every day for a national radio audience. that's kelsey snell, congressional reporter for npr. so what happened tonight? what is going on and what does the future hold perhaps? >> well, leaders say that this is just a hiccup, that they hit a bump on the road and they're going to fix this problem overnight. essentially what happened is earlier tonight, a group of these deficit hawks that we talk about, senator corker, senator flake, and senator ron johnson of wisconsin, decided that they wanted to make sure that this bill wasn't going to add to the deficit in the long-term, in the
future. there's a problem, though, that they got a score from the congressional scorekeepers that said this bill would only do about a third of the work they thought it would to growing the economy. so they had a bunch of money they needed to make up, and they were feeling squeamish about whether or not the tax cuts were a good idea. so they're going back to the drawing board, trying to find a way to make it so that they don't blow up the deficit. >> so i'm hearing some of these names that are getting wobbly. we saw corker and the full-court press that surrounded him. but also johnson and flake and collins, and if too much of that happens, 52-48 starts to go away really fast. >> it does. but we should note that senator collins did stay in line through all of this. she's one of the people she wants to get to yes. as we talked to her, she talks about how leaders are coming her way and how she feels like she's getting more and more comfortable with this bill. who we're seeing get further away is the two very important
people who are retiring, jeff flake and bob corker. they are going in here, they are long-term deficit hawks and they have a reputation to uphold. this may be one of their last acts. so they want to put a stamp down saying they left congress and the economy in a place that they can respect. >> while i have you on the sexual harassment front, the issue that is emerging for the latter half of 2017 and beyond, john conyers, what are the big names two have come out and called for the senior most man in the house to step down? >> well, we've seen house minority leader nancy pelosi said it's time for him to resign. we've seen many of his colleagues in democratic leadership, including the one who runs the campaign arm of house democrats, they're very aware of the fact that they have staked out a space over dekasd as being people who see themselves as protectors of women, champions of moving women
up in powerful positions. it's so very hard for them to come out and say, you know, it's okay for one of our own to have these allegations lodged against them. it's not a situation they want to be in right now and it's very uncomfortable ground. >> michigan democrat two years away from his 90th birthday. kelsey snell, always a pleasure. thank you very much for explaining everything for us tonight from capitol hill. coming up for us, the american president reportedly believing in conspiracy theorys, retweeting fake news, picking a fight with our closest ally. just how far from normal are we these days? that's where steve schmidt comes in. he's with us when we come back.
you know what concerns me about the american press is this endless, endless attempt to label the guy as some kind of kook, not fit to be president. i think he's a kook, he's crazy. i think he's unfit for office. >> same man, republican senator lindsay graham, south carolina, today, and rewind to february of 2016, using the exact same ha language. president trump has apparently earned graham's support. steve schmidt is back with us, republican veteran of the bush white house, and these days an msnbc political analyst.
steve, i think it's fair to say that members of our on-air family, yourself included, nicolle wallace included, had hopes for senator graham, who would be a bulwarbulwark, but t what's going on in the republican controlled senate, if you don't mind quoting from your twitter feed -- >> steve, what is happening in the u.s. senate? >> we're seeing a complete and total collapse, brian, of my
rigor around the policymaking process in this country. we're a nation of 330 million people. this legislation affects everybody. the number one economic challenge of our time that's driving so much turbulence in our politics, so much extremism in the parties is the fact that working class people haven't seen a real wage increase in a generation. it's creating a crisis of competence in free market american capitalism for millennials and so many other americans. and it can have a profoundly bad effect for future opportunity in this country. this bill does nothing about that problem. it does nothing to drive economic growth. what it does do is it lowers corporate tax rates. no one pays the statutory rate in the first place. and it does it by loading up another $1.5 trillion on the national credit card that will
be paid by my kids and grand kids, and your kids and grand kids. and it's just a travesty. >> steve, if we've got folks watching tonight who went off to war as young men and fought side by side with british soldiers, fought to keep the british isles free of tyranny and save the world, what would you say to them about what has become this week of our relationship with our greatest ally? >> well, the relationship is so much bigger than donald trump. the enduring ties between the british and american peoples. i think tonight about the towering statue of fdr in london, wearing a naval cape. the indispensable partner to churchill to saving the world from darkness. the statue built by the melted down pennies and small donations
of ordinary british men and women. the british parliament, and their condemnation is righteous. what the president of the united states did in tweeting out this video from a fascist british extremist, paramilitary group, a white supremacist group, which exalted in the president of the united states' recognition of it, for them to say he's not deserving of a state visit, though it breaks my heart to say it, i agree with them completely. if you look at it from the british perspective, to see this disgrace in the white house, in the oval office, to be standing next to her majesty the queen, the assault on her dignity that his presence would represent, the divisiveness that his visit would cause, the protests it would spark, and the stain that it would leave on the relationship isn't worth it. and by all means, they have
every right to cancel the proposed state visit. he earned it. >> steve, finely your reaction to the reporting in "the new york times" tonight, that the president made more than a round of calls to say, in effect, can't we just shut this thing down and move on about the russia investigation? >> well, it's completely inappropriate for him to be doing so. and as we look at this -- at this investigation, whether it's the mueller investigation, which seems to be moving closer and closer to the oval office on the question of russia, this just seems to me to be more evidence, and i'm not sure if it's criminal evidence, but more evidence of a constancy of an effort to obstruct the inquiries that are taking place into finding out what happened in this election. but when we think tonight about the question you previously asked, brian, what excitement
vladamir putin must have to see the condemnation in the british parliament of an american president. he probably can't believe his good luck and his good fortune, to see the damage that this president is doing to america's essential alliances all over the world. >> powerful stuff, a sobering thought to end on. steve schmidt, thank you, friend, as always for joining us on the broadcast. a final break for us. coming up, how the white house plans to get the president as close as possible to a visit they said he would not make. we'll explain right after this. i love you, basement guest bathroom.
last thing before we go here tonight has to do with a crafty move by the trump white house that seems to allow the president to campaign for roy moore in alabama in that senate race without really campaigning for roy moore. in fact, without really setting foot in alabama. "the washington post" reported that come next friday, donald trump will travel to pensacola, florida for a political rally. pensacola, as you may know, is in the panhandle, often regarded as the de facto extension of southern alabama. and pensacola, just about 20 miles from the alabama line, shares a local news media market with mobile in alabama. the post reports trump is buoyed
by moore's standing in the polls and feels his support for moore gets the credit for that. sarah huckabee sanders has said the president's schedule just wouldn't allow a trip to alabama before the election. but apparently there's time to visit the neighboring state of florida. at the rally, the president is expected to attack both national democrats and doug jones, the democrat running against roy moore. for his part, roy moore denies my wrongdoing and in fact, changed his story in recent d days. after first he told sean hannity he remembered two of his accusers, even called one a good girl, he's now saying he's never met any of his accusers. the special election in alabama is december 12th. that is our broadcast for a thursday night. thank you so much for being with us here with us. good night from nbc news headquarters here in new york.
his tweets. he's been one of the best presidents i've served under. >> the republican bargain. supporting an increasingly dangerous president to get more money for the very rich. >> failure is not an option. >> tonight the senate votes on a tax cut bill. amid new calls for the president's impeachment. i love wikileaks. >> the radio show host who could be the linchpin of the russia investigation. plus pressure on the longest-serving member of congress to step down. after multiple allegations of sexual harassment. >> congressman conyers should resign. what concerns me about the american press is this endless, endless attempt to label the guy as some kind
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on