with my friend joy reid. >> i do believe in meetings. look, i believe having a meeting with chairman kim was a good thing. i think having meetings with the president of china was a very good thing. i believe it's good so having meets with russia, china, and north korea i believe in it. nothing bad is going to come out of it and maybe some good will come out. but i go in with low expectations, i'm not going in with high expectations. i don't -- i don't really -- i can't tell you what's going to happen but i can tell you what i'll be asking for and we'll see if something comes of it. >> good morning and welcome to "a.m. joy." any moment now donald trump is expected to leave his golf property in scotland, he spent 18128 d 128 days visiting a golf course
he owns. and when he get there is, he'll meet with lots and lots of giving away the farm. but one issue putin may bring up, sanctions, and it's worth remembering in december of 2016 trump's 23-day national security adviser michael flynn who later pleaded guilty to lying to the fbi about his contacts with
russia reassures then russian ambassador sergey kislyak that the trump administration would reverse the obama administration's sanctions on russia once in office. that led to putin refraining from retaliating. the next day trump tweeted praise to putin for the move. joining me there helsinki is michael mcfaul, the author of "from cold war to hot peace, an american ambassador in putin's russia." ambassador mcfaul, thank you for being here. >> tharchnks, joy. >> i want to start out with the readout that it is that, at least according to the associated press, donald trump wants from the meeting. number one, the optics of a formal full on red carpet relationship with russia, and a relationship with vladimir putin. not on that list is the extradition of those 12 intelligence officers. what are your thoughts on that? >> pretty striking, joy. why is it not on the list? they've been indicted by his government by the united states
of america for president trump not to ask for their extradition. he won't get it for him not to ask for it is a big mistake and everything on that list has nothing to do with american national interests. it's all about the form of the meeting. >> we've had past u.s. presidents attempt to forge a better relationship with russia or with putin, george w. bush famously said he looked into putin's eyes and got a sense of his soul. president obama when hillary clinton was secretary of state tried this russia reset in part with putin's successor so it's not as if this is the first time an american president has tried to have warmer relations. in your view, what is different about donald trump's approach in these previous presidents? >> joy, i worked at the white house during the reset years you just mentioned with president obama and what i think people misunderstand about that period is we were not trying to quote/unquote improve relations
with russia. rather we were trying to get concrete things done. for instance, we got a start treaty done which reduced by 30% the naeps the united states and russia had. we got sanctions on iran, we got a new supply route to afghanistan. very concrete things that we believe were in the american interest. what is different about president trump's approach is he just makes the meeting itself and his personal relationship with putin the goal and we have no idea what the substantive agenda that he's trying to achieve. that's what's different about the obama era. >> let's read out what putin wants from the u.s. clearly sanctions lifted, not just the magnitsky act but sanctions imposed because of his seizure of crimea, a pullback of nato forces deployed near russia's border, something trump said he may be open to and a rapport with trump personally. i want to play donald trump talking about that, how he thinks he would get along with
putin and let you give your assessment of whether or not he can get it. >> i think i'd get along with vladimir putin. i think i'd get along well with him. i think i would have a great relationship with russia and putin. >> will he be prepared? will he be prepared? and i might end up having a good relationship. will president trump be prepa d prepared, president putin is kgb and this and that. pew technical is fine, he's fine. >> we're all fine. >> give me an assessment having dealt with vladimir putin. what do you think he thinks he could get out of it. >> it pains me to hear those quotes, joy, thanks for playing them again. the goal of american foreign policy is not to get along with putin. this is a guy that violated our
sovereignty in 2016, propped up a dictator in syria in 2015 by military intervention, annexed crimea in 2014, seizing land for the first time since world war ii in europe so the goal is not just to forget about those things, just to get along and i think president trump doesn't understand that basic thing of diplomacy. for putin, it's really simple how to make this successful. if trump doesn't remember any of that history and they just say let's just get along, that's a giant victory for putin. that's all he needs. those other things you mentioned is icing on the cake. >> ambassador michael mcfaul is in helsinki, thank you for being here. appreciate your insights. let's bring in our panel now. natasha bertrand is staff writer at the "atlantic" and jason johnson, an msnbc political contributor and politics it or the at theroot.com. i'm going to stay with the elements we had for this segm t
segment. i want to play the current also do russia, jon huntsman, on mete the press, was asked if donald trump would stick to the belief of nato nations that crimea belongs to the ukraine and not to russia. i want to play that and get your response to it. let's listen. >> the agenda is the president's, everything will be his call but i think it's highly unlikely you'll see any change in crimea. this was a violation of international law. what we've seen in eastern ukraine is a violation of international law. >> but you didn't rule it out. ambassador, i noticed you didn't rule it out. you said it's the president's call. >> well, of course it's the president's call. >> he can say you know what -- even though everybody else thinks it's a good idea. >> of course it's the president's call but i think it's highly unlikely it's going to emerge in their conversation. >> it's diplomatic speak but it's not an assurance, i would add, that donald trump won't simply recognize crimea as belonging to russia because he's
made noises in the past he might be open to it. >> and he could continue to make noises in the past. he'll say crimea was historically russia and if kosovo was recognized as an independent nation, why not crimea? i think i am certain he will say crimea is russia but president trump goes against anything america has ever stood for or spoken about. he gets along with putin or thinks he'll get along with putin more than he gets along with his allies so i don't know why we're so beaten out of shape about it because it really -- that's what we've seen in trump in the past two years. whatever we think is wrong he'll say is right. >> what are the consequences of that? it does feel like we're in a
home of realignment where donald trump wants to realign the american center as being erdogan, xi of china putin. >> the strongmen. >> victor orban of hungry and this new leader of italy on one side and putin and traditional u.s. allies, france, germany, england on the other side. what are the global consequences? >> i remember when he met with kim jong-un wasn't of the first things he said is that when he speaks to his people kim jong-un think listen and i want the same thing. so he wants the same thing but i think trump is a consequence of already happening turn of the world. it's the authoritarian democrat s -- democrat if the sense that they were elected. so he is almost on the coattails of a very much happening tide wave and this is a shame that
america has joined that kind of tide. it's not that orange original. and the challenges for europe or the remaining democrats in europe to make sure they present united front and they don't let -- get discouraged by the putins of the world, by the erdogans, by the trumps of the world. >> absolutely. let's play donald trump. this was in a cbs interview, he has done an interview with somebody who wasn't fox, and he's talking about the russian attack on our election. let's listen to that. >> this was during the obama administration. they were doing whatever it was during the obama administration. and i heard that they were trying or people were trying to hack into the rnc, too, the republican national committee. i think the dnc should be
ashamed of themselves for allowing themselves to be hacked. >> so donald trump, natasha, goes into the past and blames president obama which is what he does for everything but he doesn't address the substance of the attack and what they mean to his country, the united states. here's dan coats, director of national intelligence, sounding a very different note on friday about those cyber attacks. listen. >> focusing on the potential impact of these actions on our midterm elections misses the more important point. these actions are persistent, per situation i have and meant to undermine america's democracy on a daily basis. the warning signs are there. the system is blinking and it is why i believe we are at a critical point. >> so there are two ways to look at that, that maybe underneath donald trump's just noise and bluster where he wants to be aligned with vladimir putin and
he doesn't care about the election attack, underneath the presidential layer is their activity in the trump administration to protect the country or is the coats sound the noise and the trump sound the substance. which from your reporting is it? >> the latter. i'm hearing the intelligence community, the national security community is not doing anything to protect against the meddling russia is doing and will interfere in the 2018 midterms. i'm hearing whereas the national security and intelligence community would have been going full steam ahead trying to protect against these hacks and russian propaganda infiltrating our entire system, that is not being done and the question we're trying to answer is why not? why is this infrastructure not being built now in a way that this would have been and we learned after 9/11. dan coats compared the attack
russia did on our democracy to the attack on 9/11 and that is striking and it's completely emblematic of the disconnect between trump and his own administration because the administration wants to do something, they have a clenched fist when it comes to russia but donald trump is going in with open arms and the question is why and i think the biggest example of that, of course, was when rod rosenstein issued -- announced those indictments on friday just three days before trump's meeting with putin. that just shows just the fact that he briefed trump only three days or four days prior to announcing those indictments and didn't get his input on them at all shows how divergent their priorities are. >> so then the next question is when you broaden it is to the republican party, it's not clear whether the clenched fist of the rod rosensteins of the world who
want to hit back against this russian attack on our election and the trump part where he wants to embrace russia but also the republicans behind him on the house of representatives who just want to beat up rod rosenstein, out in the country are republican elections officials guarding the election? are republicans in the world caring more about these russian attacks than the administration? >> joy it almost goes state by state. in maryland there was a report earlier this week about the fact that the justice department went to the state of maryland and said, look, there's a russian oligarch who has a large investment in the software program you use to count vote, maybe you should pay attention. so occasionally in some states you have some elected officials who say okay we need to be concerned. i don't care if it's an ally or enemy, election integrity should be a primary concern. i don't care if it's british, russian or chinese, no foreign entity should have too large an
investment in how our electoral systems operate. so i think it's state by state but the larger issue is this. part of the indictments on friday, one of those things that mueller mentioned is that you had a republican candidate who reached out to get in touch with guccifer to find out information about democrats. the fact that you have one of the two major political parties in the united states encouraging the degradation of american democracy so they can win local elections and stifling the work that needs to be done to keep our country safe is dangerous. it doesn't matter if the russian scutting or don't have much impact in the 2018 election, the fact that they have been able to do so won't just embolden them but china and any other nation that says if america isn't paying attention to their back door, we can walk right in. >> is it likely russia does it again, having clearly gotten away with it and been rewarded for it with a personal one-on-one meet between donald
trump and vladimir putin? is it likely they do in the 2018? >> i think politically it's possible the putin hand is not going to be seen in 2018 because that's how donald trump can claim, well when the weak barack obama was here they did it but when i am in charge of making america great even the russians don't bother or dare to deal with it and putin can give him this kind of present. on the other hand as jason brilliantly pointed out, american politics is so partisan that i'm not going to be surprised if the republicans would ask putin to help with the democrats so they're not going to take over the house so i think it can go both ways but it's dangerous and donald trump is going to contribute, his towering larger-than-life figure will contribute to one outcome or another and none are democratic. >> nina, thank you very much.
we'll have to have you back. natasha bertrand and jason jo johnson will be back later. meanwhile, republicans are trying to impeach rod rosenstein who just indicted 12 russian intelligence officers. how that you would would undermine the russia investigation as it's heating up. baby boomers, here's something you should know. there's a serious virus out there that 1 in 30 boomers has, yet most don't even know it. a virus that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. hep c can hide in the body for years without symptoms. left untreated it can lead to liver damage, even liver cancer. the only way to know if you have hep c is to ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us, it's time to get tested. it's the only way to know for sure. for us, it's time to get tested. 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,
federal investigations usually do not know all of the relevant facts. we do not try cases on television or in congressional hearings. most anonymous leaks are not from the government officials who are actually conducting these investigations. we follow the rule of law which means we follow procedures and we reserve judgment. >> deputy attorney general rod rosenstein fired a not-so-veiled shot at republicans while announcing the indictment of a dozen russian intelligence officers accused of an attack on the 2016 election. politico reports house conservatives are preparing a plan to push rosenstein out. mark meadows had an impeachment document on the house floor at the very moment rosenstein spoke. some conservatives sources say they can file the impeachment
document as soon as tomorrow. back with me, natasha bertrand. also joining me, david corn, washington bureau chief of "mother jones" and paul butler. robert mueller is racing -- basically pushing to finish parts of the russia probe, here's the quote, question of american involvement remains, as rerently as this week mueller's team discussed interviewing more witnesses. so he's pushing to get to the americans in this indictment and this comes as house conservatives are prepping to try to shove out rod rosenstein. this is from politico, conservative sources say they could file the impeachment as soon as monday. is there a race on now in your reporting for mueller to finish substantial parts of his probe before the boss gets fired? >> i don't think mueller lets other people set his schedule. i really don't. i think this is a long,
complicated investigation. there could be other business aspects to this investigation, there's a lot we've seen we don't know beforehand. rosenstein said people who don't know don't know. what this is doing is showing house conservatives, mark meadows, jim jordan, anybody who seems to watch fox news are living in a bizarre reality. to them the most important something a fisa surveillance warrant that peter strzok might have been involved with which they spent 12 hours on in a hearing and not the fact that russia attacked the united states. it's not meddling, it's an attack and an attack this donald trump covered up. he knew about it, he was told about it during the campaign and kept saying it didn't happen. they're lost in their own little
world and the two worlds will clash. >> let me play peter strzok. he was quite vigorous in defense of himself and this is one of the things he said to your very point, david. >> i have the utmost respect for congress's oversight role but i strongly believe today's hearing is another victory notch in putin's belt and another milestone in our enemy's campaign to tear america apart. >> do republicans understand that or care about that? >> i don't know if they understand. they don't care about it certainly. even senator rand pall is saying everyone does it, who cares if the russians interfered, it's hard to avoid the word treason. i tend towards treachery but they're giving aid and comfort to an enemy that attacked us and had an impact, no mistake. they had an impact on the election and republicans don't seem to care. >> and natasha do rank-and-file
elected republicans care that russia attacked our election? >> it doesn't seem that way. the only harsh statement we've seen has been from senator john mccain as usual he is the one pushing back saying the president should prioritize the revolution that 12 intelligence officers hacked the dccc and if he does not and if he doesn't plan to then the meeting should be canceled and you have a ton of democratic senators saying the meeting should be canceled but in terms of republicans coming out, mccain is the only one. ben sasse came out with a statement that criticized implicitly but not by name trump for characterizing putin as someone who could be our friend but we're seeing this attack on peter strzok which was a three-ring circus, that entire hearing, very special attacks and you now they are preparing
to impeach rod rosenstein who just announced the indictment so it seems like they're doing everything they can to put the brakes on this investigation because they feel the noose is tightening and if it's tightening around the president it's tightening around the republican party because they have been complicit in allowing the president to get away with his open arms approach to vladimir putin and russia. >> it's strange that if there's enthusiasm to what happened because of the outcome being favorable at least an indifference to it. you're seeing one republican named rod rosenstein who seems to be getting tired of being a punching bag. a piece in the "washington post" that said i don't know if it's krt but at some point he made the decision he would stay within the ethical pounds but wouldn't be a punching bag said a former official who is friend with rod rosenstein. you see a little steel in the spine every now again when he decided i'm going to keep doing it my way." can an attempt to impeach this man who is indicting the people
who attacked our election and they want to impeach him, can that work. >> the republicans know there's more evidence to support the impeachment of donald j. trump than rod rosenstein and riepz is steeling himself so we saw the clapback on friday. it reminded when when president obama said there are no red states or blue states, just the united states. rod rosenstein says said on friday when the russians are attacking the united states there's no republicans or democrats, we're all americans and then he said president trump needs to understand. in other words, you gon learn today when you meet with putin that that man tried not to subvert our democracy only. the indictment reveals there was
nothing bipartisan about the russian effort. they went for democrats to install donald trump as preside president. >> let me play that. this is rod rosenstein on friday at what paul butler called the clapback. let's listen. >> we follow the rule of law which means that we follow procedures and we reserve judgment. we complete our investigations and evaluate the relevant evidence before with we reach conclusion. that's how the american people expect their department of justice to operate and how our department is going to operate. >> very quickly before i come back to our two reporters, a prosecutor in the position rod rosenstein is in, can you explain to us as a former prosecutor how do they continue to operate with this kind of political pressure where one political party has said the investigation itself is a crime and should stop. how does a prosecutor operate?
>> you do your job and understand you have to submit to these congressional hearings. congress is fulfilling its oversight role in a very bipartisan way. they're trying to protect the president so rod rosenstein is in a poogs where he has to regard the congress as basically a supplement to the president's defense team. it's an excluesly difficult position. >> first natasha and then david. even in this indictment that rod rosenstein issued, it talked about that republicans also went after the rnc. do republicans have a sense, do they understand as marco rubio said today the russians want to help republican, tomorrow they could want to attack republicans. do republicans understand that? >> i think all you have to look at to answer that question is the fact that you had a republican senator delegation go over to moscow during the week
of the fourth of july. >> on the fourth of july. >> they were there meeting with high level kremlin officials. why? we don't know. was it to discuss the upcoming summit between trump and putin? we don't understand why that happened. was it to better relations between the u.s. and russia? these weren't members of the arms services committee or the intelligence committee, just senators who decided to go other there and take matters into their own hands. the question is whether or not they understand the russians might have compromising information on them because they did hack into the rnc. maybe that's part of the reason why they went over there? >> you've been following russiagate for from the beginning. do the russians have potentially leverage over the republican party between what they did with the nra in terms of funneling money? do republicans believe -- do any republicans believe russians have leverage on them as well?
>> again, it's hard to know how -- what republicans are thinking about because they're not acting in a highly rational manner. they're acting very transactionly, very situationally, the way trump does. whatever works for them for the moment to protect trump because they feel that's their interest. we do know that the russians have the capability and certainly have ben trait it had republicans to some degree but i don't know if that's why they're doing what they're doing. it seems to me the jim jordans of have decided that i need to do whatever they can to protect donald trump and his own treachery. >> protect trump at all costs and the enemies are rod rosenstein and christopher steele. >> and not putin, he's fine. >> natasha bertrand, david corn, paul butler, thank you all, have a great rest of your day.
coming up, donald trump is about to meet vladimir putin face to face. i'll speak with a key democratic senator on why he wants that meeting canceled. and now for the rings. (♪) i'm a four-year-old ring bearer with a bad habit of swallowing stuff. still won't eat my broccoli, though. and if you don't have the right overage, you could be paying for that pricey love band yourself. so get an allstate agent, and be better protected from mayhem. like me. can a ring bearer get a snack around here?
one of the main events of donald trump's european tour was his meeting with britain's queen elizabeth. he told his friend and former apprentice winner piers morgan "the queen is fantastic, she is a fantastic woman. so much energy and smart and sharp, she was amazing, such a wonderful lady and so beautiful. it was an honor to meet her." but he missed his lessons on royal protocol. he turned his back on the queen and walked in front of her and the brits were not amused. one royal commentator said trump's awkward stroll was reminiscent of wandering on a golf course, something he knows well. up next, trying to put the brakes on the trump putin summit. and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business
the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ that's confident. but it's not kayak confident. kayak searches hundreds of travel and airline sites to find the best flight for me. so i'm more than confident. how's your family? kayak. search one and done. sometimes you need an expert. i got it. and sometimes those experts need experts. on it. [ crash ] and sometimes the expert the expert needed needs insurance expertise. it's all good. steve, you're covered for general liability. and, paul, we got your back with workers' comp. wow, it's like a party in here. where are the hors d'oeuvres, right? [ clanking ] tartlets? we cover commercial vehicles, too. i think there's something wrong with your sink.
we cover commercial vehicles, too. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation
that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira.
in a sense, we're competitors, not a question of friend or enemies. he's not my enemy. and hopefully someday he may be a friend, it could happen. >> donald trump may be optimistic about his meeting with potential bff vladimir putin but in light of the varmint indictments of 12 russian intelligence officers, there are growing calls from democrats and one gop senator, john mccain, for the white house to call off tomorrow's summit. with me is one lawmaker, democratic senator from rhode island jack reed, ranking member of the arms services committee and member of the intelligence committee. thank you so much for being h e here. you issued a statement calling for the cancellation of the summit. it says the president should
cancel his meeting with vladimir putin in communication with americans to interfere with our elections. t the. you signed a joint letter to avoid meeting trump alone. i real read from that. if you insist on meeting with russian president vladimir putin in hill singky, finland, we write to urge you you include senior members of your team and not meet one on one with mr. putin. we hope you will use the opportunity of a meeting with mr. putin to advance a well-coordinated u.s. message supported by senior leaders in your administration to hold russia accountable where it's unacceptable behavior. it was signed by yourself, chuck schumer, mark warner, dick durbin and others, dianne feinstein, et cetera. why did you go from calling for the meeting to be canceled to saying don't meet him alone. do you feel there is no chance he would cancel? >> well, very little chance he would cancel and i think it was
very important for us to also state as you point out that if there is a meeting, the meeting has to be staffed by his foreign policy specialist. the last meeting he had with kim jong-un was a disaster. he went in by himself unprepared, ill informed, he gave up our military exercises with the south koreans. he chose to describe them the way the north koreass and chinese do, as provocative war games. if there's another repetition of this, it will be disastrous and one way to stop it would be to not meet with putin but at a minimum to have skilled foreign policy experts with you at the meeting. >> what are your top three fears about what it is that donald trump would do or say at a meeting with putin without anyone else in the room? >> he would likely adopt the
terminology putin uses, he seems to mimic these authoritarian leaders he enjoys so much but in a concrete sense he could suggest that have sanctions be dropped against the russians after the invasion of crimea. he could suggest that there be a recognition of crimea. that was suggested by his comments at the nato meeting. all of this is unpredictable. that's one of the problems. most of his predecessors, presidents of both parties, have gone into meetings with russian leaders with a very, very well bangladeshed agenda, staffed, ready to go. there were very little surprise s what have been established
through negotiations. here's it's off the you have to. >> what the american people would wonder is to what extent could congress stop donald trump from doing? reversing sanctions on russia, allowing for the recognition of russia's hold on crimea and pulling the u.s. back from nato. could congress stop him from doing that? >> the damage would be done if the president of the united states made these changes. my resolution last week with respect to supporting nato was passed 97-2, very strong bipartisan support so the president's comments don't reflect the widespread beliefs of my colleagues on both sides and i believe the american
people not only with respect to nato but russia and it's difficult since the report of the confirmation of what our intelligence people knew, the attack of our democracy by russia. he'll be sitting across the table with someone that decided and continues to act in a way that is destructive to american democracy and also he calls him out on that not only as he missed the meeting, putin will walk away stronger. >> there are indications from donald trump said so far in the bits of the cbs news interview that he doesn't say he would ask for the indictment of the 12 russians indicted by his own justice department for attacking our election and that he has amorphous goals if for meeting and you believe that congress would act in a bipartisan
fashion to counteract him giving in on those issues but listen to rand paul on state of the union about the investigation and whether he thinks it's a witch-hunt. take a listen. >> do you think president trump shoulds a ask for the extradition when they meet tomorrow. >> i think it would be a moot point. i don't think russia is sending anyone back over here for trial the same way we wouldn't send anybody over there for trial. he's not going to admit he did it and we can't take on face value anything they tell us. we have to assume -- and if we have proof that they did it which it sounds like they did, we should spend our time protecting ourselves instead of having there witch-hunt on the preside president. >> can you understand why americans have a lack of confidence in your counterparts in the republican party that they would join democrats in trying to counteract the president taking the putin line on things like nato, crimea and
these indicted russians when they're talking on television like rand paul? >> it's the president. the president has refused to accept the conclusion of his own intelligence community that russia did attack us in 2016 that, in fact; they continue to attack us, just this week national intelligence director coates came it what very stern warning about russian activities so it's not just some of my colleagues, i don't think the majority of my republican colleagues that dispute that iss issue. i asked if there was an approach to constrict and confront the russians and the answer was no.
>> we will have to leave it there, senator jack reed, thank you for being here this morning. >> thank you. >> up next, steve bannon is back. but now he's pushing his far-right agenda overseas. we'll tell you what he's up to. year, i am sorry about that. [music playing] (vo) progress is in the pursuit. audi will cover your first month's lease payment on select models during summer of audi sales event.
president trump. you've known him for many decades. he's not a racist. he's one of the most loving guys i've known. he's a tough guy. i've never seen him as a racist. pop list, nationalist movement, it's not racist. >> steve bannon is back. trump created chaos across europe, bannon set up shop in lon con creating a pseudowar room at a hotel to confer witheth know nationalists. his goal was clear. to reinforce his reputation as a leader in what he sees as a, quote, global populist nationalist movement. >> christopher dick i joins me from nbc news --
>> earlier on the show, they said donald trump is not leading this far right nationalism movement. he's on the tail end of it. it's obviously a bigger trend. the people trump praised is vladimir putin, kim jong-un. ab dal -- he loves strong men. in europe specifically, is he seen as a leading edge of this nationalist movement or the tail end? >> you know, when trump was first elected, he was a problem for the nationalist movements that already existed here. what some people call the cryptofascist movements that exist in europe. they had some momentum. but when -- people like -- in the netherlands expected to do very well did not do very well when he was running in the
parliamentary elections right after trump. same thing with in france. she seemed to have a lot of wind taken out of her sails by trump, not intentionally but because he was seen as so weird, a buffoon, a blowhard. that's begun to change now. the immigration issue has set in. it's been exploited by the kind of people that bannon is talking to. particularly with the victory in italy and the interior minister of austria, a very, very right wing. comes from a party basically from the nazis. then you begin to see a resurgence of, well, we could call it populist. but i think the irish times, it was praised best. pre-fascist.
>> i think they better watch themselves. you're changing security, look at what's happening. you take a look. look at what's happening to different countries that never had difficulty, never had problems. it's a very sad situation. it's very unfortunate. but i do not think it's good for europe. >> if we put up a polling on countries and wlosht the populations believe that increasing immigration, adding more immigrants adds to the terrorism lists. it's trending toward people saying it does. how much of a risk
a couple of incidents that it has seen. people based in germany. based on anecdotal incidents. if there's a new wave. christopher dickey. appreciate you being here. >> coming up. now from inside (vo) i was born during the winter of '77. i first met james in 5th grade. we got married after college. and had twin boys. but then one night, a truck didn't stop.
john roberts got t i don't take questions from cnn. cnn is fake news. john roberts of fox. let's go to a real network. >> we're a real network too, sir. >> good morning. welcome to "am joy." we're now in season 1 of the fox news produced presidency. partially headed up by bill shine, the ousted fox news executive who serves as trump's communication's director and one of the first accomplishments in
the shop, made for tv unveiling of the supreme court pick brett kavanaugh. shine controlled details like flattering lighting for trump and the timing. it happened to coincide with the a-block of fox host and trump pal/adviser sean hannity's primetime show. trump's adoration of all innings fox serves as the backdrop of his trip to europe as he consistently bashes any other outlet as fake news. joining me is gabe sherman, vanity fair, eric bowler, senior writer. lillian maxwell, director of progressive programming. jason johnson, politics editor at the root. gabe, i'll start with you. read a little bit from your piece about the kavanaugh rollout. he's benefited from shine's appointment. timed the announcement for the start of hannity's show for monster ratings and he got big ratings. >> of course. i think this was an early indication that bill shine is
really now producing the white house like a media company. timing the rollouts to get maximum ratings and also as a stage craft of the more attractive lighting. there is some sort of element to that. you do need to produce these event. this is really a case that trump decided he's going to only speak to the fox news ud jens. >> there's even the way kavanaugh sounded. they all sound like donald trump. play kavanaugh at the nomination on monday. >> no president has ever consulted more widely or talked with more people for more backgrounds, to seek input about a supreme court nomination. mr. president, i'm grateful to you and i'm humbled by your confidence in me. >> one of the criticisms of president obama, even from people who are fans of him, was that he is such an eloquent speaker and such a great sort of
performer. political performer. once he got into the white house, he shunned the performance aspect to drill down to the policy and get into the policy aspect. he was an excellent president from the standpoint of leadership and family man. he didn't do the performance. donald trump always has the performance and he also has his cast of characters do the performance just like him. are we getting to a point now where the american people are going to expect a reality show? that this performtive becomes a new normal? >> i hope not. i think american consumers are conditioned to expect a reality show and something that is made and produced for television. i would also say that there are a lot of aspects of this plot for lack of a better word that are negative for the president. right? as a part of this reality show, you have what's going on on the border. i think that americans are
looking at the show and saying, there's a complete lack of substance on the one hand but also you're seeing human rights abuses as a part and sub plot of this reality show. that's probably not what the white house wants. >> at the same time, you have this produced presidency. it is sort of a produced program that is an extension of fox news. but then they become an extension of sinclair broadcasting. they take that show and feed it into the homes of what, 70, 80 millions americans every night. >> fox is a propaganda with republican parties. it's now state-run and at war with the free press. when you look at kavanaugh, there's no way he wrote that first line. he wrote the next line. i'm deeply honored. he looks at this and said oh, my god, i guess i have to read this. for me, this production, i agree with gabriel, that's what shine did. i think it was kind of a bust. ratings were down overall.
the biggest drop was from fox news. there's fatigue even among the base. today the bill shine effect was that disaster at the press conference with trump and may where trump internationally televised press conference, two of the most powerful leaders to go all in and denigrate the free press. this is authoritarian 101. this is what we're seeing in hungary, romania, poland and places like that. this is what they do on the national stage. it's incredibly dangerous. >> we were talking with chris dickey about it. a berlusconi -- where the leader is -- they deny reality and they have a whole bunch of people who believe the reality given to them by donald trump and his associated media. i want to come to jason johnson to that point. this is another rupert murdoch outlet. here's donald trump claiming that an interview he did on tape
with the sun is fake news. take a listen. >> didn't criticize the prime minister. i have a lot of respect for the prime minister. unfortunately, it was a story that was done which was generally fine, but it didn't put in what i said about the prime minister. i said tremendous things. fortunately, we tend to record stories so we have it for your enjoyment if you like it. it's called fake news. we solve a lot of problems with the good old recording instrument. >> the recording instrument to him saying the thing he said. but the sun responded -- we stand by our reporting and the quotes we used, including those where the president was positive about the prime minister. they're conceding to him. they said no, no, no. we did put the positive stuff in the paper and the audio and were delighted that he retracted his original charge against the paper.
then they go, to say the president used fake news with any serious intent is well, fake news. they're pushing back. but adopting his terminology. >> right. joy, in american parlance, this is called receipts. he's a notorious liar when he has interactions with foreign leaders, theresa may, angela merkel. he said he didn't say he said things that he gets caught for. i agree with this on two levels. one, i never say fake news. i never alternative facts because i refuse to allow the ear worm of this man's language to become part of my parlance when i discuss american politics. to the degree we begin to use the terminology of donald trump is the degree to which we allow him and the dangerous way that he runs this kcountry to become normalized. i talk to my students.
this industry works because journalists have each other's backs professionally. what happens in the uk where fox allows other news outlets to be insulted that way and validate what the president did an embarrassment to that news organization. there's good people that work at fox and they should be ashamed of themselves for being used by him in that way. >> the authoritarian government, they reward state media, media that will play ball and punish anyone critical of the leader. you now have the white house punishing cnn, not just refusing to take responsive questions, but retracting an interview that john bolton had scheduled. we got the list of who was to be on the sunday show. he was on the libs. it gets retracted. dave tapper tweets out, he had been locked in for the state of union. then the president attacked cnn, our correspondent tried to ask
questions. huckabee sanders responds. the spokesman for the president. a cnn reporter disrespected the potus and p.m. may. we prioritized. essentially, saying that asking a question was disrespecting the leader. because he didn't show deaf reign -- deafer ens, that is dnied. two post putin interviews. talking to first sean hannity and tucker carlson. putin is talking to -- they're punishing cnn for asking questions and giving exclusive access for a high-profile foreign policy moment to its preferred network, fox news. >> president obama used to go on fox news. >> in between every sentence. >> it's not as if you have the
equivalent on the other side. >> the rest of the washington press core rounded up behind -- [ overlapping talking ]. >> the other interview donald trump granted the sun, rupert murdoch's paper. the one who won the apprentice also. >> john roberts was completely classless at that press conference. trump is attacking cnn on a televised stage. this wasn't a sideshow at the white house or something like that. british press was -- john roberts jumped in. he issued a feeble statement saying it was unfair. there has to be collective institutional response from the press. i've been saying this for two years. when the trump campaign was hurting, reporters -- >> there has to be stand-up. -- you have to stand up to the bullies.
if you don't, the damage to democracy is incalculable. >> it isn't happening, though. >> it happened a little bit last year. remember when the white house tried this press conference or not have press conferences recorded. there's enough screaming and yelling, we got press conferences back. to be consistent, in the event that fox decides they want to completely abdicate any responsibility, then it's the obligation for other networks to treat them as such and no longer validate the garbage that they're producing if they don't want to be a news organization and just be a mouthpiece for pre-authoritarianism. that's the next step of this decision. i don't believe the press will behave properly. therefore, fox needs to be treated as what it is if they decide to follow that route. >> it is interesting. a collective horror among the press corps. she made her comedy routine. you haven't seen the collective
outrage that other -- >> there was outrage when hillary clinton used a rope to put reporters in one section of a rally and they acted like she was the authoritarian dictator. now we see somebody embodying authoritarian behavior actually only going to the state-run media and apparently we're too afraid to call it out in the same way we did with hillary clinton. i'm calling bs on that. i think the reporters should stand up to donald trump. i have no idea why they won't. maybe the only reason is because they want to retain access to the white house. they're not getting access. >> i don't know why that is. it's not as if when you get access, you're getting the truth from this white house either. >> bill shine coming into this and the production of the presidency, they understand clearly that they can do this, right? they can have this direct pipeline to fox news and integrate their operation with the media outlet and there's no
punishment for it. there's no downside for it. >> all of my reporting that i've heard is that bill shine and the president now have been incredibly close relationship. they see eye to eye. they're familiar personalities. now we're going to see basically a sim biosis between donald trump, the oval office and certain aspects of fox news, especially laura ingram, tucker carlson and sean hannity. they're going to have a direct pipeline to this white house because bill shine used to work with these people every single day. >> what happens to the the other outlets. do they get in on this. sinclair is in a lot of the same way. >> there could be resentment. this does become a closed loop. they get every interview, all the access. >> these are competitors to fox. >> used to have the bannon in. we'd get interesting interviews and access that way. i don't know. they're all loyal to -- >> relatively aggressive in covering bill shine's
appointment. there are fractures on the right as they see this preferred access that fox gets. some of the other ones may -- i mean, the danger is that you then -- it splinters and they turn back on the white house. >> the idea that the conservative president that we'll stand up to the white -- >> they have the experience of the one interview that he granted to our own lester holt. >> yeah. >> [ overlapping talking ]. >> because 23 tif the president a conversation with a functional journalist, he's going to indict himself. that's what they're afraid of. remember, we also have to look at the quality of the people that he's speaking to at fox news. there are real reporters at fox news. just like there are real reporters in other places. sean hannity is connected to the investigation. tucker carlson at this point given what his ratings are, i think it's important that we remember the president is literally propping up a business in a world as well. you talk about choosing -- he's
propping up a business in order to promote authoritarianism. that's a danger for the future of the country. >> and continually attacking the "washington post," amazon, other businesses that are parallel to it in trying to denigrate them. gabriel sherm han and eric, tha you very much. the three democrats who could win big from the appointment of brett kavanaugh. we're talking 2020 next. [ drum roll ] ...emily lapier from ames, iowa. this is emily's third nomination and first win. um...so, just...wow! um, first of all, to my fellow nominees, it is an honor sharing the road with you. and of course, to the progressive snapshot app for giving good drivers the discounts -- no, i have to say it -- for giving good drivers the discounts they deserve. safe driving!
if you are a young woman in america or you care about a young woman in america, pay attention to this. because it will forever change your life. we cannot go back to a time when women are made criminals for making a choice about what to do with their own bodies. >> i look forward to standing with my colleagues and all americans in what will be the most important fight of our lifetime. there will be no greater. >> brett kavanaugh has democrats being more and more like presidential candidates. lucky for them, three of the dem's most likely contenders happen to sit on the senate judiciary committee, the committee that will question kavanaugh. joining the panel, fug he will sang of tell me everything.
thank very much for being here. this is an opportunity. >> yes. >> this committee has to be stocked with both republican and democrats. what can they get out of this hearing? >> i think it's an opportunity to differentiate themselves as we start to consider 2020. but i think most democrats are very kind of allergic about even talking about 2020. we're not at 2018 yet. they have to do it carefully. it's not a moment for grandstanding. it's a moment for really smart questioning of a candidate that could swing the court so much farther right than the country that it seeks to serve that this is a generational moment we all need to talk about. we hit it on a couple of levels. it's important to talk about the substance of people's lives and it's important to talk about the
process. the fact we have a president clearly under investigation for colluding with a foreign a adversary to take the white house, maybe this nomination isn't as legitimate as we hoped since it's a lifetime appointment. i think democrats can handle both messages, voters can as well. i think the media really likes to hear a single thing over and over again. it's important to not ignore one or the other. >> she started with the question of whether or not a president that's under investigation should be able to -- [ overlapping talking ]. >> the two message are linked. if it wasn't going to change the lives of 51% of america, maybe it wouldn't matter so much. but this could be a little bit -- but it does. we need to talk about this. >> a little bit of counter point to one thing that was said. reticent to talk about 2020. they need to stay in the moment of 2018. to me, it seems to me that
barack obama emerged in 2004 and set himself up for 2008. does it concern you just from a strategic point of view that no single democrat is standing out and emerging ahead of 2020? >> no. it doesn't concern me. we've got plenty of time. also, this is an opportunity for people to position themselves. so your original question about what the judiciary hearings actually hold, this is a mass media platform that's going to allow them to actually build a base. i mean, in a crowded primary, it's going to be important for them to distinguish themselves. these judiciary members actually have an opportunity to not only solidify a base that they might have but also expand the people who might vote for them in a democratic primary. you know, it's important that the democratic process has to play out. it's likely we're going to have a crowded primary. but it's important that these people have visibility and this
is going to be a prime opportunity for them to connect with the american people. >> a little bit of the highlight reel from the candidates. jason, camilla harris, her kind of big highlight for a lot of people with her grilling of jeff sessions during his confirmation hearing. take a listen. >> sir, i'm sure you prepared for the hearing and most of the questions presented were predictable. so my question to you is did you then review with the lawyers of your department, if you are as a top lawyer are unaware regarding what you can share with us and what you cannot share with us, what is privileged and what is not privileged. >> we discussed basic parameter ofs testimony. >> will you make a commitment that you will share any written correspondence, be they calendars, records, notes x e-mails or anything that has been reduced at any point in time in writing to this committee where legally you actually have an obligation to
do so. >> he seemed shaken from that questioning. is that the camilla harris america wants to see? >> it was highly entertaining to watch. it was like in maxine waters was asked questions, basically. lots of people, who leaf them kamal a harris -- the most important thing that the democrats have to realize, whether kolb schar, or harris -- if they can delay or stop this nomination, they will transport themselves into being immediate contenders. trump will eventually get a supreme court nominee, whoever it is. if they can take credit for slowing or stopping the process, they will come out as democratic heroes. that's what harris and booker want. they want to find a way to delay or stop this process. making great speeches and they won't remember that in two years
when they're running for president. >> you mentioned cory booker and get his take on him. he was on politics nation this morning. sounding like another rather famous politician we might know. >> you've got to understand this is usually because of the activism of americans. change happens in this country. change doesn't come from washington. it comes to washington. >> doing his best obama. >> i think everybody should strive to be more obama. that would help just about any candidate that want today do it. i thought it was exciting that cory booker put it back on the american people. that honestly, is where -- democrats can do a few procedural things. they can gum up the works. i believe they should do whatever is possible. but the big influence right here is going to come from people sweating the senate phone lines and the reason why the obamacare repeal failed was because american citizens literally
broke the switchboards. we need them to do that again. that's where we have to channel obama. it's about inspiring people to take that action. that's our best bet for stopping it. >> that's the hope of delay is in the american people. let me play for you amy klobuchar. this is appealing to a big constituen constituency, that isn't -- it's important numberswise. that's women on the question of the supreme court. take a listen. >> the constitution is no less protected with the people's liberties now than it was 200 years ago. >> when the constitution refers, like, 30 some times to his or he when describing the president of the united states, you would see that as, well back then they thought a woman could be president even though a woman couldn't vote? >> senator, i'm not looking to take us back. >> you can answer that question. it's very important to me. >> of course, women can be president of the united states.
i'm the father of two daughters. >> great. >> interesting exchange, maya. can this nomination process help democrats to win over more women who aren't currently voting democratic, meaning mainly white women. women of color are all on this side of the aisle. >> it's a tragedy it's -- women understand that this is a visceral -- viscerally understand this is a battle for their future. the republican party actually wants to stand between women and their doctors in terms of making decisions about their own bodies. the democratic party has an opportunity to win over masses of women who end up saying that this is not just a health issue, but it's an economic issue for so many women out there. klobuchar making that kind of argument, certainly camilla i harris and cory booker, how he can connect to women.
this is something that basically the democratic party is a winning strategy. >> they'll be on display and we'll see how they respond. jason will be sticking around. thank you to maya rocky more. after praising kim jong-un, donald trump listed a new enemy this morning. details coming up on "am joy." the line between work and life hasn't just blurred. it's gone. that's why you need someone behind you. not just a card. an entire support system. whether visiting the airport lounge to catch up on what's really important. or even using those hard-earned points to squeeze in a little family time. no one has your back like american express. so no matter where you're going... we're right there with you. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. don't live life without it.
well, esurance makes it simple and affordable. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. paying too much for insurance that isn't the right fit? well, esurance makes finding the right coverage easy. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. esurance. an allstate company. i've been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. there's a lot of innovation that goes into making america's #1 shave. precision machinery and high-quality materials from around the world. nobody else even comes close. now starting at $7.99. gillette. the best a man can get.
before leaving britain, donald trump gave an interview to piers morgan sharing his delight over the nomenclature. >> you can say england, united kingdom, so many things. you have so many different names. great britain, i always think which do you prefer. great britain. you understand what i'm saying? the response, you know great britain and the united kingdom aren't exactly the same thing. trump goes right, right, yeah. you know i know. but a lot of people don't know that. you have lots of different names. so many names. all of that reminds me of this iconic commercial. >> give me an anheuser-busch natural light. >> just say natural. >> he doesn't have to call it
anheuser-busch natural light and you doesn't have to call it busch natural, just say natural. >> he's right. >> you can call me ray or you can call me jay or you can -- >> just say natural. >> you doesn't have to call me johnson. >> please don't ask him his name. >> name? you can call me ray. at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.
foes. the european union is a foe in what they do in trade. you wouldn't think of them. but they're a foe. russia is a foe in certain respects. china is a foe economically, certainly. they're a foe. that doesn't mean they're bad. it doesn't mean anything. it means they're competitors. they want to do well. we want to do well. we're start to go do well. >> donald trump this morning listing the european union as a foe of the united states. before naming russia. despite knowing that 12 russian intelligence agents were just charged by his own justice department with attacking the 2016 election. joining me now john fug he will sang and jason johnson back to me. i'm going to come to you and tell you one more bite from that european union as a foe extraordinary interview in the cbs evening knaus. take a listen. >> i look them all. eu is very difficult.
i want to tell you. maybe the thing that's most difficult, both my parents were born in e.u. sectors. in a trade sense, they've really taken advantage of us and many of those countries are in nato. they weren't paying their bills. as an example, i have a big problem with germany. germany made a pipeline deal with russia and paying russia billions and billions of dollars a year for energy. i say that's not good. that's not fair. you're supposed to be fighting for someone and then that someone gives billions of dollars to the one that you're guarding against. i think it's ridiculous. >> before i come to you, i want to note the european council -- >> this is a president who has been harder on meryl streep than on the people who attacked our
election and attacked our electrical grid. that has to be brought up all the time. i think donald trump is talking like a mob boss. you missed your last payment, pops. he doesn't understand how it's always worked. a lot of this money is money that, it's not needed at the present time and before he dismantles nato, he should be forced to prove he knows what the letters stand for. >> the eu doesn't pay us. >> no. >> he makes it sound like they're overdue on a bill they owe us. >> talking point. >> he doesn't understand what's happening. that sound bite that you played, literally none of it makes any sense. his premise doesn't make sense, his conclusions don't make sense. the facts don't line up. he's not a smart man. >> that hat with the -- >> donald trump wants a close relationship with russia. he wants to be friends with vladimir putin, but he's upset that germany wants to do business with russia. these two things don't line up.
>> right. i don't understand. >> try to explain president trump and what he says and does is a difficult task. as a political analyst, all of us every week have a struggle with this. as jeff said, the facts don't line up. in this case, donald doesn't know what he's talking about. i would say this. i think his behavior towards russia is very nefarious. are we going to watch two co-conspirators? i don't know. based on the indictment on friday, that's a concern. it doesn't make sense, it's an incoherent argument about nato and what's wrong with nato from a person who doesn't understand nato. but also on the other hand, the darker side is that he could be somebody that is in the -- >> the three of you from brilliant and smarter than me. you consider his goal is destabilizing western -- i agree
with -- employment progress report rather than anything else. i think you can predict his behaviors. >> that is the darker side, right? funny when you read the quotes. when you think about the fact that putin's wish list includes breaking up nato, picking off pieces of the eu and have them turn against each other, the darker side of this, his foreign national security adviser, michael flynn, before he was indicted, assured the russians that we would not -- the sanctions wouldn't last. we don't know if donald trump will repeat that same sort of behavior. isn't that the darker sort of setup here? >> the piece is really the only super power, hyper power left. if you consider economics and military. by shifting to this new world order where it's the u.s. and turkey and russia and north korea as opposed to our -- it's
like lebron moving to the western conference, everything is messed up now. it's imbalanced and the world as we've understood it -- when the united states should send this -- it disrupts every flow of information possible. it's not just that trump will promise to end sanctions. it means any information that the french, the germans or the british shared with him, he may just tell putin. that makes every single way that we've understood this to operate become in danger. the facts that he wants allies with nondemocratic authoritarian regime makes it dangerous for everyone living here. >> when donald trump met with him in the oval office, when he invited the former russian ambassador into the oval office, he denigrated the fbi director. he called him crazy, et cetera. now he's attacking another fbi agent ahead of his meeting with putin calling him a disgrace. let's listen to that interview.
>> i think that getting along with russia is a good thing. it's possible we won't. i think they're hampered by this witch hunt going on in the united states, the russian witch hunt. i watched some of the testimony even though i'm in europe of strzok. he wants to do things against me before i was even -- i guess before i was even the candidate. it was a disgrace. then he lied about it. >> a president is on foreign soil calling an american fbi agent a disgrace and praising russia and saying -- i find this shocking. >> the bar has gotten so low in terms of what we are able to accept from this president. the idea that -- i mean, the president going overseas and criticizing democrats should be something that people are very, very concerned about. but going overseas and
criticizing american intelligence -- >> and criticizing a man who is actively attempting to protect the country against russian attacks on our -- >> when he praised oish overseas. >> right. as was pointed out, it's not any fbi agent, it's the chief spy hunter. this person is probably a foe, to use his words, of vladimir putin. his job in the fbi as chief spy hunter was to find the russian operatives and figure out what they were up to. it's not that he's attacking the fbi, he's attacking the person in the fbi in charge of preventing the attack on our election that we -- >> none of this should be a surprise. we all know that trump is not a fan of intelligence. what he's doing is what he's done all along. he's talking out of both sides of his mouth. he's trying to say the attack was a hoax and simultaneously blaming the attack on barack obama. two things. >> i'm open to remember the
previous star republican president ronald reagan, as he was trying to pursue a more rational policy towards the soviet union, said mr. gorbachev tear down the wall. even standing up to the man in charge of the services because that intelligence service helped him get involved. >> joy, i'm old enough to remember reading in high school how bill clinton was the worst man on the planet because he protested the war while he was in england. going across the ocean and criticizing this country is shameful. again, remember, this was a president who admired vladimir putin. this is a republican party who praised putin while he was in office. possibly responsible for assassinating several people, white nationalist organizations. this is a dangerous precedent. no one will share information with us after tomorrow's
meeting. >> i am old to remember when the eu was considered our friend. >> still are. >> the president to call the eu is a foe is extraordinary. >> thanks for sticking around. thank you all. coming up at the top of the hour, more on the fallout from trump's latest interview. up next, politicians getting punked. shed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia.
>> is it possible to sign my waterboard? >> sure. that's the first time i've ever signed a waterboard. >> comedian sacha baron cohen who you may remember as borat, bruno, or ali g. is back with a new show on show time entitled "who is america." it got plenty of press when several politicians put out statements condemning cohen for tricking them into what we can only imagine are unflattering interviews. including former republican vice presidential candidate sarah palin, failed alabama senate candidate and accused pursuer of teen girls john moore and
recently pardoned joe arpaio. he wasn't fooled by ali g.? >> no, these are all new characters. >> this is where the sacha baron cohen character is creating a program called the kinder guardians. a program to train pre-schoolers to fire guns at school shooters and two sitting congressmen endorse it. here's dana or arohrabacher anda wilson. >> maybe having young people trained and understand how to defend themselves might make us safer here. >> a three-year-old cannot defend himself from an assault rifle by throwing a hello kitty pencil case at it. our founding fathers didn't put an age limit on the second amendment. >> an outrage. now dare sasha bcha baron cohen these people to reveal their
feels with their actual words. what a disgrace. >> people are angry they fooled them but i don't understand how an adult could be fooled into saying a three-year-old shouldn't throw a hello kitty pencil at a school shooter. >> you don't understand how joe wilson can do it. you lie. >> sacha is a talented shape shifting comedian. >> satirist. >> there is a critique that says it exposes america's divisions in a way that's unflattering. it i can poses the hypocrisy of liberals who don't mind seeing sacha baron cohen trick republicans but get upset when the right tries to do it. >> bernie sanders and howard dean are on this show and this is nothing new for sashccha bar cohen but borat and bruno were about the alt-right before they were the alt-right.
he's doing nothing new. this is what we need right now in america. billy wilder said if you're going tell the truth, make it funny or they'll kill you and he's using wit which along with non-violence are the only things that work against crypto fascists. i can understand why roy moore is upset but he has a history of hiding his own identity. >> he did that like a dozen years ago, 12 years ago. let's play that. >> how long has there been businesses? >> well, business started from the day one, from early in the world. >> and what was they doing business in back in the day? >> many, many, many years ago, hundreds of millions of years ago people were doing business and trading in rocks and stones and other things. >> who would want to buy rocks? >> i don't know, man, you've got to ask them this. >> there's a thing where republicans control the politics of this country but liberals
control the culture and there is a coveting of that control that they're saying we have everything else but we want the culture back. is that why it's easy to get a donald trump to give in and do this because they so want to be a part of the culture. >> in fairness, that's before donald trump was a politician before he was a republican and to trump's credit -- it's exhilarating to say that phrase -- he figured it out and left seven minutes in. that's when ali g.'s show was a funny show and not about social commentary. this show he goes after both sides. there's not a lot of conservative comedy. there's a lot of great conservative comics but con srve i have the comedy doesn't work in large doses because what you're doing is defending the status quo, punching down. progressive comedy -- and that's how it's always been -- is about going after those in power, those protecting those most power. . it's very christian to me, you're standing up to the least of us. >> but do liberals err in thinking control of the culture
and winning the culture war is enough? do liberals ignore the idea of also having power. >> you're right. liberals air in thinking making fun of rubes is more important than getting people out to vote. you won't be able to sway the trump voters but stacy abrams has proved in georgia the strategy is not to try to get these people out of the matrix. they were sucker bid bush/cheney, we warn them, they hated us. it will hurt them the most and we're fighting for the people who hate us. it's about inspiring people to vote and by highlighting ignorance and meanness, i would like to think this will inspire people because batman, gandhi, mlk, no one will save us. it has to be us. >>fugelsang, a great comedian in your own right. more a"a.m. joy" next.
♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ don't stop it now, ♪ don't stop it no. ♪ don't stop it now, ♪ don't stop it. ♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ don't stop it now, if you keep on eating, we'll keep it comin'. all you can eat riblets and tenders at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment
centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. to put on our website? i mean i would have but i'm a commercial vehicle so i don't have hands... or a camera...or a website. should we franchise? is the market ready for that? can we franchise? how do you do that? meg! oh meg! we should do that thing where you put the business cards in the fishbowl and somebody wins something. -meg: hi. i'm here for... i'm here for the evans' wedding. -we've got the cake in the back, so, yeah. -meg: thank you. -progressive knows small business makes big demands. -you're not gonna make it, you're not gonna make it! ask her if we can do her next wedding too! -so we'll design the insurance solution that fits your business. -on second thought, don't...ask that. this is a story about mails. and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams
they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ i know, right. we are seriously ikeeping up with the joneses.. i know, right. we are seriously keeping with the anderson's. we are finally keeping up with the ford's.
keeping up with the garcia's. keeping up with the harvey's. keeping up with the wahh-the-wahh the romeros. carters. patels. the allens. wah... wolanske's. right, them. no one is going to have internet like this. no one is going to have internet like this. gig to more homes than anyone. not just the joneses'. over here. xfinity. the largest gig-speed network. that's our show for today. it's our wonderful intern chanel, her laes day on "a.m. joy." we'll miss her, we love you, love you, love you. now i'll turn it over to alex witt, my sister from another mother. >> she's on to bigger and better things because everybody graduates from joy's show and does so well. >> you see i won't let her go, i'm clinging. >> i can see that! thank you so much and good day to all of you, i'm alex witt. it's just about high noon here
at the east. >> the european union is a foe. what they do to us in trade. and now you wouldn't think of the european union, they're a foe. china is a flow, economically. >> what is on the president's agenda for his one on one meeting with vladimir putin? we have new reaction to the logistics of tomorrow's summit and the big question as robert mueller tries to wrap up the russian investigation. a new report asks were any americans involved. it's all coming up on msnbc live. new reaction from the president less than 24 hours before he meets with vladimir putin. here's what he said on his expectations and whether the latest mueller indictment will have