tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC June 25, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
she made it home okay and they recorrected him last week because she invited him to go to church with them yesterday. steve kornacki is back. >> 2:00 and 5:00. an appearance on craig's show, too. >> triple duty. it is 11:00 out west, 2:00 p.m. in washington. that is where donald trump's latest crackdown on immigration includes calls for cutting out the courts completely. starting with this tweet, quote, when somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no judges or court cases, bring them back from where they came. then the president followed up with this -- quote, hiring many thousands of judges and going through a long and complicated legal process is not the way to go. we'll always be dysfunctional. people must simply be stopped at the border and told they cannot come into the u.s. illegally. children brought back to their country. it signaled trump's refusal to back down on the hardline stance on immigration that drove much of his campaign during the 2016
election and seems perhaps at odds with the trump we saw and heard last week when he signed that executive order saying he would end family separations at the bord. this as the administration claims they have a well-coordinated plan to re-unite the more than 2,000 children currently separated from their families. they say that over 500 children are now with their guardians. according to republican senator james lankford, each and every child who's been separated has been accounted for. >> we know where every single child is. these are career professionals that work with hhs and that work with dhs and customs and border patrol and i.c.e. these are not political appointees. these are career folks that know where every child is to be able to connect him to their parent or the relative that came. >> for the parents of these children, a very different reality playing out. one civil rights attorney representing migrant parents tell texas' "caller times," i would say, at most, 5% of the people i have spoken to had
contact with their children. a virginia-based attorney ectoed saying only about 30% of the adults she spoke to some type of contact with their child or children. so the big question we are asking today is this -- has the president's call to end due process for migrants changed anything on the ground? nbc's jacob soboroff joins me from los angeles. philip rucker, msnbc political analyst, because reporter for the "washington post." danny cevallos joins us from mcallen, texas, he's our legal analyst. we actually -- to let you know just moments ago -- i think we can let you know, the king and queen of jordan actually arriving. there are the images right there. this at the white house just moments ago. we are following this as it comes to us. president trump and his wife, melania, there waiting for and greeting the king and queen of jordan. we may have some tape as we watch the motorcade pull up there. we will show you the king and
the queen get out here. we may have some tape here that we can ultimately roll for you of the president if he has any comments, any newsworthy comments when they sit down later. but again, that is the -- that's the president and first lady there greeting the king and the queen of jordan just moments ago at the white house. if we hear anything, as we say, from the president, newsworthy in the coming minutes we may get some cameras and may get an opportunity, we'll bring it to you. back now to the main topic of the hour though, question of immigration, we're going to pick up with our guests here. danny cevallos, i wanted to start with you. on the border there. so we have the president talking about we don't needo send a flood of judges down there to the border to deal with these cases, to expedite them, saying we don't necessarily need due process rights for any of these migrants. this is what the president's saying on twitter. it is what he is saying publicly in terms of what's playing out on the ground. is what the president is saying on twitter having a bearing on
what you are seeing on the ground there? >> if you are talking about the president saying that we should just remove these people without a hearing, the president likely cannot do that because it would likely be unconstitutional. migrants, or aliens, as they're called in the law, are not subject to the full range of constitutional protections in a removal hearing. but they are entitled to fifth amendment due process. and that means an opportunity to be hard. so any attempt to divest them, to take away that opportunity to be heard would probably violate due process. practically speaking, what we're seeing here at the federal courthouse in criminal court is the mass prosecution of defendants for illegal entry and illegal re-entry. a misdemeanor, and then a felony. we are seeing a huge spike in the misdemeanor cases, 60 to 70, today i counted 74 defendants, all of which, that i saw, took
pleas and were sentenced the same day for illegal entry. >> philip rucker, behind the scenes then, what is going on in the white house with president trump? you had the executive order last week saying we're not going to be doing these family separations anymore. you have more hard-line rhetoric being tweeted out here. in terms of a -- is there a clear policy that's emerged? >> not quite, steve. what you have happening behind the scenes is the president desperate to hold on to his political base. he's very concerned that he will be viewed as insufficiently tough at the border. it is why you've seen day after day after day him tweeting about hard-line policies, taking positions like denying immigrants who cross the border without documentation illegally, denying them their rights to a due process. that raises all sorts of constitutional questions, but it is also not a policy. it is only his view. we've not seen any effort inside the government yet to try to
institute that or turn that into a policy or certainly not any effort on capitol hill to legislate it in some way. this is really the president blowing off some steam and trying to communicate through twitter to his supporters that he's going to continue to be tough at the border, even as his administration tries to reunite these families that have been separated. >> jacob, on that question of reuniting families that have been separated at the border, you have james lankford there, the republican senator, saying all of these cases have been accounted for. hearing from lawyers and advocates saying, hey, no, that's not the case. do we have a handle, a sense, on that estimated number, total of about 2,000, of exa exactally h many are accounted for? >> i watched that interview on "meet the press." the idea that everybody's been
accounted for and we know how to get them back to their parents is just factually inaccurate. a dhs official told me over the weekend that some of these parents, of the 2,053, may already be deported, if not a large number of the 2,053, which goes to show you how poorly thought out this entire thing was. not only implementation of the zero tolerance and family separation, but then the extraction from that process. i feel like we're asking questions in real time that the administration is not -- or is just about to start asking itself. where are these children going to go? where are the families going to go together? wednesday will mark one week since the president signed the executive order ending separation. you can only hold families in i.c.e. custody for 20 days. are they going to start releasing families they're detaining together? are they going to put them on military bases together? where are they going to go? what are they going to do? this whole thing has been about so many more questions than we are getting answers from the administration. having seen these kids in cages,
my belief is that the administration doesn't know the answer. >> danny, let me ask you. do you have any sense of that? there is still -- the administration has made a major point here in saying there is this old consent decree, this basically court ruling from a number of years ago saying 21 days. that's the number you got to release kids after 21 days. so if the administration is still going to try to enforce this zero tolerance policy of hold and jail and prosecute and don't release, and that 21-day count is still, as far as we know, still active and ticking, whether that number starts hitting for some of these kids, are we still going to see separations? do you have any sense? >> we will. because the zero tolerance policy is a policy of prosecuting all of these misdemeanor cases. when that happens, the dockets fill up with 60 to 70 to maybe more defendants in a day. those defendants are either sentenced anywhere from time served to 180 days. and if they are sentenced anywhere in that range, those are additional days they are away from their children. all the way on the other side
with the children, every time the children are placed with foster parents, or placed in any other facility, every additional day they are away from their parents, under state law, could potentially be used against them in a dependency type proceeding. and the federal law requires that a child who has been -- i use quotes -- "abandoned" by their parent for a certain period of time ov, over 22 mont the state must seek to terminate parental rights. though's band abandonment, stats will consider a parent's removal back to their home country as time against them when they couldn't possibly get back to the states, hire a lawyer or make it back to the proceeding. >> we mentioned a minute ago what the president's been saying on twitter. let's just play a cut here from saturday. the president was out there in nevada talking about this issue of calls to send more judges to the border to deal with this. this is exactly what he said.
>> you know, they want to hire now 5,000 more judges so that a person puts their toe on the land, we have to go to trial. this is crazy what we're doing. i don't want jujdges. i want border patrol. i want i.c.e. we don't want judges. >> philip, you wrote about this. it is striking, too, because ted cruz, republican from texas, and he's running for re-election this year, we should say, he's tried to craft some kind of response to this that does involve a surge in judges to help with processing. the president seems to have no interest in that. how are republicans on capitol hill, conservative republicans like ted cruz, reacting to how the president's posturing on this? >> well, the president's been all over the map, quite frankly, over the past week in terms of the directives he's been giving to his republican allies on capitol hill. the reason senator cruz is proposing adding more judges is because if you're prosecuting so many of these cases, you need
more court personnel to move these cases through, to process these defendants, to get them all in front of a judge so that they can have their hearing and get on with it. the system is really jammed right now, and that's what cruz is trying to fix. the president clearly doesn't want to be adding judges. he believes that immigrants should not be entitled to an appearance for a judge, which is -- a lot of lawyers would tell you that's not constitutional. but again, that is not a policy from the administration. that is only sort of a sound bite from a president who's offered a ton of different sound bites, many of them conflicting over the past week. >> philip rucker, jacob soboroff, danny cevallos, thank you all for joining us. lee, thanks for joining me. you have been involved in this issue of reunification for these families. you said earlier you don't think a plan exirssts?
>> we've filed a national class action in san diego. we filed papers this morning. the government's papers are due tomorrow morning. the judge has moved up the schedule. we are hopeful there will be an order soon. we are asking that every child be reunified within 30 days. children under 5 be reunified within five days. judge basically said we don't have a plan, we'll just use what we've been using in the past. which doesn't work. anyone who follows the reunification process will tell you that will not get the kids back. >> when you say no plan, let me be clear. the idea that these kids are accounted for, the government can tell you where they are, what state, what city, what facility. do you think they are all accounted for? >> i don't think the government knows where all the kids are, but i also don't think the dpoft has a plan to reunify them. i don't believe they know where all the kids are. the other thing is we don't believe the executive order
actually will stop separations going forward in the future. there's too many explicit loopholes in the executive order. we have asked the judge to also enjoin future separations because we think those will happen notwithstanding the executive order. >> what do you want to happen here? because there's so many arguments coming from so many different directions. let me take it from this perspective. what the administration said way back at the beginning of all this was, we want to treat illegal border crossings a lot more seriously, we want to prosecute everything. they said we're holding these folks and we can't hold their kids more than 21 days, hence the separation. so one idea that's out there is, is there a way to hold the adults and the children together, maybe at hhs facilities, something like that? is that something -- would you be willing to go down that road? >> what we have said to the judge is the parents and children ought to be released because they're bona fide asylum seekers. they aren't a flight risk or danger. but if the government is not going to do that and they choose to detain them, they can detain them together longer than 20
days. that's a myth, the 20 days. the parent can always decide they want to keep the child with them in the detention center. the settlement does not require the automatic release of a child over the parent's objections. the mother can say, look, my child's 2 years old. i want her with me in this detention center, not shipped off to chicago just because there's better crayons. that's just sort of classic settlement law. you can always say i don't want the benefit of this settlement. so this is a myth -- >> so makes for the idea of actually not even having separate facilities, having children stay in the detention facility with the parent? >> for sure. there are family detention centers built for that very purpose that other administrations used. now to be sure, we don't think there should be family prisons and they ought to release any parent that's not a flight risk or a danger. but this myth that they have to do it within 20 days or they have to rip the kid apart again is simply wrong. that's something the government's put out there to try and suggest we have no choice, we have to separate after 20 days.
>> this is the pushback you get. you don't think they are a flight risk, they should be released. people would say, hey, the rate of folks detained, released, given a court date and acty showing up for that court date, there is a lot of people who don't do that. >> i would tell them to actually look at the statistics involving asylum seekers. the obama administration put in a case management program that was 95% to 98% effective. the reason is because once you pass your initial asylum screening which most of these people have, you have a vested interest in coming back because you don't want to be on the lam the rest of your life. you're going to get asylum and that's a path to getting permanent citizenship. that's why the program worked. but we aren't saying they have to release everybody. but you have to hold a hearing. if they are determined not to be a flight risk or danger after the hearing, you must release them. >> thanks for stopping by from the aclu. we turn to the so-called tent city on the border. cal perry was inside there today and he joins us next to tell us
what he witnessed. stay with us. on our planet than. on our planet than. we're putting ai into everything, and everything into the cloud. it's all so... smart. but how do you work with it? ask this farmer. he's using satellite data to help increase crop yields. that's smart for the food we eat. at this port, supply chains are becoming more transparent with blockchain. that's smart for millions of shipments. in this lab, researchers are working with watson to help them find new treatments. that's smart for medicine. at this bank, the world's most encrypted mainframe is helping prevent cybercrime. that's smart for everyone. and in africa, iot sensors and the ibm cloud are protecting endangered animals. that's smart for rhinos. yeah. rhinos. because smart only really matters, when we put it to work- not just for a few of us, but for all of us. let's put smart to work.
down along the southern border, we are now getting a first look inside a tent city for migrant children in texas. this tent city was constructed to house an overflow of migrant children who were separated from their parents under the trump administration's new zero tolerance policy. over the weekend, hundreds of protesters rallied in the area, calling for those families to be reunited. msnbc's cal perry is on the
ground in tornillo, texas. he took a tour of that facility this afternoon. so, cal, take us through first what you saw in there. and explain exactly, we hear so much about the kids, they have been separated. are these kids where the government lass a sense of who and where their parents are? or are these kids who are completely separated and there's no trace on that? >> reporter: yeah. so they -- hhs -- is saying that they have a beat on where all the kids are and they are going to be able ooh reunite them. they definitely pushed that issue because of course we hear different stories from really moms and dads along the southern border. as you said, we just got out of this tent city. we'll show you the hhs hand outphotos. 326 kids are in this camp. 14 of them are girls. 23 have been separated from their parents. it was initially 26 but they were able to reunite three already, a very quick breakdown on where they are from. 117 from honduras.
40 el salvador. 3 from mexico, four from other countries, including romania. the camp, 22 military style tents housing -- >> cal, i'm sorry to cut you off, but i need to do it because we have some breaking news to get to here. we'll try to get back to you in the meantime. we said the president and king the jordan meeting at the white house. >> i just want to say, our nations have a very good relationship. we now have a great relationship. but the job you do on a humanitarian basis is fantastic. and i would like to thank you very much, sir. >> thank you. sir, if i could thank you and the united states or the people of america for all the support you've given our country. if the rest of the world just took a little bit of your humility and your grace to help us, we would be in a lot better position. if it wasn't for united states,
just on behalf of myself, my people, thank you so much for all that you've done. >> remember he used the word "humility" with respect to me. i am very happy with that word. that's probably the nicest compliment i've been given in a long time. no, the job you do is fantastic. but we spend a lot of money in a lot of places and people don't do the job that you do. so i want to thank you so much. thank you very much, everybody. >> let's go! thank you! we're leaving! let's go! >> no, no. the executive order was great. it was something that i felt we had to do. we want children staying together. the law has been this law for a long period of time. you would understand this better than most because of the great job you do in your country. no. it was -- there was a false story, fake news in the "new york times." just the opposite. i wanted to sign that. in fact, i was saying yesterday
before i read this phony story in the "new york times" that i was very, very happy that i signed that. and it also -- it shows, we're all talking about humanity, whether it is what you are doing in jordan or what we are doing here, the laws are obsolete. laws are horrible having to do with the border, both in terms of security and in terms of taking care of people. president obama had a big problem. in fact, a lot of the pictures used they thought would be i guess -- i don't know what you folks did. you used pictures from 2014. they were all taken during the obama administration. but the bush administration had the same -- it is the same laws. they're a disaster. laws have to be changed. and whether it is north korea or whether it is so many different things like trade, we're taking care of a lot of problems that should have been taken care of over the years. well, one of the highest on the list is immigration. and we have to change our laws. we have to make them sensible. they came in to see me last week. they said, we'd like to hire
5,000 more judges. 5,000. you ever hear of a thing like that? judges. well, we're appointing 145 judges here, and everyone goes through this extreme vetting process. talking about 5,000. where do you find 5,000 people to be judges? and you know what? it leads to graft. it leads to a lot of other things. we want a system that where people come in illegally, they have to go out. and a nice, simple system that works. mexico holds people for four hours, for five hours, for two hours, and they're gone. we have people for four, five, six years and they never leave. so we want to have a great immigration. what we have is very simple. we want strong borders and we want no crime. strong borders, we want no crime. the democrats want open borders and they don't care about crime. and they don't care about our military. i care about our military. that's what we want and that's
what we're going to get. we're going to get it sooner than people think. thank you very much. thank you, everybody. thank you. thank you very much. >> make your way out! let's go! >> thank you all very much. >> what about the middle east peace? >> we're doing very well in the middle east. we're doing very well in the middle east. thank you. >> when do you want to release the middle east peace plan? >> i can only say this. his majesty knows we've done very well in the middle east. a lot of progress has been made in the middle east. a lot. it really started with the end of the horrible iran deal. that deal was a disaster. and things are a lot different since we ended that. a lot different. thank you all very much. >> all right, everybody. thank you. we're leaving now. thank you. >> okay. that was the scene just moments
ago inside the white house. the president seated next to the king of jordan there, king abdullah. you saw melania trump and the wife are -- or queen of jordan also there standing by. two pieces of news to emerge as questions were shouted at the president on this topic of immigration just in case you didn't hear clearly there, we'll run them by you here. first, there had been a report that the president perhaps behind the scenes was having second thoughts, was airing some doubts, some regrets perhaps, about that executive order he signed last week saying he wanted to reunite, put an end to the separation of families at the border. he denied that just now in that session in the white house there. he says he stressed, i wanted to sign it, he says, of the executive order. he called it a great executive order. so he took issue with that reporting. also the president again reiterated something he had said over the weekend. over the weekend when he talked about opposing the idea of sending more judges down to the border to expedite the processing of all of these
asylum requests, of all of the migrant whose are showing up at the border. the president reiterating his opposition to the idea of sending more judges, the idea of sending 5,000 judges to him. he said it didn't make sense. he says it is very simple. he wants people, when they come in illegally, they have to go out. very simple, the president saying. he wants strong borders, he says, and no crime. again that was the president there sort of impromptu session with the press. also designed as a quick photo-op but you heard the questions shouted and the president weighed in. we still have cal perry down at that makeshift tent city in tornillo, texas. cal, not sure if you were able to hear the president there, or our attempt there. but your reaction if you did catch what the president said? >> my reaction coming from the tent city, we spoke to the emergency manager who actually runs the camp. he works for a private company that's contracted out to take
care of the facilities on the camp. he said, quote, this shelter would not have been necessary without a separation. the crisis is a result of the decision to separate these kids. he called the process flawed. the separations should have never happened. he actually said it harms the children. you have opposition to the policies coming out of the white house from inside these camps themselves. little bit more color on this camp. 22 military style tents. two of them set aside for the girls. 20 of them for the boys. we saw some drawings. the kids had put on the wall. that was probably the most emotional sort of part of the visit. we saw one that said, i'm 100% honduran. i've walked more than 10,000 miles to get here to the u.s. these kids, steve, were walked around in single file, in groups of 20. they just -- they looked older than what they were. we know they're sort of 13 to 17 years old, but you imagine walking from honduras. all the way to a place like this. keep in mind, this camp city, this tent city behind me, is only here because of the
separation policy. it wouldn't have been necessary without those separations. it is an overflow area. of course, what everyone is concerned about is getting these kids reunited with their families. we actually had a chance to speak to the hhs spokesperson right out here after the visit. here's what he said about that. >> every child in our care we have reached out and we have connected them with parents. in the rare case that we have not connected with that parent, we are aggressively working to find that parent. i can assure you, parents are involved in the decision making about children in our care, and so i don't -- there's always exceptions and misunderstandings and miscommunications. we really are aggressively looking for parents. if they're having a hard time, we're going to find them. >> such a big part of this story, steve, has been the lack of transparency from this administration to both the media and the american public. i asked the hhs spokesperson if he was aware that that was a
major issue. he said he is. he said that's what today was about it would be get us into that tent city and to try to get some of this information out. in fact, the emergency manager said that was his biggest concern, was that he felt like he was doing all of this in secrecy. >> cal perry down there in tornillo, texas, getting a first look at that tent city. cal, thank you for that. next, the politics of immigration meet the politics of civility. ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, ... with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques.
and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you.
booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline. the beswith neutrogena® beach? beach defense® sunscreen. helioplex™ powered, uva uvb strong.
obviously, the situation at the border, the crisis at the border, has dominated news coverage for the last week. at least the last week. the trump administration's response, all sorts of backlash, all sorts of controversy. what about the politics behind it all? how are people reacting to it? how are they processing? what could it mean? we do have elections coming up, after all. that is sometimes the bottom line when we are talking about politics. that's definitely a part of this story. we have new numbers to take you through. the situation might actually be a little more complicated when we talk about the politics than it looks on the surface. let me tell you what i mean. first, there is this. this is the latest poll. this one is from cbs. we have seen a number of these over the last week that on the thing that's dominated the news for the last week-plus, this issue of separating children from their parents at the
border, that trump administration policy that was instituted a few months ago, again overwhelmingly unpopular. basically a 3-1 margin here. 72% opposition. when you look at 72% opposition, that means it is not just independents and democrats who are have a problem with it. there is a lot of republicans who have a problem with that policy. so that policy that the administration had in place or that donald trump sails heys he gotten rid of with this executive order -- still some questions on that. but is policy overwhelmingly unpopular. the trump administration's been arguing that that policy grew out of something broader, a broader crackdown on illegal crossings of the border, a zero tolerance policy. that's what the trump administration said it was instituting, and they said this separation, they said, grew out of that. what about the broader politics of the border? how do people feel about that? here is a philosophical question that was asked in this new cbs poll. folks who are entering the
country illegally, philosophically how should they be treated? should they be punished as an example of toughness? close to half say yes to that. tweeted well as an example of kindness. you get over half. 54%-46% split. just a real divide at a gut level of how people view this situation. you are asking people philosophically how they should be treated, but what's that mean in terms of policy. that's where it gets even more complicated. this is the question that was asked. we've seen versions of this in a couple polls and we get results that look like this. families caught crossing the border illegally from a policy standpoi standpoint, what should be happening? again in this new poll here, almost half here saying release the family together back to their home country. keep that in mind. back to their home country. that's not bring them into the united states, await court processing there, give a court date to the parent. that option only gets 21% support. if you add, there's sort of these hardline policy
prescriptions here. this includes the separation, this includes arresting. over 60% for i think what you might call more of a hardline solution. so that trump family separation policy poisonously unpopular, but some hardline policy prescriptions, there also may be some support underlying for those as well. that's why i say politics might be a little more complicated. charlie cook, msnbc political analyst. in d.c., matt schlapp. basically 3-1 opposition, we see in every poll, against the family separation policy. i also know that there is a new gallup poll out today that showed trump's approval rating dropped four points in the last week, probably in response to that. how much damage was done to the president and the republican party with this family separation policy? >> i think it was a rough week. we're good and tolerant people
in this country and we hated the idea of families being separated. of course, that wasn't a new policy because that was a policy that we've had on the books for a couple of decades. the new policy that trump initiated was this zero tolerance policy where everybody who comes and crosses illegally will go through the prosecution system if they're not political asylee. the numbers you just went through, that's wildly popular. the combination of either sending people back to their homeland if they don't come to america legally or prosecuting them, you get near 60% of the american people say that's the right thing to do. but i'm a glad we're a compassionate and good people and they think we should do it in a humanitarian way. >> i guess the second part of those numbers, when you get away from the family separation policy and you do ask about those -- okay, so you don't want the families separated. what do you want to happen? when you see those numbers, does
that surprise you, and do you think that the democrats in particular who have been critical of the trump administration here, do you think they're reflecting the attitudes that you are seeing in those numbers there? >> you know, i think the truth is that we are in a time and discussion that really trumps politics. and you know, we continue to have stories the first half of your show really continues to be about the fact that there are children who still don't know where their parents are, they're spread across the country. until every child is reunited with their parent, i think with his or her parent, i think we're going to see a continuing discussion of this issue. there is a variety of polls that show a lot of different things. some polls -- this polls showed concerns going one way. there are other polls showing that it is much more spread across a multiple different answers on immigration. i think at the bottom of this whole issue is that matt is actually wrong. donald trump created a policy, the zero tolerance policy, that, as a result of that zero
tolerance policy, he himself decided, and jeff sessions said this, and john kelly said it mat a different time, to separate children from their parents. and that is what the american people have risen up in horror at and we can all discuss the politics of this. i think this is actually a motivating issue now to democrats who are angry at what's happening in their name and in the country's name about children and parents. but, i think at the end of the day, we are not going to end this conversation until every child is reunited with his or her parent. >> charlie, let me get you to weigh in on that. is that the bottom line, that just the specific issue of the family separations, of the kids and parents being separated, that that overwhelms this completely and that the underlying numbers we're showing maybe don't have as much political impact? or are we missing something maybe? >> what strikes me is, in is an unforced error. if i worked in the trump white house, what i would be saying is
we ought to be keeping the focus on the economy. the economy is improving. if they want to talk about the tax cuts having benefited the economy, i'd be talking about getting north korea to the table that previous administrations were not able to do. that's what i'd be talking about. the fact that we're having this whole controversy right now, this has been brought on by the trump white house and they're stepping on their own message. you look at -- i like to look at the go allup poll. same methodology every week. the fact that the president's approval rating dropped from 45% to 41% in a week and three points among democrats and independents, five points among republicans, that's a lot of movement in just one week. i'm not sure -- i'm not sure i could explain other than just doubling down on policies that are really popular within the republican base, but are
radioactive outside of the base. i'm not sure why they do this. >> i do want to get in the other item that folks on the left and right seem to be talking about today. it seems to be escalating. it happens through twitter, as it does these days. you had that incident over the weekend with sarah huckabee sanders at that restaurant in virginia. you had maxine waters, the democratic congresswoman from california, i think it was yesterday, at a rally saying, make life miserable, basically, for folks in the administration, folks who support the administration. president himself, about an hour ago, then going after maxine waters in some very blunt terms. i thunk we have this. congresswoman maxine waters, an extraordinarily low iq person, has become together with nancy pelosi the face of the democrat party. she's just called for harm to supporters of which there are many of the make america great again movement. be careful what you wish for, max!"
matt, let me start with you. over the weekend you could make a case sarah huckabee sanders, raises the question is that the right approach for this restaurant or this country, but is the president just making it worse jumping in like this? >> you know, absolutely not. i mean, look. my wife obviously works alongside sarah huckabee sanders. at the same time she had that unfortunate incident, you get plenty of other incidents. we were out to dinner and i had a vice president of a bank come up to me and encourage us for the work that we're doing. i think the problem is this. sometimes when i go through airports or other places, i'll have democrats and liberals stop me. we'll have very interesting conversations. i think most people in this country are respectful, they respect differences, they can have the dialogue. you're nice enough to put me on your show even though most of your audience probably gag when they see me. the fact is we have to do more of this because we have to figure out a way to disagree politically and still be civil. i don't have any problem with the president defending his staffers. this is unprecedented in
presidential politics. haven't seen this since the vietnam war. i think most americans will treat people they disagree with politically with decency. >> nira, what's your reaction? >> you know what i think is not treating people with decency? i think it is talking about a united states senator who doesn't vote the way you like and he is a member of your party, john mccain, and then joking about how he may die. that is not civility. >> how about calling out maxine waters? >> i'm happy to do that. i'm happy to say, everyone should be more civil. hey! why don't you speak about the civility in the white house when you attack members or people in the white house attack members of their own party as a joke about their death. i think the trump administration lecturing anyone, trump administration and their allies, lecturing anyone on civility is ridiculous. having said that -- >> so anything goes.
>> no. you know what? let's talk about something that actually matters in people's lives, which is these kids and their parents and talk less about the treatment of sarah huckabee sanders and more about the dhirn who achildren who are with this. but you really can't take lectures from you, matt, on civility when you haven't said one word on john mccain. >> i just did. >> you didn't. >> i did. i said right on national tv the next morning it was wrong when john mccain was fighting cancer. >> well, now you know how everybody feels. now you know how everybody feels. donald trump -- let me just say, donald trump never said one word about the attacks on john mccain and he still hasn't. and over the weekend, he still attacked him. but you know what? we should be better -- you're right. you're right. we should be better than the president of the united states, and actually try and treat each other civilly. i agree with you. >> charlie cook, i want you to weigh in here at the risk of throwing you in the middle of this. but i wonder just, it is such --
it is cliche. it is such an unusual time. this is not what it was like 10, 20 years ago, in modern history. the level of polarization we see right now. how do you look at it? how do you diagnose it? >> i just left a luncheon of former members of congress of both parties. and you just get a sense talking to these folks that we thought things were acrimonious in the '90s. we thought they were acrimonious in the '80s, '70s, and '60s. but this exceeds anything we've ever seen. the thing is there is a lot of guilt on both sides. this is like trying to figure out who threw the first punch in a bar fight. there's been a lot of sins committed on both sides. i really wish people would sort of stand down a little bit. in my mind, i think we are more politically divided today than we have been since reconstruction. this was started -- i think this
is 25, 30, 35 years coming that president trump didn't start it. he may have accelerated it, but he sure didn't start it. i just am not sure what can turn the process around. because we're headed to a bad place. >> i think a lot of people are seeing that potentially and wondering the same thing, is there some way to get off that course. charlie cook, matt schlapp. and lower oral steroid use. about 50% of people with severe asthma have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. fasenra™ is designed to work with the body to target and remove eosinophils. fasenra™ is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with severe eosinophilic asthma. don't use fasenra™ for sudden breathing problems or other problems caused by eosinophils. fasenra™ may cause headache, sore throat, and allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue,
or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if your asthma worsens or if you have a parasitic infection. fasenra™ is a targeted treatment for eosinophilic asthma. that's important. ask an asthma specialist about fasenra™. even when nothing else is. keep her receipts tidy, brand vo: snap and sort your expenses with quickbooks and find, on average, $4,340 in tax savings. quickbooks. backing you. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you.
call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel - and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people
who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now - and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. (vo) imagine a visibly healthin 28 days. purina one. natural ingredients, plus vitamins and minerals in powerful combinations. for radiant coats, sparkling eyes, and vibrant energy. purina one. 28 days. one visibly healthy pet.
we showed you the president in the white house earlier. a few hours from now he is going to be campaigning in south carolina on the eve of a gubernatorial runoff on the eve when the president's clout with his own party may be on the line. last week donald trump went out and endorsed henry mcmaster, the governor of south carolina who issis if aing a primary challenge. south carolina they do primary and then a runoff if nobody gets 50%. mcmaster in the primary two weeks ago held to 42%. now in a runoff with john warren, a businessman, an outsider. tomorrow we are going to hold on if mcmaster can hold his job or
will get knocked out. the president is going down there to campaign for mcmaster tonight. he swept the state in the primary two years ago. very conservative state. can he get his party behind mcmaster. joining me, indicateton dawson. let me ask you, the president is in for henry mcmaster. what is the risk that this blows up in his face. >> steve, i don't think it's going to blow up in his face. it is unprecedented. we have never seen from richard nixon to right now a president come in. but the circumstances are different here. remember, governor mcmaster was elevated to the seat because nikki hayley was appointed to be in u.n. ambassador. so this is the -- governor mcmaster's run. it's virtually an open seat. with that being said, our primaries like most primaries,
11 to 14% of the registered voters who can vote vote. it is a very small universe. they are issue driven. and endorsements sometimes especially in south carolina don't make a lot of differs. but when air force one lands in south carolina tonight at 7:00, it remind every voter for governor mcmaster this they need to come back and vote again. he got 42% the first time. if he can bring 38% of those voters back out they are going to be successful. donald trump, the loyalty he has shown to henry mcmaster being the first elected official in the country to endorse him. again with mike pence coming in on saturday with air force two. someone who has been to south carolina before by invitation. someone who will run for president at some time in his life is very popular here as well. that is calling in the big dogs. they are here. i think it will work well for governor mcmaster.
>> see if you can take me through this. i think south carolina, what happened in the republican party there as it relates to donald trump might be sort of an example of what has happened nationally. we look at the national polls that say trump has 90% support from republicans right now. we think back to those primaries in 2016. you know, trump came into south carolina -- i say he swept the state. but his percentage of support was in the 30s in that campaign in 2016. what happened to the rest of the party? when he came in through the primaries in 2016 only less than half the party actually voted for him in the primaries. now we see 90% supporting him. henry mcmaster lining up with trump thinking he is going to put him over the finish. how has trump school dated that support within the republican party? what are they seeing now that they didn't see before? >> you brought up a good point. marco rubio and ted cruz got together more votes than donald trump did in our primary.
it is a winner take all primary like a lot of them are, and there isn't a runoff. how did he move to an 87% approval rating in south carolina? it's policies. very much so, over personality. and i have soon the numbers to see that -- seen the numbers to see that. it's the policies of trade. it's the policies of tax reform. it's the policies of dismantling obamacare, which is very unpopular in south carolina. so they have looked at his policies. and then they -- one thing that, as we watched in south carolina in the primary was, we were a little shobd at how upset the -- shocked at how upset the voters were and how they just warranted to turn washington upside down. and donald trump and his rhetoric and his style has satisfied that appetite and has grown. plus, the only time i've really seen a sitting president's numbers in modern day decline were george bush 32's in the last four months or so of his
presidency. republican want to love and like their president. they will overlook the misgivings. and they want to support him. that's why i tell you steve, i'm not sure it's always -- that popularity is transferable to anyone else. >> that's an interesting potential test of that tomorrow there in your state. indicateton dawson, former republican chair in south carolina. thank you as always. we are back after a quick break. there's little rest for a single dad,
up for this hour. ali val she is here to pib things up. i turn it over to you. >> steve, thanks very much. i'm ali val she this. hour, thousands of children remain separated from their parents. we have no timetable when they will be reunited. president trump isn't focused on that issue. he is focused on denying the constitutional rights of unauthorized immigrants crossing the border, specifically their right to due process. the department of homeland security insistings it has a process established with health and home services indicating it knows the exact location of all the children in its country. dhs says 522 children were reunited with their guardians but more than 2,053 have yet to be reunited. markets have been retacting to the trade war all day. right now the dow is down almost 450 points. that's less than 1.8%, a little