tv Andrea Mitchell Reports MSNBC March 12, 2018 9:00am-10:00am PDT
putting education secretary betsy davos on the spot. >> it doesn't make sense i have to make sure i'm 21 to get a handgun but i can get this weapon at 18. >> we didn't address it, mr. president. >> you know what, because you're afraid of the nra, right? >> quhapd? >> the plan is really the first step in a more lengthy process and the proposals that the president has put forward really encompass a lot of things. >> why is it it is not in this plan? what happened? what changed? >> everything is on the table. changing his tune. the. is the now the diplomat in chief. after his sudden decision to meet with kim jong-un. >> south korea came to my office after having gone to north korea and seeing kim jong-un and -- no, it's very positive. no. after the meeting you may do
that because now we have to be very nice. let's see what happens. no joke. at his pittsburgh rally, the president was also back to his old ways, hurling insults at democrat members of congress and the media. >> he's using these vulgarities in the context of a campaign rally. obviously, there were a lot of funny moments to that ray lp. >> yeah, they were hilarious. good day, i'm andrea mitchell in washington where president trump appears to be bending to the national rifle association one month after the tragedy at stoneman douglas high school in parkland, florida, backing off his push to raise the age for buying weapons. all this after promising stronger accident to gun violence survivors at the white house. >> we're going to pick out the strongest ideas, the most
important ideas, the ideas that will work and get them done. it's not going to be talk like it has been in the past. in addition to everything else, in addition to what we're going to do about background checks, we're going to go strong into age and -- age of purchase. most of you have been through a lot more than you ever thought possible. more than you ever thought humanly possible. all i can say is we're fighting hard for you and we will not stop. >> joining me now is nbc national correspondent, peter alexander, katy tur, and msnbc contributor ashley parker, white house reporter of "the washington post." peter, first to you. the president taking a very different tact today on guns in the official rollout with betsy davos, homeland, not the high-profile rollout which would actually contradict the nra. this was all after the president, of course, had dinner with the nra.
>> reporter: you're exactly right. the president shocked gun rights groups with his initial comments in the wake much that awful shooting at parkland, suggesting comprehensive background checks. he would strongly support raising that age for gun purchases to 21. by the way, something his ally rick scott helped marshal days ago. now it appears, even as you heard him say, this isn't just going to tb talk. what he's talking about is much more limited at this point. the president tweeting on the topic this morning, among other things, saying on 18 to 21 age limits, watching court cases and rulings before acting, states are making this decision. this is probably the key line. he says, things are moving rapidly on this but not much political support to put it mildly. rule remember this is a president who said i alone can do it. this is a president who said he has the bully pulpit, the ability to change minds on capitol hill. now less than a month, not even four weeks after that shooting at parkland, it appears he has softened his stance after what
was a warm meeting with the top lobbyists for the nra just a matter of days ago. >> and katy tur, the president back to his campaign rally ways. we've seen it a number of times since he's been president but you, of course, saw it every day of the campaign. one of the things he did was to attack frequent targets, nancy pelosi, maxine waters, and also the news media. you were famously part of that during the campaign when he called you out by name. this is part of what happened. chuck todd was questioning mnuchin, the treasury secretary, steve mnuchin was put out by the white house to respond. he was the only white house person, and the deputy press secretary put out over the weekend, to respond to the way kids might react. chuck, of course, was one of those attacked personally by the president who called him a son of a "b." >> many people, including
myself, raise their kids to respect the office of the presidency and the president of the united states. when he uses vulgarity to talk about individuals, what are they supposed to tell their kids? >> again, i'll be with my kids this morning and i'll be focused on them on what the president is doing to protect the united states, its citizens and -- >> don't worry about his values, a role model -- >> i never said that whatsoever. i don't know why you're putting these words in what i'm trying to say. so, again, i'm very comfortable with what we're doing, okay? >> katy tur? >> steve mnuchin is trying to defend the president on this, while other cabinet members might say that it was unfortunate and they wished he didn't do that. steve mnuchin is someone who's always defended the president no matter what. always had glowing things to say about him. you had in the open that a lot of the rally was funny.
chuck responded by saying hilarious in a bit of a sarcastic tone. this is who donald trump is. this is the schtick, we know this by now. this is what he does. when someone gets under their skin, when that person is in a powerful position where they have a significant voice, donald trump will attack them personally in order to undercut what they are saying. he doesn't go after the substance. he attacks the person personally in order to strengthen himself. it's a very obvious pattern. it's one he's employed now for 2 1/2 years. i think it's important to remember and to acknowledge, andrea, while a lot of folks might find this to be completely outrageous, completely unacceptable, there is a significant number of people, some of whom, a lot of whom were at that rally on saturday, who find this to be refreshing, still and find it to be hilarious or funny, as steve mnuchin did still and not worried about trying to teach
their children the values of the president. that's just the reality of it. there should be that reminder for people that at a lot of folks find this all very distasteful, there's still a section of the population, still 30-plus percent of people who think donald trump is doing a good job and who still enjoy this sort of rhetoric. >> and ashley parker, you also witnessed all of this during the campaign and since. we see him unleashed. it seems as though he feels liberated, perhaps less control from the chief of staff kelly, who's been under fire so much. less control now that it's clear that gary cohn is leaving. and the role of ivanka, ivanka and jared, principally ivanka, is a lot of your reporting today. >> yeah. we actually ended up doing an ivanka profile in part based on peter alexander's great interview with her at the olympics where it's clear she's trying to straddle this is dual
role. she's a senior adviser. she went to the olympics as a senior adviser. she went there with a diplomat mission. she was prepared to deal with north korea, but she's also the president's daughter and she's very unapologetic about that. she talks to him multiple times a day. she's sort of trying to figure out exactly what she can do. one area where she's come under a lot of fair criticism is a lot of people wanted her to be a moderating voice. they're frustrated on is she x or is she y? they thought she could prevent trump from pulling out of paris. she explains she treats herself like any other senior adviser. so, she will not publicly contradict the administration in the way most other senior advisers would not. the interesting thing to watch for, we learned, is she will push for the issue she's passionate about but she'll be silent on the issues where she disagrees. you'll notice she did not sell the republican health care plan
at all. she's been very quiet on guns. i i think you can see her silence as a bit of a loud message of disagreement. again, there's certainly people who, perhaps, fairly would like her to be more vocal when she disagrees. >> there's been reporting over the weekend that her role at the olympics was a softer, more diplomatic role than the role assigned to mike pence earlier because he did not stand up. that was clearly coordinated with the white house. they were trying to keep the pressure on, keep the hard line and that's why kim's sister did not meet with mike pence. then they saw a different side when ivanka went. not that she was leaning over backwards, but clearly, at least first to you, ashley, then peter, she had a softer presence. >> that's exactly right. i was on the vice president's trip and he cast himself as this anti-north korea propaganda warrior and that's what he did every step of that trip was very cal lated from meeting with the
defectors to taking a very hard line on them. ivanka, talking to her people, she learned some of those lessons. she was very aware of -- she would also be in a box with the north koreans, how should she handle that? the vice president didn't stand. she did stand for the north korean unified team. it was different under the closing ceremonies. they came out under their own flags instead of unified flag. she wore bright colors. she met with the athletes. she took selfies. she charmed president moon and his wife. you did see a different beginning and end to the trip from this administration. >> peter, i wanted to catch up with you because during that interview she famously objected to your questioning about the women and accusations against her father saying, i don't think that's a fair question to answer on. >> reporter: before answering it, obviously. >> before answering it. she's a staff member. she chose that double role, which ashley has smartly been outlining in "the washington post." now, again today we see the saga
of stormy daniels. now the stormy daniels attorney very aggressively bargaining in public saying, well, she'll now return the $130,000 if she can speak openly. they probably see their lawsuit to tear up that agreement may not have a great legal standing, so now they're saying, well, we can get out of the agreement because clearly she has a lot more money to make up -- you know, whatever this hush money agreement will be torn up. there's also an issue of winning restraint against "60 minutes". >> at the end of this week we expect to hear from stephanie clifford or stormy daniels in an interview to air on "60 minutes," that letter nbc news has obtained being sent to michael cohen, the president's long-time attorney, basically offering to pay back $130,000 to allow her to speak, to no longer
silence, to be able to share written messages, text messages, voice mails, whatever other information she may have. we spoke to her attorney a short time ago who told nbc news the following. this has never been about money. it's always been about miss clifford being allowed to tell the truth. bottom line, this is a story that has not disappeared and does not appear to be disappearing any time soon. and just to get back to the conversation about ivanka trump and the unique role she plays in this white house, you have these two women who have been surrounding the president in recent headlines. ivan ska trump, one whose daughter is supposed to soften him up, and stormy daniels reigniting so many questions about his treatment of women now and in the past. >> peter alexander and ashley parker, thank you so much. katy, we'll watch you at 2:00 with a lot more details by then. joining me now is the attorney general of california, javier becerra, former congressman, and leading democrat in california.
thank you very much. we wanted to talk to you for so many reenasons. the war launched by attorney general sessions to state of california over sanctuary cities for undocumented immigrants and also today on the gun issue. the president backing down on raising the age limit. ed. >> andrea, it's a little scary to not know where this administration might go on something as important as gun safety. and it's unfortunate that the rest of the country has to wait. here in california we've had background checks for decades. we've banned bump stocks for years. in fact, we have for 100 years required a license to carry a concealed weapon. and so it should not surprise people that when president trump comes to california, he'll see what it takes to have real gun safety measures in place. >> it seems to me it's 14, 15 months into the administration.
is this the longest any president of the united states has gone without visiting the most populous state? >> i believe since truman, if not before. that's the longest it's taken someone to come visit the most important part of the country, where we create more jobs than any other state, where the economic economic for the country. we're the sixth largest economy in the world if we were a stand-alone country on our own. and so it's unfortunate that the president has chosen so long -- to wait so long before visiting the number one agricultural state, number one manufacturing state, number one high-tech state. we graduate more people from college than anywhere else in the country. but what he'll find is that we figured out a way to do this right and create more jobs, give people an opportunity without breaking families apart or treating immigrant families as if they're something different. >> mr. attorney general, i wanted to also ask you about education. betsy da voss, education secretary, was on the "today" show and last night she did an
interview with lesley stahl on '60 minutes" about her role as volunteer in favoring charter schools than private schools in the state of michigan. and this was one of the unusual exchanges. >> the public schools in michigan gotten better? >> i won't know. overall -- i can't say overall they've all gotten better. >> the whole state is not doing well. >> well, there are certainly lots of pockets where it is students are doing well and -- >> no, but your argument if you take funds away, that the schools will get better is not working in michigan. where you had a huge impact and influence over the direction of the school system here. >> i hesitate to talk about all schools in general because schools are made up of individual students attending them. >> the public schools here are doing worse than they did. >> michigan schools need to do better, there is no doubt about it. >> have you seen the really bad
schools, maybe try to figure out what they're doing? >> i have not -- i have not -- i have not intentionally visited schools that are underperforming. >> maybe you should. >> maybe i should, yes. >> i mean, the fact is she was controversial at her confirmation hearing. she's not an educator heading the education department, so how does it affect california schools and how have been your interactions with the education department? >> any time you strip a school of its funding for its kids, you're depriving those children of the best education they can get. unfortunately, we have a secretary of education who has steered away from giving our kids everything they should have at our public schools. at the same time, i would also raise a red flag with her policies relating to our college students where she has seemed to be favoring for-profit predatory colleges over our students when it comes to their practices, how
they gouge students in student loans. we're trying to defend those students here in california. secretary da voss and department of education are trying to strip away the power of state prosecutors like the attorney general in california, to be able to go after those bad actors who end up costing those college students and their families tens of thousands of dollars. >> i also wanted to give you a moment to come in on your former congressional colleague, maxine waters, play a little of what the president had to say about maxine waters saturday night in pittsburgh. >> and maxine waters, a very low iq individual. ever see her? have you ever seen her? we will impeach him. we will impeach -- but he hasn't done anything wrong. doesn't matter. we will impeach him. she's a low iq individual. you can't help it.
she really is. >> general becerra, your comment? >> i think donald trump probably said that from about 2,000 miles away from maxi waters because he's probably too afraid to say it to her face. she's been one of the great arest champions consumers have ever had, that families have ever had. i suspect that donald trump would be afraid to come up to her and actually say something like that to her because she won't stand for that. it's unfortunate he uses that kind of language about someone who's been a public servant for so many years, someone who's fought very hard. just because he disagrees with her doesn't mean he has to use derogatory language. maxine can tad care of herself. i would urge donald trump to be careful if he ever finds himself in a dark ally with maxine waters. >> that's a funny image. let's briefly ask you again, you referenced the sanctuary cities and if you think you can beat the federal government in its lawsuit? >> i believe any time the federal government tries to violate the tenth amendment and
the rights of the states to decide how to do general welfare and public safety for their citizens that we have a great chance of winning in court. and in this particular case where the trump administration has decided to sue california, they're essentially trying to coerce us into doing the federal government's job. we believe the federal government has every right to enforce its immigration laws, to do it under the institution and we don't get in the way but we don't believe the federal government can get in the way of the way california wants to do its public safety. we want our police and our deputy sheriffs to go after criminals on the streets and not do immigration and deportation enforcement for the federal government. we'll leave the business of deportation to tth trump. we're in the business of public safety here in california. >> mr. attorney general, thank you. it's always good to see you. thank you for being with us today. president trump's snap decision to take a gamble on north korea. is it going to pay off? you're quaching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc.
president trump's spur of the moment decision to meet with north korean dictator kim jong-un surprised even the south korean national security adviser who was at the white house briefing hmplbrief ing h.r. mcmaster and other white house officials. even secretary of state rex tillerson caught off guard. joining me is "new york times"
peter baker and former deputy national security adviser under president george w. bush as well as msnbc senior national security analyst. peter, first of all, the details you and your colleagues have mastered over the last couple of days are extraordinary how the president just said, if he's here, bring him in and accelerated everything by not only 24 hours but the fact he did not wait for the south koreans to brief him. he just said, yes, i'll do it. they had to quickly call president moon in south korea and say, is that okay? this is pretty unusual. >> it's very ad hoc in this situation. they knew the south korean national security adviser would be bringing this invitation from kim jong-un. they were sort of aware this possibility was there. what they didn't understand, at least the people around president trump, is how quickly
he would say yes. most presidents might want to take a little time with this, talk it through with their staff, their advisers, weigh the consequences and the benefits and then get back to the south koreans with an answer. instead the president relied entirely on instinct and said, let's go for it. not only can we do it now, why don't you announce it to the press. which is another unusual thing to have a foreign official announce a major decision by the president of the united states. that's how he operates. he operates on instinct, on impulse. he thinks it's gotten him where he is today and so why give up from his point of view a pattern he thinks works. >> the other piece of it is that this was a verbal communication via south koreans who don't have the same issues entirely. we're in sync with with them but not lockstep. there's no letter from kim jong-un for cia analysts to parse over and try to figure out
intent and look at all the words. they're now backchannelling to the nk income orth koreans them verify the offer. there was no national securitile meeting, no principals or deputy meeting. it's all not just spontaneous but some would say reckless. >> well, it's certainly a big gamble in terms of the negotiations with north korea. peter's reporting has been phenomenal. you can place yourself in the west wing as things were unfolding. i i think thits rather unconventional. the risks are, first of alling, you don't have the exact details of what the offer looks like. we haven't heard from the north koreans directly. i think they may be just as shocked as everyone else in terms of the quick acceptance. secondly, you have the diplomatic choreography that has to go along with any negotiation where certainly you would want the president to be in a position where he is the final dealmaker, the final voice for the united states.
not the first voice in a negotiation. so, that's a bit unconventional. you have the problem of the north koreans always having wanted to have the president of the united states meet with their leader. obviously you've had president carter, president clinton meet, but not as a sitting president. so, does the north korean leader use this, from his perspective, from a position of strength to further embolden his regime and demonstrate his legitimacy certainly and externally. finally, you have the risk that if this goes very badly, if this devolves into a very bad meeting, you potentially have an acceleration of potential conflict and degradation of potential diplomacy. that said, this is an opportunity. the president is taking a gamble. there's. huge opportunity in this to change the scope and maneuvers of how this operates. the key question is can we maneuver neatly before the may visit and does that may visit turn into a good meeting that
then leads to a framework agreement that can be verified and that's comfortable to the u.s. and our allies. that's to be seen. mike pompeo was on "face the nation" and this is the way he described the offer. listen closely because he's basically saying kim is letting us do military exercises rather than we are entitled -- or -- to do those military exercises. listen closely. >> we've got more than any previous administration. an agreement to not continue testing of nuclear weapons and their missile program. the thins that would put them capable of getting across the threshold. that's critical. he's allows to continue -- us to continue our exercises on the peninsula, something that's been fought over for decades. at the same time, he's agreed to have a conversation about
denuclearization. >> so, peter baker, he's saying that we are allowed to continue our exercises. that's a novel approach for the cia director. >> well, it is. they're looking for ways to frame these as concessions by nk mk. seems to me the idea of suspension of test is a basic, minimal agreement anybody would have to make in this kind of circumstance. he doesn't have a choice about these military exercises. he can complain about it. he can use it as an example not to have talks or complain and have talks. having said that, the american side has given up nothing either. there's been no concessions on the american side, no relaxation of sanction, no middle ground they have agreed to just to have this meeting. both sides are kind of walking in without having given up anything and without anything yet on the table. without any plan, any road map, without any guide post for where these talks are meant to go.
it is the reverse of the way it's normally done. normally you would have someone like him have a conversation first with his counterpart in north korea. you would see, can we get common ground on this thing, bump it up to assistant secretary of state, maybe eventually to a president. that's one reason we've never. a sitting president talk to north koreans. president trump decided to throw out that protocol and try it the other way. his argument is, it didn't work the other way. >> no, i take that point. i would push back on one point. we have given up something big, which is the meeting itself. the legitimacy -- >> that's a fair point. you're right. that's a fair point. >> andrea, one thing i was going to say, the way i read direct pompeo's comments, i think he was trying to frame the conditions for the discussion. i think the administration does see the fact that the north korean leader has opened up
ytish denuclearization as the end goal is very important. the fact the administration doesn't have to concede any of the u.s. steps with respect to maximum pressure. as you know and when i was part of the bush administration, part of the tit for tat with north koreans is always whether concessions would be given up front before any discussions quoo be had. something i've argued and written about, we need to make sure we have maximum pressure sustained through negotiations to maintain our leverage otherwise the north koreans will play the same games as they have for the past couple decades. final point. we need to watch what china is doing. i think one of the potential fallbacks it on this move is we take the onus off china. the administration was doing very well to put the pressure on china. this now has the potential of taking china off the hook to try to pressure the north koreans. we have to watch what china says
and does and how they're brought into this. >> fair points, all. peter, juan is absolutely right, your reporting has been phenomenal. thank you. it's been a great eye-opener for all of us. by the way, rex tillerson returning a day early from africa. he'll be back by tomorrow morning because of all this that's going on. coming up, more international intrigue. british prime minister theresa may about to update parliament about a statement of a form he were russian spy. we'll have the latest coming up.
and right now at the white house, the houston astros, major league baseball's world series champions, are in the east room meeting with the president. the team is it expected to present him with a jersey. we'll keep an eye on all that and bring any news that develops. "saturday night live" put their own spin on the shocking breakup from abc's reality series "the bachelor" that went viral last week in a memorable comic turn kate mckinnon playing robert mueller but as the bachelor's conflicted leading man. >> i'm trying to be honest with you and tell you i can't commit to collusion right now.
>> but you indicted 13 russians and, like, everything that happened in the seychelles means nothing. >> no, no, the seychelles were amazing and it's definitely -- it's definitely something. it's just like the more time that goes by, you know, the more that i keep thinking about obstruction. >> this is just [ bleep ] embarrassing. collusion is literally the only thing i've been looking forward to for the past year. >> at this point i honestly feel like i'm only half in with collusion. >> joining me now is julia ansley, and matt miller, former chief spokesman for the justice department and msnbc justice and security analyst. i don't think, matt, for all your talents you could play bob mueller as kate mckinnon. >> not with a face like that, no. >> let's go to julia first for
all your new reporting on whether they cooperated or didn't cooperate, didn't want to cooperate, didn't want to the hurt their position with the white house in this whole very convoluted story about this lebanese middleman. >> that's right. it is convoluted. to step back we know the qataris believe they were retaliated against when donald trump last june endorsed a blockade by their neighbors including the uae and saudi arabia. that's kept them from getting food and medical aid by land and sea. what they are also looking at and what they gathered information on is there have been secret meetings between americans working to connect the emirates to the trump administration. they say these meetings happened during the transition and white house and involved jared kushner. they believe that influence was illicit and led to that endorsement of the blockade
against them. but the key is, they held onto this information, andrea. they didn't want to go meet with robert mueller when several of the qatari officials were in d.c. earlier this year because they didn't want to jeopardize their position with the white house. if it got out they were cooperating on this probe and they were supplying information that could damage jared kushner, they were worried that would damage their own position which they thought was possibly improving since the endorsement of that blockade. that's when we find conflicts of interest are a real problem, not only how business is done within this administration but also how foreign governments can relate to this administration when they're caught between making a decision do they go forward with evidence of what they believe is wrongdoing or protect that evidence in order to protect their relationship with this administration. that's a position the qataris have found themselves in. >> the conflict here is not only the president but jared kushner has not fully separated himself, matt miller, from the family
businesses. in particular, in jared's case, his family is deeply leveraged and was going to a number much countries to try to refinance this white elephant on fifth avenue, 665 fifth avenue. more than $1 million in debt. >> and didn't get a deal from qataris which they believe led them to take this action adverse to them -- >> which was shocking to madison tillerson, home to the largest american base in the region, a key base in the war against isis. >> i think the qataris have figured out the first rule of dealing with this white house which is there is little difference between the president's personal interest, his legal interest, financial interest or jared kushner's legal interest, financial interests and the policymaking of the united states government. they're not just taking this position they're not going to cooperate or supply information for a lawful united states inquiry, which is what bob mueller's inquiry is, but
they're advertising it. the qataris saying on the record they're not going to provide information to bob mueller's inquiry. that said, it may not be relevant. we know bob nader is cooperating, elliott brody, the fund-raiser, participated in a meeting with the president, supplied information to nader and emiratis. what -- bob mueller may be able to get that information through other means. >> to skeptics, how does this relate to the russia probe? >> that's one of the open questions. whether this is related to the russia probe because of that meeting in the seychelles that was attended by an intermediary for russians and emiratis or is this a connected inquiry?
if that's the case robert mueller would have to get approval for a new line of inquiry. we don't yet know if this is connecteded to russia or looking a a broader means by which people outside the administration have bought access to the administration or ultimately bought policy. >> matt miller, thank you so much. julia ansley, the web of all of this is so complex. thanks for being there for us. and coming up, pennsylvania pushing republicans' last-ditch efforts to save a deep red house seat outside pittsburgh. this is "andrea mitchell reports." anies, but we make more than our name suggests. we're an organic tea company. a premium juice company. a coconut water company. we've got drinks for long days. for birthdays. for turning over new leaves. and we make them for every moment in every corner of the country. we are the coca-cola company, and we're proud to offer so much more.
so we know how to cover almost we've anything.st everything even a "red-hot mascot." [mascot] hey-oooo! whoop, whoop! [crowd 1] hey, you're on fire! [mascot] you bet i am! [crowd 2] dude, you're on fire! [mascot] oh, yeah! [crowd 3] no, you're on fire! look behind you. [mascot] i'm cool. i'm cool. [burke] that's one way to fire up the crowd. but we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪
fidelity wealth management. for the republican candidate to save an all-important pennsylvania house seat deep in trump country saturday night, but are barely mentioned the candidate himself. next hour the president's son, don junior, will be campaigning with saccone, who is neck and knock with his democratic opponent. let's get the scoop from kimberly atkins and msnbc contributor, kathleen parker, washington post opinion writer. first to you, kimberly, this seat is important, but it's all going to go away anyway because of the gerrymandering decision they both have to run against and both end up in congress at some point. >> right. >> so, $20 million on a special election for a seat that doesn't matter, but these are bragging rights? >> it's bragging rights and it matters nationally because
republicans don't want to seem vulnerable in this particular district. this is right in that industrial working class area just outside pittsburgh that was so important for donald trump's win. and to have a democrat win that seat would be further evidence of his democratic wave, this momentum on the other side that republicans really want to stop. that's the point more than what's going on on the ground. >> it's really a test case. 20 points was the margin for donald trump in thissette district in pennsylvania, but steel is important. this is one of the places where jobs could be saved biz his tariffs as net loss elsewhere across the country with retaliation is a big deal. so, he may have done this tariff decision with the pennsylvania folks in mind. >> oh, do you think? >> i do. >> he brought about at a certain point in history in time, so politically, yes. he wanted to do it, but why not do it right now in case it helps. this such an important race, even though it's only for ten months. as you say, it's all going to
shift. this can't be seen as a loss to donald trump, primarily. because when he associates himself as strongly as he has with this candidate as he did in alabama with roy moore, you know, he's on the ballot as well. so i think it matters a lot to him and the republican party that this not go to the democrats but at the same time, lamb is a very attractive candidate, independent of all the -- of -- >> he's not your typical democrat. >> no, no, he's a vet reran, marine, prosecutor. >> young. >> young politico coming forward. he has not really identified himself strongly with the democratic party line. in fact, has set himself out as more independent. whether that changes should he get elect the, as donald trump said in his speech, remains to be seen. could happen. nonetheless, he does have some crossover appeal, i think, so that's a concern to republicans. >> there's been a lot of reporting leaking out of the white house that the president has been bad-mouthing saccone,
the republican. i want to play a clip of jeff flake, by the way, looking towards 2020 with chuck todd on "meet the press." >> he's running for re-election already. he announced that last night. basically, do you think he needs to be challenged from somebody who espouses your views? >> yes, i do. i do. i mean, it would be a tough go in a republican primary. republican party has -- is the trump party right now, but that's not to say it will stay that way. >> he's going to new hampshire, jeff flake is. >> he is. it sounds very much like a plan could be in the making to challenge him. the broader point he's making is people like jeff flake, that wing of the republican party are looking for a way to stop donald trump, who essentially is going to go on the midterm stump with the donald trump show, whether the republican in each of these districts like it or not. and really eclipse what republicans are trying to do. i think people are trying to figure out a way to stop it and maybe a primary challenge is the best way, even though it's a
longshot. >> flake, too, is -- he is the candidate for all those republicans who have been wandering in the darkness trying to find a place to be. you know, who have variously left the party, abandoned trump to find someone to identify with and vote for. he has that constituency wrapped up. if there are enough of them. we'll see. >> kathleen and kimberly, great to see you both. thank you very much. coming up, spy games. the british prime minister expected to update the investigation into the poisoning of a russian spy. spending time with the grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why at safelite, we'll show you exactly when we'll be there. with a replacement you can trust. all done sir. >> grandpa: looks great! >> tech: thanks for choosing safelite. >> grandpa: thank you! >> child: bye! >> tech: bye! saving you time... so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪
there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan,
these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now.
remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. it's 6 am. 40 million americans are waking up to a gillette shave. and at our factory in boston, more than a thousand workers are starting their day building on over a hundred years of heritage, craftsmanship and innovation. today we're bringing you america's number one shave at lower prices every day. putting money back in the pockets of millions of americans. as one of those workers, i'm proud to bring you gillette quality for less, because nobody can beat the men and women of gillette. gillette - the best a man can get.
and we're following developing news overseas. british prime minister teresa may will be reporting to parliament after spending the morning with her top national security and intelligence advisers about the suspicious poisoning of a former russian spy and his daughter living in the small town of salisbury. this case is so shocking. it seems on its face if it was a nerve agent, bill, it must be state sponsored and that points to russia. >> reporter: fingers have been pointing to russia in the weeks
since sergei skrapol and his daughter were poisoned. theresa may will be responding in the next few minutes. will she directly blame russia for poisoning the former spy? and if so what will britain do to punish russia? will she give more details of the nerve agent used. would she give any indication who the suspected killer or killers might be? as i said, will she blame the russian state, name president putin, or fudge it? will it impose more economic sanctions? what sanctions? because if you just deny, let's say russian oligarcs, that just won't cut it.
thank you so much. thank you! so we're a go? yes! we got a yes! what does that mean for purchasing? purchase. let's do this. got it. book the flights! hai! si! si! ya! ya! ya! what does that mean for us? we can get stuff. what's it mean for shipping? ship the goods. you're a go! you got the green light. that means go! oh, yeah. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we're gonna hit our launch date! (scream) thank you! goodbye! we help all types of businesses with money, tools and know-how to get business done. american express open.
to get business done. but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working, just like it should ♪ man: i was born in a hurry. the world made war, my parents made love. and i screamed into life. together, they were unstoppable. and i came along for the ride. did mom give me too much freedom? did dad make me lust for too great an adventure? my scars and bruises tell their own story. so here's to you, mom and dad. freedom and adventure.
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.
and thanks for being with us. thank you very much for that. a lot to be watching this hour. we begin in new york. we begin with payback. new reporting about stormy daniels who says she had an affair with president trump before he took office. spy mystery. theresa may expected to speak any minute now about a russian spy poisoned in london. will she blame russia? and all in just two days after president trump campaign for a congressional candidate in pennsylvania, donald trump jr. is there today.