Skip to main content

tv   Deadline White House  MSNBC  January 9, 2018 1:00pm-2:00pm PST

1:00 pm
tweets and all the statements. we have a president who's creating constantly a sense of crisis, even though the white house under him is running better than it had in the past. >> that does it for me, thank you for watching deadline the white house with nicole wallace starts right now. hi, everyone. almost caught me with my glasses on. it's 4:00 in new york, it was margaret thatcher who said if you want something said ask a man, if you want something done, ask a woman. senator dianne feinstein, the chairman of the judiciary committee released 10,000 of testimony from the firm behind the dossier, fusion gps, feinstein saying today, quote, the innuendo and misinformation circulating about the transcript are part of a deeply troubling effort to undermine the investigation into potential collusion and obstruction of
1:01 pm
justice, the only way to set the record straight to make the transcript public. the founders of fusion gps warned in an op-ed last week that the dossier was being used for political purposes, writing, quote republicans have refused to release full transcripts of our firm's testimony even as they selectively leak details from the far right. the transcripts released today by feinstein debunk the theory that the firm behind the dossier had a political agenda. in fa he said he was professionally obligated to do it. like if you're a lawyer and you find out about a crime, in a lot of countries, you must reporter that. also today we're learning the transcript described a walk in whistle blow eer from the trump team who was sharing similar
1:02 pm
information with the fbi. quote, my understanding was that the fbi believed chris at this point, that they believed chris might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing and one of these pieces of intelligence was from inside the trump organization. we're also learning steele cut off contact to the fbi in t. let's get right to msnbc intelligence reporter and "new york times" justice reporter, at the table associated press white house reporter jonathan lam mere, elise jordan nbc analyst and former aid in the former george w. bush white house. also here, steve schmidt,
1:03 pm
republican strategist and msnbc contributor. let me start with you and let me ask you a simple question. why did dianne feinstein release the transcript? >> well, we haven't heard her explain it nicole, but one can only assume that it had a lot to do with that criminal referral against christopher steel on friday that was made yuan nauni ly on friday. accusing christopher steele of potentially misleading the fbi. >> you write most of the stories from which i learn these facts, but donald trump's allies in the media and some of them in congress are engaged in the smear campaign against the fbi, describing it as in tatters. what i deduce from reading the kra transcripts of glen simpson's testimony before the senate judiciary committee, is that
1:04 pm
christopher steele went to a meeting with an fbi contact in rome, i don't want to characterize it too much, but it had the impression that the fbi was unfazed by what he was telling them so he left with this belief that it hadn't been elevated. in fact the fbi had opened an investigation, they had this walk in whistle blower, which i understand from some reporting might have been george pop develop li popadopoulos is that your understanding? >> from what i understand from the timeline, this transcript one of the real values of releasing this is it helps us establish a clear understanding of how this began. the fbi opened this investigation in the final days of july based on the information that the australians gave the fbi about george popadopoulos who was running his mouth about the russians having dirt on hillary clinton russ plus the
1:05 pm
understanding that had just come on the heels of the hack of the democratic computers and the release of those emails. and our understanding was that the senior fbi people that were doing this investigation, they don't receive the information from steele until august, and ultimately they don't go out to interview him until october. so you can see why steele would be frustrated and think, oh, these guys don't care anything about what i have given them, but really they had already opened an investigation at that point. >> so it becomes abundantly clear, that far from being in tatters, the fbi in view of the information that was being passed on by steele, so acutely aware of the political climb in which that information was being passed along said that steel did not, doesn't this completely obliterate the critics on the
1:06 pm
right that the fbi is a biassed corrupted law enforcement agency? >> what we know about how the fbi handled the clinton administration and the trump administration, the fbi all thought that she was going to win, they didn't want to be seen as going easy on hillary clinton. that was why they released that investigation in october. and they had a super close hold on the trump administration, they didn't want trump who was obviously going to lose the election, they didn't want him to come out and sort of question the results. so they gave trump the benefit of the doubt here. i think it's a totally fair point to ask, did political opposition research paid for by hillary clinton impact in any way an ongoing fbi investigation involving the trump campaign? i mean that's a fair question to ask. i don't think that is necessarily being done in bad
1:07 pm
faith. but i think a lot of what you call the smear campaign is being done in bad faith in order to muddy the water that was already even more complicated. >> is there any effort to stop an investigation into getting to the bottom of information that was originally funded by mr. singer, a new york billionaire associated with republican causes filtered through the free beacon, a conservative website, ultimately the tab picked up by sources and supporters of hillary clinton, is there any effort to stop an investigation into finding out what happened to fusion? i mean isn't that white fusion gps has testified before three committees for more than 21 hours? >> fusion is saying essentially they did a job, they were like, you know, a guy who goes about doing his job and comes across a crime scene and they feel an obligation to report it.
1:08 pm
the testimony today indicates that they didn't set out to try and go and fuel this fbi investigation. they did it because they thought a crime had been committed or was being committed and they felt obligated to report it. obviously you have seen that testimony, i'm sure that's not going to end the criticism, but certainly any time you release more testimony, transparency helps us understand what's going on. there's no doubt that fusion gps is going to continue to be part of this debate and i'm sure it's not going to quell the republican criticism. >> chuck grassley was asked by one of his constituents in rural iowa if he was going to release the transcriptnd then something happened. he changed his mind after the simpson testimony, to the position he held today when dianne feinstein released the transcripts over the objections
1:09 pm
of the republicans on the committee. do you know what changed? >> i don't. there are some reasonable good reasons not to release witness testimony, it's sensitive, you know, it can sort of motivate other witnesses to not cooperate. well, look, it a good thing that we're seeing this, because it clears up a lot of misrepresentation. and a lot of people are getting spun up about the idea that simpson said that there was a walk in source, but two sources from fusion gps told me that that was inaccurate, he misspoke and he was talking about the australia jan dn diplomat that russians had democratic emails well before that was public. it becomes clear that the fbi knew about that well before they debriefed krchristopher steele rome that happened in september. he sat down with the fbi and told them anything he had been gathering. he thought that trump was subject to blackmail, he thought
1:10 pm
he was an intelligence risk to russia, and he wanted the fbi to do something about it. we now know that the fbi was doing something about it. apparently they didn't tell steele. so steele and fusion gps apparently started making some of this available to reporters. >> and john mccain, wasn't john mccain someone who was in receipt of some of the contents of the dossier and also handed it on to law enforcement? let me ask the question that i asked matt, the general smear against the fbi, from the president who describes the bureau as quote, in tatters, and others from the far right trump world echo chamber, suggests a corrupted, a biassed and unprofessional law enforcement agency. can you see anything in this 10 hours of testimony that was released today that suggests the fbi did anything in its handling of steele or the information created by fusion gps?
1:11 pm
>> no, but in fairness, glenn simpson doesn't really know what the fbi did with the information, and he shouldn't. this is a secret investigation. i speaking to a former fbi official today who says he really fears for the image of the fbi in middle america where a lot of people are watching right wing media and seeing day after day, the fbi denigrated. this is a well regarded law enforcement whose primary mission is counter terrorism, keeping the u.s. safe from overseas terrorists and domestic terrorists and there's a real concern that this could have lasting impact. >> all right, because ken delaney breaks so many stories, we need more of them. the "new york times" reporting this hour that steve bannon is stepping down from his position as executive chairman of breitbart news, jeremy peters who broke the story for the "new york times" spoke to me on the phone. jeremy, big, big deal and a big
1:12 pm
statement in favor of donald trump from breitbart. >> that's absolutely right, nicole, i mean what you saw happen here over the last few days has forced an inevitable conclusion for steve bannon and to a career at a website that he helped put at the forefront of american 3politics. it reshaped the way we look at immigration, it reshaped the way we look at donald trump and right now steve bannon is walking away hanging his head low. >> and jeremy, i think we have got the breitbart headline announcing news about themselves, breitbart also normalizing some of the darker forces, if you talk to traditional republicans, people like me in the least, that certainly the reputation of breitbart inside the republican party. what kind of a statement is this that they want to stand by a president whose one big
1:13 pm
legislative accomplishment was something that benefits corporates and who in a meeting today showed democrats and republicans doing something along the lines of daca. >> that's exactly the problem, the dilemma that republicans, i think were always going to find themselves in with president trump. would he be faithful to the pledges he made during the campaign, and i think for the hard right, the far right, for the bannon wing of the republican party, what you're seeing right now is possibly the beginnings of a rupture. and what i can't answer for you, but i think one of the most defining political questions of our era is going to be is whether or not this is the beginning of a break, if steve bannon is just the only one
1:14 pm
right now who got caught saying what other conservatives we all know are saying privately, and that's that they don't trust donald trump, that they think that he is not going to be faithful to what he ran on anda he's ultimately going to sell conservatives out. >> jeremy, let me hit you with one more and then i'll let you go. to steve bannon in the book calls ivanka trump dumb as a brick, accuses jared kushner as double dealing and lots of derogatory things about the kushner family businesses, the only thing for which he apologized was calling don jr. treasonous, was there maybe a mistake with the apology, did it not go far enough? >> quite frankly it was too little, too late, i'm not certain that an apology the
1:15 pm
minute that the michael wolf book came out would have been enough. i wouldn't rule out steve bannon working his way back into donald trump's good graces, you're never fully out with donald trump. and the moment that trump needs steve bannon, although at the moment, i don't know what that would be he's going to come calling again. i think that though for the moment, steve bannon is going to do what the people around him have been encouraging him to do for weeks, which is to take a bit of a breather, slow down and reassess. because steve has made some unforced errors, not unlike the president he once served that have really jeopardized what was once a promising political career. >> jeremy peters, we're grateful to have you jump on the phone with us, and continue the scoop, and the line's open for another 45 minutes, if you get anymore
1:16 pm
juicy tidbits. >> some have described these two as scorpions in a bowl trying to kill each other. do you think they're done with each other or do you think there's a trump-bannon 2.0? >> certainly in trump world, you're never truly out. the divorce with his former campaign manager cory lewandowski is about as ugly as they come and we know that trump still talks to cory lewandowski frequently. >> and when he needs to fire somebody, he calls lewandowski. >> bannon knows and people he's been talking to, he's been expressing privately he knows the white house is angry and that this fury is going tlos a while, but he's already predi predicting that after a cooling off period, he does believe he'll be back in the president's good graces. the white house sent out a
1:17 pm
signal more or less to republicans, it's me or him and right now republicans, conservatives are almost to a person siding with the president. >> i knew that steve bannon was in trouble elise when i called him an incompetent boob on the roy moore story without being -- any of donald trump's other people that he dials up for political advice, he is a lesser political strategist than anyone who has ever had that title in the white house before. i wonder who today he's on the phone with, or who is he at a bar downing v-8 with? or whatever he's drinking? who's standing by steve bannon today? >> i think you have nailed the most important point, who at this hour is steve bannon's con citizen general si. he thought that he had just as big of a constituency as donald
1:18 pm
trump, he was down in alabama, reporters at his event in lower alabama saying that he looked like he was campaigning for president himself. he had really warmed to that role of being in the spotlight. what utter irony, though, that this comes on the day the president donald trump announces he is going to davos, it is fully over, it is dead. steve bannon is dead. he's like i'm getting to davos. >> before we put any dirt, though, on the political coffin, i have to say, i'm going back out to see the trump voters and what they voted for, these were democrats who flipped in michigan, pennsylvania, florida, wisconsin and ohio. what they voted for was the bannon stuff. they voted for -- and for nafta. they voted for economic isolationism. they were not angry about the wall, they were not angry about a muslim ban. these were all things is that steve bannon had on his white
1:19 pm
board, whether you want to call them accomplishments or embarrassments, these are the only things that president trump has gotten done in his presidency. how much of a hit is it for donald trump not to have steve bannon there with the animated and excited -- >> to your point of him not being on the level of a david axelrod, i think it's true, he's the only one that came in with ideas and with a plan of action and so that's who they have defaulted on for many of the powers they started out with in temperatur terms of the executive orders on immigration and the travel ban. there wasn't another political brain for policy agenda or any plan of action in the white house. and so it defaulted to steve bannon. i disagree with him on policy, but one of the things i think he
1:20 pm
was correct about in the book was that the legal expoisure to the trump family is absolutely more than has been reported to tate. ivanka trump is not mentioned in a number of these stories that he has been mentioned, her exposure is the same on the kushner side as on the donald trump side. and that also is contributing to the fact that we're seeing this very public fallout. >> let me bring steve schmidt into this. under the theory that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, there are some people and some republicans in washington they loathed everything that steve bannon stood for, they loathed him pressuring the president to get out of nafta. however they loved the things that steve boannon said about just what amy was talking about,
1:21 pm
the trump kids, and he describes ivanka as dumb as a brick, their naive today combined with what is safe to describe as hu bruhun the political front. >> look at what steve -- they dug from the bottom of this toxic swamp of white nationalism and made common cause with some of the most odous elements in american life. and, you know, he is somebody who has done real damage to the social and political fabric of the country, as has the website. now the statements that he made in the book, you seem to me to be statements of the obvious and so it's an inside account that confirms what many of us believe
1:22 pm
and know to be going on in the white house. but i certainly don't think that steve bannon is going to have a role in opposition to donald trump. he's somebody who holds extreme political views, frankly we didn't talk enough about over the last year his opposition to what he calls globalism, these are crack pot ideas that emanate out of him and have always been crack pot ideas and so this is someone who i think touched the third rail here, overcome by hubris, he flew too close to the sun and he did the one thing that you must not do around donald trump, he criticized the president, criticized the president's family and made the point that trump was on his way to being a failed president. and for that, it seems there will be no forgiveness for steve
1:23 pm
bannon. >> let me get to two of the low points in the trump candidacy and presidency in which steve bannon was about the only one by his side, one was the ""access hollywood" jsh hollywood" he kept a list of people that -- he crossed people like chris christie off the list because he wouldn't go on and defend him after the billy bush tape. any politician who says the things that donald trump said on the "access hollywood" tape and he finds good people on both sides of a neo nazi rally. >> he was clearly unbothered by anything that trump said on the "access hollywood" tape. nearly everyone in the country was appalled by it and steve bannon wasn't.
1:24 pm
in regards to charlottes ville, we have neo nazis marching by torchlight, saying that nazis will not replace us, venerating the most evil regime in all of human history and steve bannon's advice to the president of the united states is to go out and say, hey, there's good people on both sides. and one of steve bannon's enduring legacies is giving room for these extreme elements to surface to feel empowered and to feel legitimately part of the debate in american society around our politics. he main streamed nationalism, white nationalism, neo naziism as part of a coalition in support of the trump candidacy.
1:25 pm
it is an appalling and dubious and ignominius policy that he will leave behind. >> who is more responsible for killing the republican party that we once knew, steve bannon or donald trump? >> well, they both are nicole, but it's also the cowards in the congress who say behind the scenes that, hey, this is all wrong, but won't say it publicly, that's what killed the conservative movement and i think will do great damage to the republican party. >> all right, nobody is going anywhere, when we come back, bob mueller is looking to interview donald trump as part of his russia investigation, but the topic may not be russian collusion, it may focus on on struckati obstruction of justice. and donald trump who spent most of the primary raking jeb bush
1:26 pm
over the coals said that he wanted an immigration bill full of love. but if that's not enoug, we offer innovative investing tools to prepare you for the future. looks like you hooked it. and if that's not enough, we'll help your kid prepare for the future. don't hook it kid. and if that's still not enough, we'll help your kid's kid prepare for the future. looks like he hooked it. we'll do anything... takes after his grandad. seriously anything, to help you invest for the future. ally. do it right.
1:27 pm
seriously anything, to help you invest for the future. they cahow many of 'em?e, sir! we don't know. dozens. all right! let's teach these freaks some manners! good luck out there, captain! thanks! but i don't need luck, i have skills... i don't have my keys. (on intercom) all hands. we are looking for the captain's keys again. they are on a silver carabiner. oh, this is bad. as long as people misplace their keys,
1:28 pm
you can count on geico saving folks money. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
1:29 pm
brand-new reporting today in the "new york times" by one of our guests said that bob mueller is interesting in questioning donald trump about his former national security advisor michael flynn and about the firing of jim comey as a signal to watchers of mueller's close counsel that he intends to focus on obstruction of justice. trump would have no legal grounds other than the fifth amendment to reject a subpoena. talk about the precedent for presidents of both parties, i remember my old boss george bush spent about 75 minutes with pat
1:30 pm
fitzgerald when he was investigating the leaking of valerie plame's name and there's no secret that bill clinton was in an investigation when he perjured himself. so this is not new ground. >> he's going to have to give bob mueller some information here. our understanding is that this is a primar apreliminary, there we want to interview the president, or we want him to appear before a grand jury or we want him to answer the question, it was just like before we move forward or close the investigation, we're going to have to talk to the president at some point. i don't know if we're there yet, we're certainly weeks away if not more and there's been no date set yet, if he refuses, they're going to hit him with a
1:31 pm
grand jury subpoena and he had told everybody in the white house, i want to cooperate, i want to get out from under this, it's not going to be a good look if he says no i won't cooperation. maybe we can answer written questions or we'll agree on the parameters, but he's going to have to give some information to bob mueller. >> i thought of you and ken delaney, this is from jab goldsmith, he served in the bush doj, he was head of the office of fiscal policy. why wasn't rosen steve recused? he possesses information about the president's beliefs and motives in the firing of jim comey, since he appears to many to have been used by the president and was reportedly very angry about it and rosenstein will very likely be a fact witness in connection with the comey firing, it's hard to understand why he did not have a
1:32 pm
conflict of interest the moment mueller's investigation turned to the firing of comey. so string together your information there today that mueller wants to talk to the president about the firing of jim comey, and rosenstein's role which was to write a memo which was supposed to be a cover story. as though rosenstein's case was the one that the white house was suggesting was the reason for firing comey when donald trump told our own lester holt that it was was of the comey probe. your thoughts? >> it's a great question and certainly we have asked her and we have been trying to get an answer to, far be it from me to question the deputy attorney general. >> if you've got him on hold and you don't have time for him, transfer him to my cell. >> i think the general thinking would be, look, rod rosenstein
1:33 pm
would say, i wrote this memo because this is what i believbelieve ed and i think there are amount of people who know rod who are inside the justice department saying rod rosenstein really does believe that memo that comey was off the reservation in his handling of the hillary clinton emails and he was repent tent about it in his may testimony before the senate and that we can't have a guy like that and that rod rosenstein believes that and see his role in any sort of shenanigans and firings is not relevant to the investigation, if anything improper happened it wasn't at rod's level. that was one argument. another argument, maybe it's just better for mueller to not try to jam up the deputy attorney general and get him to recuse himself. because, you know there's no indication that rod has interfered with this investigation, why make it more complicated than it needs to be
1:34 pm
and just let this thing run it's course. but i mean it's a great question, and we have tried to put that to the justice department repeatedly and all they have said is we're going to follow the recusal rules, we're going to follow the rules and if there comes a time when he has to recuse, he will. >> with us now, democratic congressman eric swallow a member of the house intel committee, i know you're running around, thank you for making some time for us. let me ask you about two big stories in the newsanne fienstd release the transcripts of the the fusion gps documents. >> sometimes the best way out is through. and she was running into hurdle
1:35 pm
after hurdle from chairman grass lee who did not want the document released, couldn't provide any classified information that it shouldn't be released and now it's in the public domain because there's been a concerted effort from the conservative voices in the media to discredit the fbi's work and i think the transcript demonstrates the credibility of christopher steele and the timeline of what took place which discredits the republicans line of attack that the whole investigation was driven by hillary clinton funded opposition research paper. >> the testimony that describes christopher steele's interaction with his fbi contact in rome, also depicts an fbi very discrete, very professional and not even remotely close to the fbi described as being in
1:36 pm
tatters by donald trump or being investigated by your counterp t counterparts on the republican side of the house intel committee. >> and that's the opposition that i have had sitting through hours and days of this investigation with fbi witnesses. now the republicans are attempting as i would see in the courtroom as a prosecutor. i called it the nose against the painting trick, where they would try to point out one little flaw in an investigation and convince you that that is the whole story. and i would always liken that to keeping your nose too close to the painting. you need to step back and look at the whole picture here and the whole picture depicts a trump campaign that was willing and eager to work the russians and what we have to sort out is did that amount to any crime. >> glen simpson and peter fitch penned an op-ed, do you think they knew that the referral from republican senators chuck
1:37 pm
grassley and republican senator lindsay graham was coming for their one-time colleague christopher steele? the only charges that have been suggested to be brought criminally by republicans looking into russian collusion are against british intelligence agent christopher steel, it's pretty remarkable without knowing the full picture as you just said. do you think that the founders of the firm knew some of the political machinations that were to come and do you think that that op-ed had any influence on either the referral for criminal charges or senator feinstein's decision to release the transcript? >> hard to tell, but certainly you can't avoid hearing these republican attacks against the fbi and the dossier. i think it's fair, nicole, to ask who paid for the dossier, what role it played in the fbi investigation, but if you're going to ask those questions, why wouldn't you asked if what's alleged in the dossier is also true, so they just want half of the answer, they don't want to
1:38 pm
hear about the evidence that corroborates what was alleged in the dossier and i think that's going to lead to an incomplete investigation. >> so where do things stand right now in your committee? does dianne feinstein turning over these transcripts suggest that all is not sympatico on the house side. how's intel? >> we don't have too many more relevant witnesses coming in, we have more efforts to discrete the fbi under way, but as far as relevant recipient witnesses, we haven't scheduled them to come in yet and testify. there's still time to keep our investigation alive, to subpoena witnesses, review documents. nicole, the problem with our investigation is we're at a take them at their word investigation when we have subpoena power, so trump campaign officials will come in and say something about their contacts with russia and we're not curious enough or
1:39 pm
willing enough to corroborate that through subpoenaing bank records or text messages or cell phone records, and again, i think that's the wrong direction. >> i want to ask you about something in the "washington post" today. who write about the white house's frustration that they're now dealing in the white house press briefing at the president's press conference at camp david over the weekend, with questions about the president's mental acuity, about his fitness to serve, i wonder what you made about the president's half a dozen tweets on the topic over the weekend, and i wonder what you make of the work you're trying to do getting to the bottom of russia, or the role that russia played in the 2016 election, while there's a debate raging, inside this white house even about how they deal with it about the president's mental fitness? >> i don't think you have to be a psychiatrist to understand
1:40 pm
that the president is unfit for office, that he at times is delusional, that he's belligerent, that he's ill tempered. that comes from his own speeches, his own interviews, his own tweets. i think it's pretty clear. i was encouraged today to see at the white house, a scene that i think a lot of americans welcome, which is republicans and democrats sitting down and talking to the president for about 45 minutes sorting out some of these important issues that face us around immigration, if we can have more days like that and fewer days where we's trying to spark a war with north korea, i think we'll have a much better country ahead. >> i agree with you. by partisan immigration reform is better than talking about the size of one's button. let me ask you something i was asking about right before you came on.
1:41 pm
jack goldsmith who served in the administration of george w. bush asked a question today about rod rosenstein, he talks about how in light of all of the reporting out there now that the interview with the president may be around questions that pertain to the obstruction of justice investigation not just thea ar narrow question of russian collusion, i wonder what you make of the question about whether rod rosenstein may have already recused himself and we just don't know about it. >> it's a fair question to ask, and i found rod rosenstein to be a seriously prosecutor, and all i know is that he asked for an opinion on this, when senator jeff sessions asked whether he should recuse, he was told by lawyers that he should and he did. i hope that question has been asked of independent lawyers because it does seem that there
1:42 pm
is a focus on obstruction of justice. >> thank you for spending some time with us. we're going to get reaction from everybody still here on our panel on the other site of this break, don't go anywhere. let's begin. yes or no? do you want the same tools and seamless experience across web and tablet? do you want $4.95 commissions for stocks, $0.50 options contracts? $1.50 futures contracts? what about a dedicated service team of trading specialists? did you say yes? good, then it's time for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need.
1:43 pm
looks like we have a couple seconds left. let's do some card twirling twirling cards e*trade. the original place to invest online. kayak compares hundreds of travel and airline sites so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. cheers! kayak. search one and done. with smart, revolutionary hhearing aid technology available right now, why does it take most of us 7 years --
1:44 pm
when we know we have hearing loss -- -- to actually do something about it? will you continue to feel left out... to constantly ask people to repeat themselves... and to miss out on so much in life... for all that time? really? with the aarp hearing care program, provided by hearusa, why wait even 7 minutes? call right now. and receive the highest level of quality, care and value in the industry. which is why so many people have trusted us to get their lives back. because the time to enjoy virtually invisible hearing aids... to enjoy how they connect with your tv... to enjoy their extraordinary sound right now. discover hearing care beyond compare. attention aarp members. call hearusa today to find out how you can save an additional $500 off your next purchase of a pair of digital hearing aids. call us today.
1:45 pm
we're back and i've got to bring ken delaney into this conversation about rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who now oversees the russia investigation, a piece from a prominent, well respected, nonhyperbolic legal scholar jack goldsmith today posing questions about why, whether and if rod rosenstein should or has recused himself? >> we have been asking the same questions and getting the same answers from the justice department, he'll recuse when he feels it's necessary to recuse. but a lot of legal experts feel that it is inevitable that he
1:46 pm
will have to recuse. i have heard that he's delaying that as long as possible because he feels like he's in the position to protect the mueller investigation. he's supervising the mueller investigation, he's approving the budget, things seem to be going well in that regard and it may just be that mueller likes it the way it is and rosenstein likes it the way it is and they're going to keep it going that way as long as possible. >> and just a hypothetical, if he were to recuse himself, with the responsibility for overseeing the mueller probe fall to rachel brand? >> i believe that is the case, yes. >> and she ee's another well respected, highly regarded person to live by the law. what are you hearing about the breaking news coming out of the white house today? and of course we should say that the firing of steve bannon has at its core the things that
1:47 pm
steve bannon said about donald trump and his kids as it pertains to russia. >> if my phone is any indication, there are certainly trump allies both inside and outside the white house are shedding no tears about the former chief strategist to the president. it is not just the quotes in the book, although that set the president off, you hit after the president's family, that's the line you just don't cross. but steve bannon had a number of people left in the white house, a number of them had been purged in john kelly's shake-up in recent months, and they felt like they blamed him for a lot of the infighting that consumed the west wing in those early months of the trump presidency and bannon was considered to have committed the cardinal sin in the white house and that is overshadowing the boss. he took a lot of credit for shaping trump's political message and that was something that the president had a really hard time handling.
1:48 pm
n't so the two of them had had their ups and downs of their relationship, although they did talk after bannon left the white house, and they were in contact during the alabama election and of course the roy moore debate. but this was the straw that broke the camel's back for the president. but i think they will never speak again. >> i bannon is proven correct and the things that he says to michael wolf in fire and fury about, i think he calls them jarvonka. >> you put an r in there. >> the things he's said about donald trump jr., and donald trump jr. ends up being in some sort of jeopardy in the russia probe, if jared and ivanka end up having some legal troubles, do you think being right is the way back into the good graces of a president who is so sensitive to even the most minor slight?
1:49 pm
and these were big ones. >> look, donald trump is guided by transactionally by self-interest, period. nothing more. certainly not what's right and wrong and so steve bannon walking around on a stage celebrating a credibly accused child molester who goes down to defeat in alabama may be his high water moment in his short-lived political career. if donald trump thinks that steve bannon can help him, then steve bannon will be back. if donald trump thinks that steve bannon is irrelevant to him, then steve bannon will stay gone. but it certainly has nothing do with right or wrong or whether steve bannon was critical of trump's children. it's about trump, first, second, third, last and always. >> all right, we have to sneak in one more quick break, it's the last one i promise.
1:50 pm
don't go anywhere, we'll be right back. so that's the idea. what do you think? hate to play devil's advocate but... i kind of feel like it's a game changer. i wouldn't go that far. are you there? he's probably on mute. yeah... gary won't like it. why? because he's gary. (phone ringing) what? keep going! yeah... (laughs) (voice on phone) it's not millennial enough. there are a lot of ways to say no. thank you so much. thank you! so we're doing it. yes! "we got a yes!" start saying yes to your company's best ideas.
1:51 pm
let us help with money and know-how, so you can get business done. american express open. when it comes to strong bones, are you on the right path? we have postmenopausal osteoporosis... ..and a high risk for fracture, so with our doctors... ...we chose prolia®... help make our bones stronger. only prolia® helps strengthen bones... stopping cells that damage them... ...with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure; trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip or tongue swelling... ...rash, itching or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems, as severe jaw bone... ...problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. peak to your doctor before stopping prolia®, as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium; serious infections, which could need hospitalization; problems; and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. if your bones aren't getting stronger...
1:52 pm
...isn't it time for a new direction? why wait? ask your doctor about prolia®. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide.
1:53 pm
your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. there is nobody we think higher of than president trump and the agenda. let's not let the left wing media stir that up. >> are those comments that have been reported that you have said? >> i think we have the wait for
1:54 pm
the book to come out and let people see it then we can determine it at time. >> you can blame the left wing media for a whole lot of stuff but not for steve bannon using the words treasonous. >> how ironic that steve bannon's down fall came not because of donald trump even but because of the mercer family. because donors real estate jektded him. the man who rose to his own political power preaching nationalism and a man of the people ultimately is just another stooge of the donor class at the end of the day. >> i'm reminded, this afternoon, that joe arpaio, sheriff arpaio, who donald trump pardoned on the eve of the big hurricane there, is someone who is going the run for jeff flake's old seat. so trumpism, bannonism,
1:55 pm
nationalism, isolationism, racism in some cases very much alive and well this the republican party? >> absolutely. it's really unfortunate. but i don't think that that's a new thing. because there is always been the dog whistles. i think what steve bannon did was remove any pretense. >> use a bull horn. >> exactly. so anyone hearing it. people of color listening to truf could hear it when coming down the escalator. said mexicans are racists. we understood all of that well before charlottesville. >> he achieved all those things without steve bannon. >> and had he he joined the campaign it put down a marker. i remember that week when we were trying to figure out how to message, and essentially alarm, you know, ring the alarm to the american people that steve bannon is a white nationalist, right, and this is not run of the mill dog whistles or politics and policies that are not going to help people of color for example. this is nazis, this is something different than what we had seen
1:56 pm
before. that is there to stay because republicans never really stood up to steve bannon even when he was quoted in a book saying negative things about the president. >> and that's steve's point, jonathan, that it's neither donald trump nor steve bannon who killed the republican party. it's all the republicans who stayed silent to get their tax cut. >> right, we need to see what happens. bannon challenged incumbent republican senators in virtually every state. what do they do? do they run from bannon? do they still try to cop some elements of his message? >> we'll see. also what happens to breitbart now? will it continue its attacks on paul ryan and mitch mcconnell even as the president in some issues moves towards them? it will be fascinating to watch. >> steve schmidt, last thought? >> at the end of the day, steve bannon lost his power base. breitbart is gone. why would any republican senator care what bannon thinks. as we look at nevada in 2010,
1:57 pm
the republican party has been plagued by the fringe candidates and it has cost them six or seven u.s. senate seats since the beginning of this decade. that problem isn't going to go away for republicans. you will still see those candidates. and for sure there will be someone new who emerges on top of the pyramid of the freak show wing to replace bannon. don't know who it is but i guarantee you he's out this. >> let me follow up. mcconnell released a video of him smiling about bannon's demise. is it too early for establishment republicans like mcconnell and ryan to breathe a sigh of relief when bannon wouldn't have been as successful and breitbart wouldn't have its viewership if that wasn't where a big swath of the republican party had moved? >> i understand the personal
1:58 pm
shodden freud that mcconnell is feeling about banno's down fall. but the association of the republican brand with white nationalism is devastating for the party. with bannon gone, it doesn't mean it undoes the damage that bannonism and trumpism have done to the grand ol' party. >> the scene at the white house today. a well produced today of bipartisan legislating. i'm not sure why we are first seeing it more than a year in. i wonder if one it was a shiny object to distract from a news cycle they don't like. two, i saw donald trump respond favorably to diane feinstein's pitch. then i saw majority leader mccarthy say no no, no, no, no, no, no. it was almost like watching an uncomfortable dinner, you know, with family members.
1:59 pm
i wonder what you made of the display, if the you are encouraged as congressman swalwell that it is a sign of things to come. >> usually a pool spray is a minute or two at the top of the meeting. to be in there for 55 minutes, that's encouraging for transparency. i don't know it is a coincidence, that the president running a meeting like this that comes on the heels of stories that question his mental capacity, that stories of executive time, the amount of leisure, television and twitter time that he demands. i think the white house wanted to present ab image of him in charge running a meeting. but what came out of it was some mixed messages. yes, perhaps this is the first step to some sort of deal but it may turn out to be a photoon. >> final word. >> trump was supposed to be scene as in control, but the end result was that he outsores the major decisions on daca and immigration reform to congress. how control is he at the end
2:00 pm
day. >> president obama did that. this is not an extraordinary moment. he should be doing it. today he revealed he didn't understand the details. >> breaking news, the president is doing his job. that does it for our hour, i'm micolle wallace. "mtp daily" starts right now. hi, chuck is that work, work, work, work. >> we are all busy working. >> if it's tuesday, it's lights, camera, legislate! tonight, the white house goes out of its way to showcase the president holding a big immigration meeting. but does the president actually have a position on immigration? >> what about a clean daca bill now. >> we have to do daca first. >> you are saying daca without security? are you talking about security as well. >> reporter: we will talk with senator jeff flake about what we saw and didn't see after the cameras left. plus new information about


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on