tv Morning Joe MSNBC July 20, 2018 3:00am-6:00am PDT
a bit. sign up for the newsletters, signup@ax oux.com. "morning joe" starts right now. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is friday, july the 20th, and with us this morning, national affairs analyst for nbc news and msnbc john heilemann. we also have donny deutsch with us. legendary ad man and masusan de percio. white house reporter for the associated press jonathan lamere and washington anchor for bbc world news america katy kay. donny, i have to ask, our introductions of you are carved up by a thanksgiving turkey. at the beginning legendary ad man now they have don. don d. i mean, everything else you hear from me, i'm ad-libbing.
>> yes. >> tell me, donny d. as a legendary advertiser and marketing man what do you make of the president of the united states, we'll get to the news in a second. it was really shocking that the president of the united states after being called treasonous by quite a few people in the foreign policy defense community, still trying to clean up which is going to be our top story, you know, the mess that he created when he went to helsinki and kowtowed to an ex kgb, and now announces president putin is coming to washington, before cleaning up the last mess on aisle 7. what's your take? >> interesting, joe, you used the word t. word beginning of the week a lot of democrats, people used it and all of a sudden, oh, maybe that's too hard. i don't think it's extreme to use that treason word. adhering to enemies giving them aid and comfort. i don't know how else you describe what trump did
beginning of the week and to your point now is doubling down on it. i think that trump like a petulant child at any time in any way he's rebuked about anything, his response is to double -- first to walk it back and walk back the walk back and then double down. just putting in our faces, putting it in americans' faces, and i as branding guy, i have no trepidation at all about assigning that treason word. it is no different than had somebody attacked the united states with missiles when you attack our voting system, actually you're doing more harm to us, because once you destroy that process, our democracy is over. you have an election, we can't believe in it that is an act of war in any way, sense or form, and we have a treasonous president who now put it in our face in finland, now going to bring it to our own shores, and as jonathan swan talked about on axios, the fact that 80% of republicans think that he
behav behaved okay, gave him a stamp of approval. shame on these pathetic whimpering cowards. >> yeah. i wrote about it yesterday. who are these people? what have they done to my party? 80% of americans think it's okay to cower before an ex kgb agent. insult allies. you wonder, this isn't just a donald trump problem now. this is a problem with the party cast wide. and -- really quickly, before we move on to the first script, john heilemann, this is something we really need to talk about. i personally believe it changes not only the face of the republican party but in the long run destroys the republican party. that you have -- treason was used by so many people.
criticizing donald trump. even the "wall street journal" said that congress needed to pass a containment plan not only for putin but also for donald trump. you had the president of the united states doing vladimir putin's bidding, exactly what he wanted them to do. attacking nato. attacking theresa may. attacking germany. attacking angela merkel. attacking al of our closest -- our closest allies. as we're hearing just about every night on russian tv, commentators shocked saying we couldn't even succeed this well in the cold war. now donald trump is doing all of our work for us. but what is the long-term impact of a republican party now who not only is embracing vladimir putin and embracing vladimir putin's agenda, which is to destroy nato, and disrupt elections, but now they're also -- i think i saw somebody
last night a quote that 73% of republicans now support tariffs and protectionism, which, again is a complete reversal that will have impact in the long run on this party. >> well, joe, i think that the corruption and bankruptcy of the republican party has been a long time in the making, but there is no republican party anymore in any sense that you would have defined the republican party ten years ago, and the way you would have, what the republican party stood for at least in the post-world war ii era. it has become the party of donald trump. and so in a thorough way, we've seen this not just in startling polling in relation to how republicans now have seen the performance of donald trump in helsinki, presumably how they will see his invitation now of vladimir putin to come to washington to give him the ultimate kind of -- rather than
to chastise him, rather than to criticize him for russia's role in meddling in an american election, he's giving him the ultimate kind of dher rcherry o of a sundae what a russian president would want most of us, especially in this week. >> but, john, as it goes to republicans. rank and file republicans -- 75% saying they liked what he said in helsinki when again closest allied the said treasonous or a complete dupe. who are these people that i grew up with that were the most -- the toughest on russia, that fought the cold war alongside with nato. when the soviets goal during the cold war is the same goal that vladimir putin has now, which is to disrupt western democracies and break up nato. the goal is identical and what
republicans always supported. you talk about trade. 73% of republicans now are telling pollsters that they think tariffs are good for america? >> yes. >> this -- again, who are these people? it's like -- political body snatchers. >> joe, the people who now call themselves, now are the republican party. the people you thought in your life growing up in the party are now either no longer in the party, or they are in a kind of weak and craven way sitting on the sidelines wringing their hands over what donald trump has done to the party, not doing much about it. some speaking out, some not. over the course of the week as i watched from vacation, david ignatius said, you could feel the fabric of the presidency ripping and could hear there are more republicans speaking ot. it's not nearly as much as you expect but more speaking out, but the rank and file of the party now, the -- the grass roots of the republican party
are people who believe what donald trump believes, and not what you believe, and not what republicans believed in the post-world war ii era, they don't believe in free trade, don't believe in immigration, don't believe in standing up to russian previously soviet expansionism, they don't believe in nato they don't believe those things. it's not what the republican party is anymore. to answer your question, i don't know what happens. as you pointed out many times over the course of the last 18 months, there will be a period after donald trump. whether in fewer than couple years from now. whether donald trump makes it through, gets his -- his first term forestalled, make it through one term and beaten or a re-election, at some point there will be a life after donald trump and then the republican party's going to look up and say, what are we? what have we become? and does that lead to a fundamental redefense -- redefinition of the republican
life? >> ask the question, what have we done, and why did we sit by and allow it to happen the way we did? susan del percio, i'm curious. when you go to a reagan dinner, a lincoln-reagan din perp used to just be reagan dinners republicans every year, usually january, february, march, have a big fund-raising dinner and invite in a speaker. but if you go to a lincoln-reagan dinner now, talking to rank and file, if you believe the polls, talking to a rank and file that no longer believe in free trade. okay. so i guess what i said at lincoln-reagan dinners about free trade i couldn't say anymore if i were still a republican. talk about balancing budgets, reducing the debt. boy, one of the biggest expansions and deficits and debt spending in the history of our country, in the history of the world. so i couldn't talk about that. you talk about standing up to an
expansionist russia. being tough, not leading from behind. you talk about your alliances with, you know, nato. i mean, these are the things that we talked about. >> that's right. >> we talked about for 50 years. not me for 50 years but at least two decades, and you could go to every reagan-lincoln dinner across america, lincoln-reagan dinner across america, and you could say the same thing wherever you went, and you'd get the applause. now -- according to these polls it's not a split. now 80% of americans are fine with donald trump's kowtowing to an ex-kgb agent who wants to destroy our allies, and wants to disrupt our elections. and they now, you look at this poll, they support tariffs. what the hell -- what the hell -- who the hell are these people? what is wrong with these
republicans? where has the party, not of my youth, but of my early 50s gone? >> it's gone, joe. and it's really difficult. i was reading your column this morning, and i, too, said, like where is my party? i don't recognize it. and i could have gone to a lincoln day dinner a year or two years ago and heard those things. it has happened so quickly. let's not forget. we did have strong republicans running for president for 2016. donald trump did beat them. but they were -- you know what? jeb bush is certainly a legitimate, strong candidate. marco rubio you my not have agreed with their policies however they were strong republicans and they were beaten by the personality of donald trump at that point. the policies of donald trump are now what -- is what has defeated the republican party, and that is putting us in a very difficult situation, and personally i think if we don't start to see republican
organizations setting up the field for 2020 to open it up for a conservative republican to run or just a principled republican, leave it at that, then we are going to see this party dive way deeper. i would like to talk about the beginning of the segment. before we knew about russia undermining our elections, let's not forget. donald trump did that two weeks before election day in 2016. he questioned the validity of our elections. he said he may not accept the election results, and that really is the kind of, what led us down this road that we are today. from two weeks before the election in 2016. >> yeah. and -- and by the way, again, just as we wrap up this week, a lot of people have said throughout the week that donald trump was kowtowing to vladimir putin and ignoring what all of his intel community and military
leaders had said about them meddling in our democracy, because, it said he took it too personally and couldn't admit that his election may have been compromised. well, again, it's important to always remember, he was kowtowing to vladimir putin on this show december of 2015 before the first vote. so, again, there's something there. we don't know what it is. there is something there. he'd get in my ear, when susan was talking about lincoln-reagan dinners, you know, he was a republican, a famous tweet from early in the campaign, when actually, everybody knew he was a republican and the first republican president. read a back every once in a while's in a week of cleanups and reversals, the white house is now rejecting -- just for today -- rejecting vladimir putin's offer to allow the united states investigators to
question 12 russians indicted for election meddling, in exchange for the u.s. agreeing to let moscow question some american officials. including former u.s. ambassador to russia michael mcfaul. the white house press secretary of state sarah huckabee sanders put out a new statement yesterday saying, "it is a proposal that was made in sincerity by president putin, " made in sincerity? i think it was very cynical, but president trump agrees with it. hopefully president putin will have 129 identified russians come to the united states to prove their innocence or guilt." the statement, president trump agrees to it is in direct contrast what he initially said calling it an incredible offer and sanders saying that the white house wa considering the proposal. >> we would expect that the americans would reciprocate and
they would question officials including the officers of law enforcement and intelligence service of the united states whom we believe are, have something to do with illegal actions on the territory of russia. >> what he did is an incredible offer. he offered to have the people working on the case come and work with their investigators with respect to the 12 people. i think that's an incredible offer. >> the president's going to meet with his team and we'll let you know when we have an announcement on that s. that a topic that came up in their conversation? did president putin raise this with president trump? >> there was some conversation about it, but there wasn't a commitment made on behalf of the united states, and the president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front. >> you know, katty kay, let's really strip this down and be honest about it. no american, unless they were a dupe for vladimir putin, would
think that turning a former russian ambassador over to russian investigators, especially an ambassador who had been kicked out of russia because he spoke out too forcefully against vladimir putin's abuses, no red-blooded american would think that was an incredible offer, but donald trump did think is was an incredible offer. sarah huckabee sanders said he had to think about it a day later, and now we have this reversal yet again. i'm sure they'll change tomorrow, but what do you make of the back and forths on turning americans over to russians? >> this was never going to happen. you were never going to turn over a former ambassador or a u.s.-born financier to help implement the magnisky act and you have to wonder what was president trump thinking?
what did putin say to him, how did he communicate to him that seemed to win donald trump over so when he came out of that two-hour meeting his initial instinct, gut reaction say, yeah, this is an incredible offer. i think this is a great idea. i think as we head into the prospect, because one was not enough, why not have a second one, of that second putin meeting. you've got intelligence officials now scrambling to find out what else donald trump may have agreed to. what did he give away? what were the verbal commitments? you have russian officials and president putin saying, hey, it was great. we came out of helsinki, got agreements, looking forward to working on them and the head scratching going on around washington particularly in the defense community saying, we have no idea. we don't know what our president may have just committed this country to, and now we have the prospect of a second meeting as well. it -- beggars belief. it's extraordinary. >> jonathan lamere, you were
there. tell me all the back and forths that have been going on this week. what's your take? what have you heard inside the white house? what have you heard across washington? not only about the reaction a week later, or several days later, into the summit, but also the president lurching forward to have another summit with vladimir putin when he still hasn't cleaned up the multitude of messes created by the first summit? >> very few things seem to stick to this president. he seems to bounce off controversy nearly on a daily basis pap few things lining charlottesville, we still feel that one. this week seems like it could stay. i think the part of the confusion is, part of the reason why the stories and questions are still circulating is that no one knows really what happened. not just we in the media don't ent firely know what happened. key members of the united states government don't know what happened in helsinki on monday.
the members of the white house themselves are still trying to figure out exactly what president trump may have agreed to. we're relying on what the russians are telling us. i think there's been a lot of pushback from republicans, those, mostly those not facing re-election this fall, who feel this was a mistake. the president has given too much. changed the party. we saw the reaction on fox news which we never see to something the president does. the president, though, is telling people they wants -- >> jonathan, fox news, jonathan, you have the "new york post." >> yep. >> being critical. talking about his see no evil diplomacy. you had the "wall street journal." again, how remarkable that the "wall street journal" said we need a containment policy. they're correct. congress needs a containment policy not only for vladimir putin but also for donald trump. you had a lot of very conservative voices coming out, being very critical of the president, and yet here's the
president, despite the fact it's not good for him politically, dough spite the fact it will hurt republicans in the mid-term setting up yet another summit with vladimir putin. >> and it fits a pattern here. right? the few moments where we have seen this president never apologize, sort of walk something back. the "access hollywood" tape and charlottesville and both times issued a statement, like a retreat, felt like a hostage video did it unwillingly only to double down a day later in his position. seeing it now, him and haw what he said to putin and now seeing, yes, he wants to forge forward with the summit, we're seeing it again. >> there's a bigger picture, joe and we have to focus on it. we'll talk about dan coats and his interview yesterday with andrea mitchell but an extraordinary thing happened yesterday. the dni, the director of national intelligence, the guy who knows everything, yesterday told andrea mitchell essentially, he still has no idea what happened in the
meeting between donald trump and vladimir putin. that's an amazing thing that happened, and you can feel among a lot of serious people, a lot of republicans who have been concerned about what's happening in this presidency, about what's happening between donald trump and vladimir putin, about what vladimir putin might have in terms of compromising material or other kind of leverage against donald trump, this in and of itself san astonishing thing we learned yesterday and then in the middle of the interview the president comes out and issue as statement that says that he's inviting vladimir putin, despite all of the sound and fury of this last week, that he's inviting vladimir putin to come to washington, d.c. really, it's a moment that we will remember, i think, historically and it's kind of astonishing on a million levels, but i will say that-- that apart from everything else what we learned with that invitation is one of the things that happened in that meeting. one of the things that happened in that meeting is that donald trump in secret, in secret, not from the press, secret from his
own dni and much of the rest of his government made an agreement with vladimir putin to have vladimir putin come to washington in the middle of a mid-term election. that speaks to the extraordinary leverage that vladimir putin has over donald trump. we still don't know exactly why, but an incredible thing. >> well -- it really doesn't matter why at this point. i mean, we'll find out why either through robert mueller or historians will find out why, but i can't even imagine, john, republicans that are in swing districts that hillary won getting the news that donald trump is going to make a fool of himself again with vladimir putin. this time in the united states in a leadup to a mid-term election. it's -- very bad news for those -- >> political suicide. >> yeah. >> it's political suicide. >> yeah. political suicide. got to go to break. i'm curious quickly. end of the week, looking back.
we've talked about this, john, for quite some time. republicans being too cowardly to stand up on the hill for donald trump. republicans in his administration biting their tongue when they should be speaking out. would you say this is a weak, at least, attached to this one event, maybe not -- maybe it won't happen to other events, but this was the one week that a good bit of the republican and conservative leadership in washington, d.c. thought leaders, and political leaders did stand up and speak out against donald trump? >> certainly it's just -- impurically, it was greater in number and there was more of it than we've ever seen before on almost anything else. i think it's even more than there was. jonathan lamere mentioned charlottesville, one outstanding xavrm example, more this week. more than that, though, the sight of dni coats yesterday
making the comments he made that may have put his job in jeopardy, get to that reporting later today, the way in which christopher wray, the comments to lester holt out in aspen, in various ways they're trying to signal that something is wrong here, and that what we saw from donald trump in helsinki and what we've seen in the aftermath of helsinki suggests that something is not just wrong but deeply dangerous. i think you are starting to see some kind of shift in the tectonic plates in the way the government is dealing with donald trump and in particular the way your former party is dealing with him. this may be a week that history remembers. >> i think so and good luck fairing dan coats. if he this firing james comey was a problem, good luck firing dan coats a man that suggests something's just not right with donald trump's reship with vladimir putin. lots of luck on that one, fella. dan coats, as we're talking about. his stunned reaction to the white house invite of vladimir
putin was just one of several telling moments from the director of the national intelligence. we're going to run through the others straight ahead on "morning joe." we'll be right back. (♪) 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? ♪ ♪ let your perfect drive come together at the lincoln summer invitation sales event.
get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models plus $1,000 bonus cash. is this at&t innovations? yeah, wow..this must be for one of our new unlimited wireless plans. it comes with a ton of entertainment options. great, can you sign for this? yeah. hey, uh.. what's in that one? that's a shark. new and only with at&t, you can get unlimited data, 30+ channels of live tv, and your choice of things like hbo or amazon music. more for your thing. that's our thing. visit att dot com. i have to tell you something incredible. capital one has partnered with hotels.com to give venture cardholders 10 miles on every dollar they spend at thousands of hotels. all you have to do is pay with this at hotels.com/venture. 10 miles per dollar? that is incredible. brrrrr! i have the chills. because you're so excited? because ice... is cold.
and because of all those miles. obviously. what's in your wallet? who would have guessed? an energy company helping cars emit less. making cars lighter, it's a good place to start, advanced oils for those hard-working parts. fuels that go further so drivers pump less. improving efficiency is what we do best. energy lives here.
yothis july 16th - 22nd, enjoy wa free week of epix on us.ou". improving efficiency is what we do best. just say, "epix" into your voice remote. that's a full week of all-you-can-watch critically acclaimed shows and hit movies, on your tv, online or on the go with the xfinity stream app. we're on to something. come on. and it's all on us, and it's all week long. so you should probably start canceling your plans.
you've got some serious watching to do. we have some breaking news. the white house announced on twitter that vladimir putin is coming to the white house in the fall. >> say that again. >> you -- vladimir putin coming to -- dmplts i hear you -- >> yeah, yeah. >> okay. >> yeah. >> that's going to be special. >> all right. so the news of the administration's invite of putin to the white house blindsiding the president's intelligence director dan coats. here some other moments from his very candid conversation with nbc's andrea mitchell at the aspen security forum.
>> well, except that the president has made so many conflicting statements, he has switched from one position to the other even in the same day, as recently as yesterday, and i'm wondering, when you watch that in helsinki what was your gut reaction watching him validate vladimir putin's assessment over yours? >> well, my thoughts there were that i believed i needed to correct the record for that, and that this is the job i signed up for, and that was my responsibility. obviously, i wished he had made a different statement, but i think that now that his, this has been clarified, based on his late reactions to this, and so -- i don't think i want to go any further than that. >> he said, i accept our
intelligence community's conclusion that russia's meddling in the 2016 election took place could be other people also -- could be other people also? what does he know that you don't know? >> well, "could" is not a definitive word here that -- could someone else be looking at how to do this? re toiv our re toiv o relative to this, other rogue states, could be, but it's undeniable that the russians are taking the lead on this and basically the ones trying to undermine our basic values, divide us with our allies. they are the ones that are trying to wreck havoc over our election process and we need to call them out on that. >> i think anybody who thinks that vladimir putin doesn't have his stamp on everything that happens in russia is
misinformed. it is very clear virtually nothing happens there, any kind of consequence that vladimir putin doesn't know about or hasn't ordered. >> did you know beforehand that kislyak were going into the oval office that day? >> i did not. >> what was your reaction afterwards? i mean, we all learned about it from tass. >> probably not the best thing to do. but, no. i was not aware of that. i'm not aware of anything like that since. you have to understand you have a plead did not come through the system, came from the outside. i don't think there was any nefarious attempt there to do anything but that's history. >> you know, in washington 2016, the fact that that is considered to be an extraordinary interview
and what coats said is considered to be extraordinary shows you just how far washington has sunk in the era of donald trump, because, after all, everything that the director of national intelligence said has been confirmed by america's intelligence community, america's military community, and the media, even conservative media outlets, like the "wall street journal." everybody has -- when i say conservative media outlets, also the "journal" editorial page. it's beyond question. everything that dan coats just said there is beyond question that vladimir putin is meddling in american elections. he's been trying to do that. it is an objective fact since 2014. the indictments that came out today, this day last week, shows
clear and convincing evidence. put it before any jury in america, those russians, vladimir putin, would be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and so the question is -- why would the director of national intelligence just restating what the intelligence community has been saying nonstop since january of 2017 cause any problems for anybody? let's bring in right now -- let's bring in -- jonathan swan from axios and he's going to tell us why this is a big deal. jonathan, you've talked to sources close to the president, and they've expressed astonishment at coats' interview. i guess they haven't been paying attention since january 2017 that all coats said yesterday was exactly what the entire
intelligence community and the entire united states military community has known since january 2017, bhaut what are yo hearing? >> he said four important things that caught their attention. first, he thought it was misguided for the president to meet alone with vladimir putin and that had he been asked he wouldn't have advised it. . he said he still have no idea what they discussed in that private meeting which in itself is a stunning revelation from the nation's spy chief and you talked about that earlier. he said he had no idea that putin had been invited to the white house, and he also said, as you pointed out, that he thought, dismayed by the president's statement after the press conference. now, i got two phone calls in very quick order after that tv appearance. one of them while he was still on with andrea, and the first reaction, just so you understand
the mind-set around trump was, he's got to go. he's got to go. and to be clear -- >> by the way, jonathan, that's exactly what jared said about james comey and, boy, look what in did for them with robert mueller. do they not understand the consequences of firing a director of national intelligence for saying exactly what the entire intelligence community believes? >> well, to be clear, i don't know whether trump is contemplating firing him or not, but just so -- i mean, they've been around him long enough to know what triggers him and what's going to get under his skin and anything that wreaks of, you know -- anything that's short of utter affirmation in, you know, potentially a fireable offense. so have they learned any lessons? i think the learning curve is not particularly impressive with this white house.
>> a very nice way to put it katty kay, though, there has to be at least a few people in there that say, if you fired dan coats, that would -- that would be -- that would make the firing of james comey look like a spring shower for you politically, because, again, all dan coats is saying is what he's learned by picking up intel on the russians, what the other intel chiefs have said. there's nothing he said that was radical. the radical actions are taking place by the president of the united states, who is trying to undermine along with vladimir putin 50 years of united states national security doctrine. >> if you took a written transcript of what dan coats said you may think there's
nothing radical and the president would have no reason to disagree with him or be upset, but every time we hear back that clip of this long pause and then dan coats with a kind of smirk on this face saying, okay. that's going to be special. it's what makes you realize that the tone of this, right, jonathan, is something that the president is going to find very hard to tolerate. we know donald trump. he is thin skinned about criticism. i found it hard i don't know what you thought, jonathan, listening to that tape not to think that dan coats was kind of mocking his boss. >> it's also the whole setting. i mean, he's at the aspen security forum. there's a very clubby atmosphere, laughing along, and really in some respects it did look like he was ridiculing the president and, i mean, i could just -- i would love to be in the room to see the president
watch this clip. it would be a sight to behold. >> a question i want to ask jonathan lamere along the same line that katty and swan were talking about a second ago. that was what struck me. in my mind the way it played out, the substance of distancing that coats was doing from trump was the thing that enraged trump first. trump then goes to -- my little scenario for how this played out. trump then goes to sarah sanders and says, let's get this tweet out saying that putin's coming in the fall. to tweet coats while still live onstage. he tweets coats and coats starts -- in that way that you saw in the clip. kind of laughing and kind of laughing at trump. the tonal thing of him saying, okay. oh, boy. that, then, further the cycle of thin-skinned rage is all spun up by this and now they are angry at him for seeming to mock trump with his laughter in front of this crowd of elites in aspen. >> whether that's the actual
chronology it fits a pattern. the president likes to torment his advisers, we've seen what he's done to sessions over a year now. and i spoke to somebody yesterday who pitched that coats interview almost like an exit interview. like he's out the door and knows the gate keeper is following and saying this stuff on the way out and i'd like to add that the president has actually wanted vladimir putin to come to the white house for a while. this is not a in idea nap was his original plan. he's had discussions with advisers last spring he wanted to invite putin here and had to be talked out of it, convinced to do something on neutral turf and mind you, initially bought the helsinki thing wasn't glamorous enough but he has wanted putin to come to washington for a while now and is hellbent to see it happen. >> that is true. he has wanted it for a while. the president became enraged with h.r. mcmaster, former national security adviser for simply saying, i think at the
munich conference, indisputable evidence russia meddled and the president said what mcmaster forgot to mention is i won -- whatever it was electoral votes, crooked hillary was terrible. that got under his skin. again, like, this is -- these advisers are not crazy to think that this dan coats interview could have a fairly interesting impact once the president watches it. >> we will see what happens. jonathan swan, thank you so much. always appreciate it. coming up later this morning, we will be talking to the top democrat on the senate intel committee mark warner. plus, major drama on the house floor as republicans vote down funding to increase election security. let me say that again. republicans voted down funding for increased election security to keep your vote safe.
we're going to play that moment ahead on "morning joe." let's get started. show of hands. who wants customizable options chains? ones that make it fast and easy to analyze and take action? how about some of the lowest options fees? are you raising your hand? good then it's time for power e*trade the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. alright one quick game of rock, paper, scissors. 1, 2, 3, go. e*trade. the original place to invest online. i can do more to lower my a1c. and i can do it with what's already within me.
because my body can still make its own insulin. and once-weekly trulicity activates my body to release it. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly easy-to-use pen. it works 24/7. trulicity is an injection to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. don't use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes or if you have type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, you're allergic to trulicity, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. these can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within.
if you need help lowering your a1c, ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. until her laptop crashed her salonthis morning.or weeks, you never know what the day's going to bring when you're running a small business, it might even bring a blue screen of death. having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get virus and spyware removal, and 24/7 tech support. office depot now offers on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. ♪ right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax
let's mobilize them with a catchy clogan. four words or less. shouldn't be longer than make america great again. >> something like jobs and health care for all. >> if you're willing to go to five, i mean, what's one more? it doesn't mention opportunity. >> or the earned income tax credit. >> okay. so the slogan is -- let's achieve access to jobs and health care and affordable rail service for disenfranchised minorities while protecting our environment and combating climate change with the wealthy paying their fair share, plus a humane policy towards immigrants 2018. >> i don't know where you cut. >> that was a take from showtime's "our cartoon president" on the state of the democrats heading into the
with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were very saggy. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with new sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. introducing more sizes for better comfort. new depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit. 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. they won't hike your ratest foover one mistake. see, liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ and now is the best time to buy. preparing classic campfire trout. say what? trout. trout. all right. you don't think i need both? why does he have that axe? make summer go right with ford america's best selling brand. now get 0% financing for 72 months
democrats. democrats. yesterday they unveiled their new mid-term campaign slogan, for the people. they say it sums up the party's position on three core issues, health care cost, infrastructure projects and efforts to expose corruption. their first try, a better deal that seemed to resonate with voters. i'm wondering, first of all, what you think of for the people slogan? and whether it has, what it takes to break through the noise. >> joe, i'm meeting with the
head of the dnc next week to talk about messaging. boy, that is not the answer. talk about a generic nonstarter. here is the campaign, here is the message they need to run. this is the vote of your lifetime. this is for democracy. this is for freedom. if you think about things we've been talking about today, basically republican party, they don't even want to protect elections. they won't even pass a bill that allow us to make our elections safe. republican party thinks it's okay to side with a thug putin versus siding with our intelligence community. the republican party chimes along with the president that says the press is the enemy of the state. protect your grandchildren, your grandparents fought for these things, freedom of speech, freedom of body, freedom of election. it's the vote of your lifetime. that is the message. >> you know, john, what a dream
it would be to be a democrat running against a republican this year. you have these issues that resonate every two years. one washington corruption. and cronyism. you take all the collective scandals of everybody that donald -- you say have donald saying i apoint only the best people. and then tick off the laundry list of corruption. you can have that classic scene of the fat guy sitting around the table with expensive ties, drinking wine and cutting steaks and do the laundry list of all the corrupt practices of every one of trump's people, that's your way in. then you can talk about the fact that health care is being attacked by donald trump. that's powerful. and republicans and democrats alike vote for that. and then finally you've got the fact that donald trump was
bragging to billionaires in mar-a-lago hours after he signed the tax bill and in his words he said quote, i just made all of you a lot richer. cronyism, loopholes, you know pre-existing conditions. donald trump's america. there's so many ways to savage republicans in all 435 districts. >> right. and then on top of all that, joe, there's the personal conduct of the president which on so many front is, obviously, not offensive at all to his base and to a large not a majority of the country, but a decent, very solid size chunk of the republican base, but in swing districts among suburban women the kinds of people among african-american women as we saw in alabama, as we saw in the off year elections, in special elections over and over again these swing voters, republican
women in suburban places, democratic base voters, the way the president has behaved in addition to the policy points you made, in addition to the corruption points, then there's the president as the overarching thing in our politics who is so offensive to voters in those districts that democrats have to win. >> that's the motivator across america to get the base out, to get a lot of democrats out, to get independents out, to get republican women out. you saw in the alabama race where you actually saw a higher percentage of black voters in alabama voting in an off year special election than they did when barack obama was running for president of the united states. that's going to happen. you put on top of that a message about cronyism, about corruption, about loopholes for trump's richest billionaire friends, about people's health care being taken away so they can give away those massive tax
cuts, that donald trump bragged about at mar-a-lago to his billionaire friends hours after he signed the bill. that is a very potent campaign message and if democrats can win with that, well democrats will never be able to win. coming up, nbc's andrea mitchell joins us after surprising the director of the national intelligence with news that vladimir putin had been invited to the white house this fall. another happy surprise for republican candidates trying to run away from donald trump kowtowing to an ex-kgb agent. u.s. senior officials have no idea how to follow up and don't know whether he's lying. you know why, because all you have to do is look at his twitter feed to see he lies all the time. "morning joe" coming right back.
[music playing] (vo) from the beginning, wells fargo has supported community organizations like united way, non-profits like the american red cross, and our nation's veterans. we knew helping our communities was important then. and we know it's even more important today. so we're stepping up to volunteer more and donate over a million dollars every day. so our communities can be even stronger. it's a new day at wells fargo. but it's a lot like our first day. a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed 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. 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? - anncr: as you grow older, -your brain naturally begins to change which may cause trouble with recall. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up! - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again?
- anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life. until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax your plaques are always there at the worst times. constantly interrupting you with itching, burning and stinging. being this uncomfortable is unacceptable. i'm ready. tremfya® works differently for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. with tremfya®, you can get clearer and stay clearer. in fact, most patients who saw 90% clearer skin at 28 weeks... stayed clearer through 48 weeks. tremfya® works better than humira® at providing clearer skin and more patients were symptom free with tremfya®. tremfya® may lower your ability to fight infections, and may increase your risk of infections. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections
and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms such as fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. before starting tremfya®, tell your doctor if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. ask your doctor about tremfya®. tremfya®, because you deserve to stay clearer. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options for tremfya®. ♪ keep it comin' love. 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. there have been stories that you threatened to resign. have you ever hit a point on that issue of sources and methods or anywhere elsewhere you said this is the line? >> you know, as i said i'm a low key understated guy but that should not be mistaken for what my spine is made out of.
>> so you have -- >> i'll just leave it at that. >> okay. all right. [ applause ] >> have you ever considered resigning in the time you've worked as the -- >> i will continue to work as hard as i can, as long as i can support the men and women of dhs. >> have you ever considered it? >> i think the suggestions, when i heard those suggestions, they are in situations i would never consider resigning. >> have there been moments such as those suggested by christopher wray in his interview with lester holt where you even considered resigning? >> that's a place i don't really go to publicly. i tried to retire twice. >> not very successfully. >> i failed both times. but look you ask yourself why
did you agree to do this in the first place? what is your intent? and what is your responsibility? and i look at those measures in terms of making decisions as to how long i would like to be in this business. are there days when you think, what am i doing? yeah. but there's a lot more days saying, you know, the mission here is critical and to be able to be a part of it, to be able to feel like you're giving something back to your country, it's a reward. >> welcome back to "morning joe". it is friday, july 20th. still with us we have national affairs analyst for nbc news and msnbc. national treasure -- how is that for an introduction, donny deuts deutsch. national treasure. and also lounge lizard in the
hamptons on fridays. and washington anchor for bbc news world news america, katty kay. and joining the conversation, we have white house correspondent for pbs news hour. and also columnist for the "new york times" brett stevens as well as commentary editor for the "washington examiner" and a visiting fellow at the american enterprise institute tim carney. so, let's talk about what we just heard. brett stevens, obviously, you have a balancing act for an awful lot of people that work for this white house who actually feel like sometimes they feel they need to leave, other times they feel they need to stay there and keep doing the sort of thing that dan coats did yesterday and has been doing
through the week. what's your take on the balancing act that they are making, and when they should finally just throw in the towel. >> i think over a lot of these guys they tell themselves privately that they are cleaning up for the president, but more recently i think they are covering up for the president. i think that goes particularly for john bolton and secretary of state mike pompeo. i've known both men for years, as i'm sure you have, and they've had one consistent view or two consistent views, first of all don't negotiate with dictators in north korea, they never keep their word. it's a fool's gambit. the united states should never do that. secondly don't trust the russian, especially former kgb agents like vladimir putin. now here you have both men going along with probably the most accommodationist or appeasement oriented policy an american
president has had in as long as you and i can remember. this puts the russian reset to shame in term of the way in which president trump has consistently reached out to putin, has apologized for him, has taken his side in disputes and at some point you have to ask yourself or ask john and mike, how long can you go along with this policy and honor your conscience to say nothing of your country. i just don't see how they can do it except -- unless they are so addicted to power they will run with it for as long as they stay in office. >> tim carney, you and i and a lot of our friends have grown-up listening to john bolton, especially, and while i wasn't thrilled about john bolton going to work for the white house because i didn't know that he could play well with others, that the two things that gave me solace was the fact that nobody in washington, d.c. has been
tougher on russia and iran and specifically vladimir putin than john bolton. you can do a quick google search on bolton and russia and come up with just a potpourri of tough no compromise comments about how vladimir putin is corrupt, ex-kgb agent who wants to take over western europe. >> there's two interesting divides. right at this table. with me and brett with the highlights, a divide on the right. one what you have with bolton and pompeo and i think you're reaching out to them is that they are very hawkish republicans who are more likely to want to push things up to the point of conflict, whether it's up to the point of war in syria. the other is the attitude towards trump. a lot of us, brett and i both could call us never trump conservatives during the election. after the election i don't think that phrase means anything.
the idea oh, they are still supporting trump. for me the question is on what given policy. are they helping trump appease putin or are they trying to push trump in the right direction on putin? i don't think it makes sense you're still on trump's side, he's doing these bad things you need to quit. the job of everybody whether it's somebody in the administration like pompeo or boll on the or conservative commentators to push trump in the right direction. to oppose trump is a meaningless idea. >> i'll put something more out there and it's a little in the weed. you also don't have government functioning at full capacity. so if you have a pompeo resign what happens to the people at secretary of state. right now the three top cyber people including assistant director at the fbi are leaving. that means there's vacancies in cyber as we're going into the 2018 mid-term election. so resigning is a great concept
but we need our government to be working as well. >> well, there's so many situations. john, for instance, if for some reason dan coats was pushed out, was fired or resigned under pressure, it's just like jeff sessions, good luck having the united states senate allow donald trump to replace him with anybody else. that's why the firing of dan coats under these circumstances is just not possible. let's get back, though, to john bolton who actually one year ago today -- one year ago today vladimir putin, this is a john bolton op-ed and his headline is vladimir putin looked donald trump in the eye and lied to him. we negotiate with russia at our own peril. where are those conservative cold war hawks these days?
locked outside the door when donald trump is talking to his chief, vladimir putin. >> right. joe, obviously a stunning thing that's happened with john bolton. i want to take it back to brett and tim because i think you're pointing to a very interesting divide among people who used to be called never trump republicans. isn't part of the flaw in your argument, potentially, that there doesn't seem to be any real effect. john bolton is there to moderate trump's tendencies towards putin doesn't this last week make you look up how am i affecting this policy in a positive way and isn't it better for the country as i think what brett -- i'll let you speak for yourself, for republicans and former never trump republicans, the country is in crisis. the government is not functioning. something is going on that's deeply disturbing between donald trump and vladimir putin and would be the argument for mike
pompeo or dan coats, this is the moment where we need to stand together and act in unison to signal to the country that we're in a crisis moment now and we no longer have the ability to moderate donald trump's tendencies because he's giving away the store to putin for reasons we don't understand. >> you can't understand donald trump as a person behaves. he's a big child who is not containable. but the administration can. if you look how the administration has been vis-a-vis russia it hasn't been towards russia. it's trump the man in the room with putin that's the problem. >> they used to say that about reagan. i'm tempted to say let trump be trump. we elected trump to be our president. he's the president. he deserves to have cabinet officers who will follow out his policies and his instincts and there are plenty of people there, i can imagine secretary
of state tucker carlson, national security adviser, these are people with incredible ethical elasticity and they reflect and they are going to reflect the man. right now you have people consoling themselves with a lie which is okay pompeo and bolton, these guys are hawks and they will keep the president in check. the truth is we have an executive system of government in which the president has secretaries, we call them secretaries for a reason. purely administrative functions to carry out his policies. we're deceiving ourselves if we think putting in dan coats will moderate the policy. americans need to see what kind of government they really have. >> and yet if you look at the policies of this administration, if you look at what's actually been passed in congress with the sanctions, if you look at the statements of everybody around donald trump from u.n.
ambassador nikki haley to vice president mike pence when he's not latherring president in praise, if you look at the people around donald trump who donald trump has appointed, they are, let's just say, harsher on russia than george h. w. bush or barack obama both were. the policies seemed to be harsher on russia than they were under bush or barack obama. and yet right at the center of this you have a man tweeting and making statements that actually make him look like he's an agent of an ex-kgb officer. it is hard for our allies to sort through, but to borrow ross perot's phrase if you look where the rubber meets the road, we do have some policies on russia
that are fairly tough. >> well, when i talked to source they tell me you have to make the difference between what president trump is doing, his rhetoric, his actions, even his body language in the helsinki press conference which i attended and the actual policies of the united states which are tough on russia. the trump administration has expelled russian officials, closed consulates, not let up on the russian sanctions. there's this idea when i talk to people, i talk to the u.s. ambassador to nato, former ambassador to nato he told me all that was going on and nato allies will try to plan work around for the united states because they don't trust the united states under trump, the trump administration, the actual nuts and bolts of what came out of it is that the united states is not changing our relationship with nato, we're not taking out troops of any of the nato military operations, that said, being in that meeting, being in that press conference, it was happening in finland but could
have been happening in russia. put spoke first. his body language at the beginning of the day was slumped in his chair. by the time the press conference came around he was standing up, smirking, felt he was the host. he was having a good time. that's what's worrying a lot of people. of course that 90-minute meeting that turned into two hour one-on-one session where intelligence communities are still trying to figure out what was said. that's what's scary about this. people who work for donald trump don't know what he gave away to vladimir putin. >> katty kay, these are such bizarre times where you have, again, you have donald trump bowing and scraping to an ex-kgb agent who maintains power through assassination, and tries to undermine -- tries to undermine american democracy and western democracies. but, again, you look at the administration's positions against russia and, you know,
i'm torn. first of all, because donald trump is so -- towards vladimir putin you know we have to have the toughest policies, the toughest sanctions possible against vladimir putin. at the same time when you take a step back you go well wait, at some point we need to start to actually start building a positive relationship with the russians. but it seems that donald trump's bowing and scraping actually gets in the way of us being able to have any constructive talks with the russians. >> yeah. this is the confusion surrounding u.s.-russian relationships at the moment. i spoke yesterday to bill browder, the american financier who was on that list that president putin wants to have interrogated, he led to the passing of that act and he was
horrified at the idea that donald trump's gut in that meeting is to say that this is an incredible offer. this is where donald trump seems to want to come from to pacify vladimir putin, to agree with vladimir putin, to give in to vladimir putin on something so substantial as handing over americans and american-born people to be interrogated by russian officials. yet even he, even bill browder said when it comes to policies america is very tough at the moment on russia and the trump administration is actually being tougher on russia than the obama administration was. this is where the consfugs. if the trump administration will be so tough with these sanction w-the closing of consulates, with hitting people who are close to putin, some of the oligarchs close to putin why is it so hard for donald trump to then also say, as dan coats did and as chris wray, put was responsible for meddling in the u.s. election, nothing happens
in russia without vladimir putin's say so and it must never happen again. russia is the aggressor here. we heard it from members of his government in the past 24 hours but yet he can't say it. almost like a personal thing with putin rather than a policy issue with russia itself. >> donnie, that's what is -- i mean that's what this past week has shown. we need to separate the personal from the policy and i know donald trump thinks the personal is the policy, but it's not. let's think about, again, just digging in this, digging into this, much more. we have a president who does look like he's owned by vladimir putin. looks that way. i don't think -- i don't think -- it is hard for anyone to deny it doesn't look like he's afraid of vladimir putin and vladimir putin has something on him. >> joe, he does. >> that said -- okay. he does. you and i know trump.
we both believe that he does. in fact, i would -- bet an awful lot, bet a lot on that. so we have that fact, all right. now let's go the next step. but he's appointed people that actually are tough on russia. he's appointed john bolton, who even a year ago was calling putin a liar that you couldn't trust and you couldn't negotiate with. mike pompeo who has always been a conservative's conservative on iran and russia. dan coats, i mean that guy, a rock conservative from indiana, a senator. and he's throwing fastballs at putin's head. christopher wray, no fear. i mean christopher wray says what he believes, goes after it, says the russians are meddling. secretary mattis, secretary mattis, when donald trump was attacking nato, secretary mattis, what did he say? he said nato is so important
that if it didn't exist we would have had to invent it. what do these five people have in common? they have many thing in common. one thing they have in common is donald trump appointed all of them. and they are all tough on russia and they are all speaking out with donald trump being obsequ everyone obsequitous. he could be appointing people who aren't conservatives who will do whatever donald trump tells him to do. sean hannity could be secretary of state. i mean you need to go down the list. there are a lot of craven people trying to undermine robert mueller's investigation. he could appoint them as attorney general. it is almost like he knows he can't. it's a tale of two cities. a tale of two administrations. >> what you're suggesting, it's a fascinating point.
okay if we go on the premise and there's no other explanation. we can sit with learned folks and say why is he so subservient. well, obviously, he's owned. but then you punch a hole in that and go well if that's the case to your point why is he not surrounding himself with less hawkish people. he's doing a balancing act. at the end of the day i don't think -- i think on some level knows he loses his base. he loses who he is if he goes in it in a way. but -- but, but, but on a personal level he's just afraid of stepping over that one one-on-one boundary of it's me versus him or i'll say this personally about him because at the end of the day he is owned. our president despite the furkt point and this would put some kind of holes in that theory does surround himself with hawkish people. if you understand how this man
has done business he's owned by our number one geopolitical enemy. i'll say it again. you say no. there's no other explanation. you can use the explanation he's concerned about the validity of his election. as joe pointed out he was doing this before the election. give me one other rational explanation. >> here's the rational explanation. he likes strong men. when he's talking about kim jong-un he was on voice of america with great jim vandehei sustern. he said kim jong-un feels warmly about the north korean -- >> he called him little rocket man at one point. >> grows praise for kim jong-un fits into the same category as the attitude towards putin as same attitude towards rodrigo
duterte. these strong men dictators he buddies up to them. so erdogan and kim have stuff on him. >> he's a scmuck or a stooge. leads to the same conclusion. it's possible to think he has an ideological affinity for russia, a psychological affinity for strong men. at the end of the day you have a president who is determined to buck his advisers and seek a relationship with russia which is antithetical. he surrounded himself with russian hawks but to think the hawks are influencing him. he's transforming the nature and the ideology of the republican party, the number of republicans who take a dim view of vladimir
putin is down since 2015. the number of republicans who approve of vladimir putin has more than doubled. but he's winning his way towards transforming the foreign policy of the party to what it used to be in the 1930s, cause quasi isolationist. and whether the explanation is a conspiracy theory or the fact that he simply is in love with strong men or that he's always liked russian, at the end of the day that's less interesting than what thele result is for u.s. foreign policy. >> well it's what i wrote yesterday, it doesn't really matter why donald trump is being obsequitous to vladimir putin. it will elect a lot of democrats in the fall and 2020. he transformed republicans on nato, transformed republicans on russia, transformed republicans on the very underpinning of our
foreign policy that we conservatives have followed for the past 65, 70 years. certainly since william f. buckley founded national review. he's also cozied up to vladimir putin personally in a way that does, does tim carney, briefly, let me push back a little bit. does suggest that vladimir putin's relationship with donald trump is different than anybody else because as donnie pointed out he certainly was very critical of the little rocket man as he called kim jong-un, attacked him, threatened to bomb him, said his button was bigger than un's button. you'll snow other than stormy daniels there's no one in donald trump's three years in political life that has escaped his wrath other than put. can you not find one negative
thing he said about vladimir putin even going back before election when he was on our show talking about how american soldiers in iraq killed a lot of people too so we could be critical of vladimir putin. >> the bottom line i agree with what brett said is that to some extent the explanation doesn't matter this attitude is bad and transforming the american people. again i'll point out that he, the fondness towards the strong man is universal and putin has been very turning to all sorts of leaders, bush and obama fell under his spell before they came out from under it. >> pitching one thing here. everything you said i agree with. there's obviously the impact brett talked about it. trump is transforming the republican party, transforming the american attitude, especially on what used to be the conservative side of the ideological spectrum towards russia but it stems me the bigger issue here is he's making
the world more dangerous by attacking the western alliance, by attacking theresa may, by attacking angela merkel while at the same time providing sucker to vladimir putin, he's appreciably making the western alliance weaker and making the world more dangerous and that to me is the difference between -- yes kim jong-un is a dangerous guy. no doubt north korea and nuclear proliferation is a threat. rodrigo duterte is a different story. but the corner stone has been nato for the last 50 years. donald trump is taking a wrecking ball to nato while at the same time inviting vladimir putin to come to washington, d.c. two years after he undermined american democracy in the 2016 election. these things have consequences beyond the political consequences for the republican party, beyond american attitudes. this is making world more dangerous by the day.
>> by the day, and one thing we haven't talked about enough this week has been what he said about montenegro, we would not defend montenegro if russia attacked montenegro. that send as message to putin not about montenegro but about estonia, other baltic states, about western ukraine. that sends the message to vladimir putin that the president of the united states will not show resolve and if he wants to invade more countries as he did under george h. w. bush and under barack obama, he can start invading countries under donald trump because andrea mitchell -- let's bring in michigan right now who had quite an eventful interview with the director of national intelligence. but you remember back to the lead up to the first gulf war,
where saddam hussein misread some things american diplomats said and he took it as a green light to invade kuwait. now you have donald trump we're not going to defend montenegro if they are invade. the baltic leaders had to be shaking after hearing those words because it gives putin a green light to roll the tanks. >> exactly. and, in fact, the russians and forgive my voice, there's a lot of pollen out here this morning, the russians had, you know, tried a coup attempt in montenegro. montenegro signal was really important. i've spoken to two former nato ambassador, joe, that's another way where putin is undercutting nato and donald trump is playing right into his hands. >> so tell us about dan coats yesterday, what an extraordinary interview, and you also had, i
guess, the good fortune or bad fortune to deliver very bad news to the director of national intelligence and that is even before the president of the united states had cleaned up just the collection of messes that he created in helsinki, he's now ready for round two but this time in washington, d.c. talk about dan coats' reaction. >> it was certainly not my intention to surprise the national security -- the national intelligence adviser. i felt, first of all, that he was trying very hard to stay within his lane, to not speak policy, but to be true to the assessment which he said they had redone since 2017 repeatedly and had come to the same conclusion, anders being very clear that the russians did it, the russians are still doing it, and that vladimir putin is in charge. and i think he was even more
determined to be clear about that because at the same conference only hours earlier, kirstjen nielsen interviewed by peter alexander here, had made it very unclear, she's head of homeland security, in charge of protecting the mid-term elections and she refused to say that it was the russians or that it was clearly to help donald trump, which was part of that intelligence assessment. so there's a lot of clarity required from dan coats and he and chris wray and later rod rosenstein, later in the evening with absolutely being specific about that. they were determined to stand firmly behind the intelligence agencies and the fbi, and to support their troops and keep politics out of it. as much as they could even though they had been under fire now for 18 months or more. and that i think is the message that dan coats was trying to
deliver. >> yeah. all right andrea mitchell, thank you so much for being on this morning. absolutely remarkable times and we'll be watching your show at noon right here on msnbc. thanks. brett stevens and tim carney, thank you as well. fascinating discussion and still ahead on "morning joe," our next guest was one of the democrats who broke out in a chant of usa, usa on the house floor, congressman tim deutsche explains what inspired that after republicans deep sixed a plan to make american democracy safer. yeah, explain that one in your next town hall meeting. "morning joe" will be right back. 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.
whoamike and jen doyle?than i thought. yeah. time for medicare, huh. i have no idea how we're going to get through this. follow me. choosing a plan can be super-complicated. but it doesn't have to be. unitedhealthcare can guide you through the confusion, with helpful people, tools and plans. including the only plans with the aarp name. well that wasn't so bad at all. that's how we like it. aarp medicare plans, from unitedhealthcare.
year's mid-term elections. patrick, thanks for coming back. let's talk about where those voters are right now, too often, obviously we look at national polls that have no impact on how congressional races in certain districts turn out. what's it looking like mid-summer right now for republicans and democrats among the demographics that count the most? >> one of the interesting things i'm looking at has been the fact that in a lot of high quality polls that have come out recently, we've seen a record gender gap in this election. much greater than we saw in 2016, the quinnipiac poll had women leading among -- democrats leading women by 25 points while men are going to opposite direction voting republican by eight points. and you dig into those numbers a little bit more and what's really fascinating is that a lot
of that shift in the gender gap is being driven by millennials in particular. so you have the pew poll that has republicans leading, you know, among men by three points and a massive 44 point pro democratic vote among women which is unprecedented. >> what's the impact on districts, the districts we're all looking at? obviously the ones hillary clinton won the presidential race but still have republican members of congress there. >> well, i think on a district by district basis, you're not going to see a huge amount of impact, simply because unless you have districts that have a higher proportion of millennials that, you know, in the aggregate are shifting towards the democrat. but across all the districts obviously the genders are evenly split regardless of where you
go. but what i think it will do for democrats, it's going to put a big fat target on those voters if you're moving particularly millennial women that are moving so decisively and going to make it easier for democrats at least to identify those voters. >> so, talk about -- let's forget about what's going to happen in the next couple of months, let's talk about generational shifts. we see this from time to time. i'm an old guy so when i was in high school a lot of younger voters shocked pollsters and shocked pundit when is my older brother and my older sister and a lot of younger voters went for reagan. and you actually saw a generational shift from younger voters being democratic to younger voters being republican. you can't look at those numbers and not think, for instance,
what you've been saying and what others have been saying, that this is sort of, to borrow dan coats term, a blinking red light for republicans here and that is that they could lose a generation of millennial women. >> that's right. and you do see over time, you know, those young voters who came of age under reagan are more republican today and you see this repeated time and time again. people do move throughout their lifetimes but shaped by those experiences of voting your first three or four times, your viewpoints do tend to be locked in. but i think that there's -- i genuinely do think there's opportunity for both sides here. and i think one thing to really take a look at is you may be seeing a little bit of a shift among younger millennial nonwhite voters. the reason i say that is
nonwhites are 44% of the millennial vote now. they are growing as a share. you look at the shift among young men there hasn't been much of a pro democratic shift. you look at the voter files, some of the large scale panel studies that have been done, the most popular, you know, trump doesn't do very well among african-american voters overall but his most popular position is with the young men where, you know, republicans are nearing about 20% of the vote, where we're used to talking about republicans being in single digits with that category of voters. so i do think there are potential shifts on both sides happening and i think particularly as we talk about gender, we don't talk enough about how both sides can shift. you know, we talk about how, you know, women, you know, potentially are moving away from
the republican party. but what we could be seeing is simply both sides kind of pulling apart from each other for the same reasons. >> all right. we love having you on. thank you so much for being with us. now to the moment on the house floor after house republicans voted down a democratic effort to increase election security funding. >> we have sworn an oath to defend our constitution and our liberty -- >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> against all enemies foreign and domestic. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> you have an opportunity to do that today. do so. vote yes on this amendment for your country. [ chanting usa ] >> with us now, a member of the foreign affairs and judiciary
committees, democratic congressman ted deutsche of florida. congressman, what happened with that vote yesterday, and why did republicans vote against a bill to fund election security and republicans will say we have our own version of that bill that will protect election security just as much as the democrats. >> well, thanks. first of all, no, they are not going to say they have their own bill. there's no good answer for the fact that every republican in the house of representatives voted yesterday against additional funding for election security in a vote that took place at the end of a week when the president started the week by showing that he was with putin instead of with america and a week after, just a week after the indictment came down
that showed the extent of this hacking and what the russians were trying to do. what the response, the pathetic response, i must say, to this language that would have added funding to go to our states, to help prevent cyber attacks from the russians, the response from my republican colleagues we shouldn't be doing that. if we want to protect our elections we need to pass more voter i.d. laws. it's tone deaf. unpatriotic. inexplicable. i heard you earlier, good luck going home and trying to sflien your constituents why the week that we saw the president on stage with putin, the week we discussed their efforts to attack our democracy and the way they did attack our democracy we want nothing to do to prevent it from happening again. >> we talked this morning what the democrats message could and should be this coming fall and 2020. a lot of republicans favor dealing with put. why do you think this is so important.
is this an issue guys can run on? >> sure. we're not going to run on election security and funding for it. but in the big picture, look, what's the message. people -- proud americans want to be proud of their government. they are not proud of this government. that's not true just for democrats, it's true for republicans too. it's true because of the way the president talks about women, the numbers, the discussion about millennial women. who are surprised that millennial women don't like the president given the way he talks about women. it's true when they look at the president standing on stage -- people want to be proud and know the president is standing up for our national security not standing on stage looking like someone who is a pawn for vladimir putin. >> i want to ask you something. of course, i felt -- actually emotional felt something on the usa, usa. what i was talking about before and what the message needs be. it's a vote for democracy, a vote for freedom.
going back to what patrick said. i couldn't agree with him more. it's about the women. do you an ad that says to a young millennial woman this is what your grandmother fought for, fight for your granddaughter, this is what we stand for. it's not about voting but that emotion that happened in congress yesterday if you can gin that up in the base and you don't trash trump and don't talk about how he treats women, it's just about who we are, that's what i saw happening with the congress yesterday. >> i know people are cynical about politics. and i understand that a lot of people will watch that and think it's just for show. but there is this sense of patriotism. you saw it. some of my republican colleagues realized what was going on and jumped to their feet. it's impossible not to want to stand up right now at this moment for our democracy. i agree with you. standing for our democracy, making sure that our votes will be protect really matters, but
also donnie, those same women also care about the fact that this president is tearing dprids their parents at the border. that vote natures. they care about the fact that the administration is hell bent on taking away health care coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. all of that matters the home. it comes from these deep places of patriotism and frustration. >> you talk about people being cynical. there are people that look at that video and say this is grandstanding from democrats who want to make a show because they couldn't pass the bill. what's the plan now going forward as president trump's supporters are following him. they are saying put should be someone we're close to. what are democrats going to do now if you don't have the votes to pass legislation? >> well, first of all, it's really important to point out -- i don't know -- i think that assertion that republicans are
falling in line behind the president on his relationship with vladimir putin, not from what i've seen and if you look at the tweets -- >> i was talking about trump supporters. >> sure. i saw also those polls a lot of trump supporters think the president is right on. i won try to convince everyone that when the president stands on stage and seems to care more about vladimir putin, and be there to do his bidding instead of standing up for american national security, i can't convince everyone. i know that the overwhelming majority of people watched the president on stage and were horrified by what they saw. i'm going to continue -- we'll continue to talk to those people and what we need to do to address this issue. we'll look back on this summer, i'm convinced, we'll look back on this summer in history and the way the president did the work of vladimir putin, not just standing next to him but he attacked the g7.
he went to nato attacked nato. he stood up and attacked our allies specifically. he attacked the eu. that's what vladimir putin wants him to do. it's not about having a good relationship with russia. it's not even just about sanctions. we imposed sanctions. we dragged the president kicking and screaming to do it but we imposed sanctions. when we imposed sanctions and the president goes into a closed door meeting with vladimir putin, has some conversation that we have no idea that the director of national intelligence has no idea what it was b-thatabout, that's somethi everyone is nervous about. everyone understands the threat it provides. >> congressman, thank you for being with us. of course the congressman would like us to let everybody in his know, no relation to donnie. still ahead on "morning joe" this. >> we're definitely cousins. >> a lot of child psychologists said publicly this amounts to
child abuse. is this child abuse being imposed, enforced by the american government? >> i think that we have 2,000 children who need our care in term of being reunited with their parents and we're working very hard on doing that. that's the secretary of homeland security, kirstjen nielsen speaking with peter alexander in aspen. up next we'll be bringing in jay job whose early reporting on the government's child separation policy pulled back the curtain on the crisis and you heard the secretary say there, 2,000 children are still separated from their parents. we'll dig more into that when "morning joe" returns. it's the ford summer sales event
and now is the best time to buy. preparing classic campfire trout. say what? trout. trout. all right. you don't think i need both? why does he have that axe? make summer go right with ford america's best selling brand. now get 0% financing for 72 months plus $1,000 ford credit bonus cash on a great selection of suv's. during the ford summer sales event, get our best offer of the season 0% financing for 72 months plus $1,000 ford credit bonus cash.
save up to 15% when you book early until her laptop crashed her salonthis morning.or weeks, you never know what the day's going to bring when you're running a small business, it might even bring a blue screen of death. having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get virus and spyware removal, and 24/7 tech support. office depot now offers on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. ♪ right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax
you were doing a story about the children separated from their parents. kirstjen nielsen throwing out a number 2,000. >> it's pretty unbelievable, basically we'll do our best and try not to cut corners to get everybody reunited. six days from now is the day mandated to have them back. the number they put out yesterday only 14%, 364 of the kids have been reunified so far. we also learned one-third of the parents of those children could be deported immediately after reunification and over one-third are not eligible for any form of reunification so remember this is a crisis that donald trump created, a policy that had never been put into place to systematically separate children from their parents, put them into cages into places like
mccallan, texas, which i saw with my own eyes. third the parents may not be able to be reunited at all, ever. >> i'm glad you got to have a vacation i'm serious when i say the trauma you witnessed when you were first covering this story. so what happens now? my thing has been we have to stay on the story. you are back from vacation and on this story, not let up, you've listen relentless. how do we continue to bring accountability? the courts are trying. how do we continue to try to bring accountability and when i say we, the democratic republic here. >> we have to hammer it every single day and i'm grateful to our network that this is my job now. this is what i focus on day in and day out. we talk about 2,551 kids, we should not rest until every single one of those kids is accounted for. we know right now there are hundreds according to the government but no specifics of parents that have been released from i.c.e. custody but we don't know where they are and how they
will be reunited. there are subsets of information that we need to ask questions just like we did when we are down there, where are the little girls and the toddlers. what happens to the parents already released, what happens to the parents already deported with their families, because the aclu is concerned the due process rights of these asylum seeker were completely violated and booted out of the country or may yet immediately after they're reunified. tons of different questions we keep asking. >> i'm grateful you're on this. >> keep asking those questions. the white house has been lying for weeks talking about how the parents will be reunified with all the children several weeks ago. there are 2,500 short and as you said, tragically, some of the parents may never be reunited with their children. jacob soboroff thanks for being with us. keep up the great work. still ahead, the president answers the scrutiny of the summit with vladimir putin by --
inviting vladimir putin to the white house. that's going to be happening this fall. plus, new comments from the president about what happens if things with russia don't work out. we'll be back with more "morning joe" in two minutes. sfx: [cell phone dialing] no. no, no, no, no, no. cancel. cancel. please. aaagh! being in the know is a good thing. that's why discover will alert you if your social security number is found on any one of thousands of risky sites.
it's a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life. with my bladder leakage,
the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were very saggy. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with new sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. introducing more sizes for better comfort. new depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is friday, july the 20th. with us we have national affairs analyst for nbc news and msnbc, john heilemann, we also have donny deutsch with us, legendaryed aman and marketer, also republican strategist and msnbc political analyst susan delpercio and white house reporter for the associated press jonathan lamere and cady kaye. donny, our introductions of you have been carved up like a thanksgiving turkey.
at the beginning you were legendary ad man and now they have don, don d. and everything else you hear from me i'm ad libbing. tell me as a legendary advertiser and marketing man, what do you make of the president of the united states? we're going to get to this news in one second but it was really shocking that the president of the united states, after being called treasonous by quite a few people in the foreign policy defense community, still trying to clean up, which is going to be our top story, you know, the mess that he created when he went to helsinki, and cowtowed to an ex-kgb agent he rushes to announce that vladimir putin is coming to washington. before cleaning up the last mess on aisle seven, what's your take? >> you know, it's interesting, joe, you use the "t" word and at the beginning of the week a lot of democrat, a lot of people were using it. all of a sudden maybe that was too hard.
i don't think it's extreme to treason, adhering to their enemies giving them aid and comfo comfort. i think trump, like a petulant child in any time he's rebuked about anything his response is to double -- first to walk it back and walk back the walk back and to double down. just putting it in our faces, putting it in american's faces, and i, as a branding guy, i have no trepidation at all about assigning that treason word. it is no different than had somebody attacked the united states with missiles, when you attack our voting system, actually you're doing more harm to us, because once you destroy that process, our democracy is over. if you have an election, we can't believe in it, that is an act of war in any way, sense or form, and we have a treasonous president who now put it in our face in finland, now going to bring it to our own shores and as jonathan swann talked about
the fact that 80% of republicans think he behaved okay, gave him a stamp of approval, your ex-party, joe, and you wrote about it yesterday in "washington post," shame on these pathetic, whimpering cowards. >> yeah, yeah. i wrote about it yesterday, who are these people and what have they done to my party. 08% of americans think it's okay to cower before an ex-kgb agent, to insult allies. you do wonder, this isn't just a donald trump problem now. this is a problem with the party cast wide, and really quickly, before we move on to the first script, john heilemann, this is something that we really need to talk about, because i personally believe it changes not only the face of the republican party, but in the long run, destroys the republican party, that you
have treason was used by so many people, criticizing donald trump, even the "wall street journal" said that congress needed to pass a containment plan not only for putin, but also for donald trump. you had the president of the united states doing vladimir putin's bidding, exactly what he wanted him to do, attacking nato, attacking theresa may, attacking germany, attacking angela merkel, attacking all of our closest allies. again, as we're hearing just about every night, it seems, on russian tv, commentateors in russia shocked saying we couldn't succeed this well in the cold war, now donald trump's doing all of our work for us. but what is a long-term impact of the republican party now who not only is embracing vladimir putin and embracing vladimir putin's agenda, which is to destroy nato, and disrupt
elections, but now they're also, i think i saw somebody last night quoted a pew poll that 37% of republicans support tariffs and protectionism, which again is a complete reversal that will have impact on the long run in this party. >> i think the corruption and bankruptcy of the republican party has been a long time in the making. there is no way you'd defend what the republican party stood for in the world war ii era. it has become the party of donald trump, so in a thorough way we've seen this not just in the startling polling in relation to how republicans
have, rather than to chastise him, to criticize him for russia's role in meddling in the american election, he's giving him the ultimate kind of cherry on some of the sundae, this is the thing a russian president would want most of all, to get, especially in this week -- >> john, as it goes to republicans, rank and file republicans say 75%, 80% saying they liked what he did in helsinki. his closest allies in the media said he was treasonous or a complete dupe. who are the people i grew up that were the most, the toughest on russia that fought the cold war alongside with nato, when the soviet's goal during the cold war is the same goal that vladimir putin has now, which is
to disrupt western democracies and break up nato. the goal is identical to what republicans supported. you talk about trade. 73% are telling pollsters they think tariffs are good for america? who are these people? political body snatchers. >> these are the people who now are the republican party. the people you think of as having constituted the republican party in your life growing up with the party, they are now either no longer in the party or they are in a kind of weak and craving way sitting on the sidelines and wringing their hands over what donald trump has done to the party. some of them are speaking out, some of them are not. as david ignatius said over the course of the week as i watched from vacation, could you feel the fabric of the presidency ripping and you can hear there are more republicans speaking out. it's not nearly as much as you might respect but there are more
who are speaking out but the rank and file of the party now, the grassroots of the republican party are people who believe what donald trump believes and not what you believe, and not what republicans believed in the post world war ii era. they don't believe in free trade, don't believe in immigration, don't believe in standing up to russian, previously soviet expansionism, they don't believe in nato. that's not what the republican party is anymore. to answer your question, i don't know what happens. as you pointed out many times over the course of the last 18 months, there will be a period after donald trump, whether that's in fewer than a couple years from now, where donald trump gets his first term is forestalled, whether donald trump makes it through one term but gets beaten or whether he gets a re-election, at some point, there will be a life after donald trump and then the republican party is going to look up and say, what are we? what have we become and does that lead to ia fundamental redefinition of the political
party structures. >> they are going to look at their election results and ask the question, what have we done and why did we sit by and allow this to happen the which it did. susan delpercio, i'm just curious. if you go to a lincoln reagan dinner, used to just be lincoln dinners where republicans would every year usually january, february, march have their big fund-raising dinner and invite a speaker. if you go to a lincoln reagan dinner you're talking to rank and file, if you believe these polls, talking to rank and file that no longer believe in tree trade. okay, so i guess what i said at lincoln reagan dinners about free trade i couldn't say anymore if i were still a republican. you talk about balancing the budgets, and reducing the debt. boy, one of the biggest expansions in deficits in debt spending in the history of our country, history of the world, so i couldn't talk about that.
you talk about standing up to an expansionist russia, being tough, not leading from behind. you talk about your alliances with, you know, nato. these are the things that we talked about -- >> that's right. >> -- for 50 years, not me for 50 years but at least for two decades, and you could go to every reagan lincoln dinner across america, lincoln reagan dinner across america, and you could say the same thing wherever you went, and you'd get the applause. now according to these polls it's not a split. now 80% of americans are fine with donald trump's cowtowing to an ex-kgb agent who wants to destroy our allies and disrupt their elections and now they
support tariffs. what the hell -- who the hell are these people? what is wrong with these republicans? where has the party not of my youth, but of my early 50s gone? >> it's gone, joe, and it's really difficult. i was reading your column this morning, and i, too, said like where is my party? i don't recognize it, and i could have gone to a lincoln day dinner even a year ago or two years ago and heard those things. it has happened so quickly. let's not forget, we did have strong republicans running for president for 2016. donald trump did beat them, and you know what, jeb bush -- >> legitimate. >> is a legitimate strong candidate. marco rubio you may not have agreed with their policies, however, they were strong republicans and they were beaten by the personality of donald trump at that point. the policies of donald trump are now is what has defeated the
republican party, and that is putting us in a very difficult situation, and personally, i think if we don't start to see republican organizations setting up the field for 2020 to open it up for a conservative republican to run, or just a principled republican, i'll leave it at that, then we are going to see this party dive way deeper. >> still ahead on "morning joe" after a long and careful night of deliberation, the white house has decided it's not a good idea to hand over a former american diplomat to a hostile foreign power. that's a decision the senate was a lot quicker in making. we'll talk about it with democrat mark warner. but first here's michelle grossman with a check on the forecast. michelle? >> thanks so much, joe. the storms that came through the midwest yesterday have moved off to the east so this is what we're watching today, strong storms, the possibility for some tornadoes, some large hail and also some flooding conditions. watch that throughout the afternoon.
otherwise we're looking at a beautiful day in the northeast, picture perfect, lots of sunshine, low humidity, that will change drastically later on saturday into sunday, watching a coastal low that will bring as many rounds of rain until the beginning of next week and very hot once again, triple digit heat, 106 in oklahoma city. san antonio 102 and the same story throughout sunday so your weekend outlook, record temperatures in the south, pacific northwest looking nice. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. how can we say when you book direct at choicehotels.com you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com
you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. and i heard that my cousin's so, wife's sister's husband
election meddling, in exchange for the u.s. agreeing to let moscow investigate americans. "it is a proposal that was made in sincerity by president putin," made in sincerity? i think it was cynical, "but president trump disagrees with it. hopefully president putin will have the 12 identified russians come to the united states to prove their innocence or guilt." the statement's claim that "president trump disagrees with it," that is in direct contrast to what trump initially said, calling it an incredible offer, and sanders saying that the white house was considering the proposal. >> we would expect that the americans would reciprocate and they would question officials,
including the officers of law enforcement and intelligence services of the united states, whom we believe are, who have something to do with illegal actions on the territory of russia. >> what he did is an incredible offer. he offered to have the people working on the case come and work with their investigators, with respect to the 12 people. i think that's an incredible offer. >> the president's going to neat with his team and we'll let you know when we have an aunnoment on that. >> reporter: is that a topic that came up in their conversation, did president putin raise this with president trump? >> there was some conversation about it, but there wasn't a commitment made on behalf of the united states, and the president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front. >> you know, cady kaye, let's strip this down and be honest about it, no american unless they were a dupe for vladimir putin would think that turning a former russian ambassador over
to russian investigators, especially an ambassador who had been kicked out of russia because he spoke out too forcefully against vladimir putin's abuses, no red-blooded american would think that was an incredible offer, but donald trump did think it was an incredible offer. sarah huckabee sanders said that he had to think about it a day later, and now we have this reversal yet again. i'm sure they'll change tomorrow, but what do you make of the back-and-forths on turning americans over to russians? >> this was never going to happen. you were never going to turn over a former ambassador, a u.s.-born financier to help implement the act, a bunch of senate staffers who helped draw up american law, these are all the people putin wanted. what was president trump thinking during the course of that two-hour meeting? what was it putin said to him? how did he communicate with him, that seemed to win donald trump
over, so that when he came out of that meeting, his initial instinct, his gut reaction was to say yeah, this is an incredible offer. i think this is a great idea. i think as we head into the prospect, because one was not enough, why not have a second one, of that second putin meeting, you've got intelligence officials now scrambling to find out what else donald trump may have agreed to, what did he give away? what were the verbal commitments? you have russian officials and president putin saying we came out of helsinki, got these agreements, looking forward to working on them and the head scratching going on in washington particularly in the defense community saying we don't know what our president may have just committed this country to, and now we have the prospect of a second meeting as well. it begs belief, it's extraordinary. coming up on "morning joe" another bipartisan warning shot to the president. last week the senate voted 97-
2 to support nato and yesterday voted 98-0 to deny putin's ability to question american officials. there's something finally changing on capitol hill. we'll ask the top democrat on the house intel committee senator mark warner straight ahead on "morning joe." sometimes, bipolar i disorder can make you feel unstoppable. ♪ but mania, such as unusual changes in your mood, activity or energy levels, can leave you on shaky ground. help take control by talking to your doctor. ask about vraylar.
vraylar is approved for the acute treatment of manic or mixed episodes of bipolar i disorder in adults. clinical studies showed that vraylar reduced overall manic symptoms. vraylar should not be used in elderly patients with dementia due to increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks. high cholesterol and weight gain; high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death; decreased white blood cells, which can be fatal; dizziness upon standing; falls; seizures; impaired judgment; heat sensitivity; and trouble swallowing may occur. you're more than just your bipolar i. ask about vraylar. until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax
register today at alz.org/walk. streaming must see tv has never been easier. paying for things is a breeze. and getting into new places is even simpler. with xfinity mobile, saving money is effortless too. it's the only network that combines america's largest, most reliable 4g lte with the most wi-fi hotspots. and it can be included with your internet. which could save you hundreds of dollars a year.
plus, get $150 dollars when you bring in your own phone. its a new kind of network designed to save you money. click, call or visit a store today. i think anybody who thinks that vladimir putin doesn't have his stamp on everything that happens in russia is misinformed. it is virtually clear anything of consequence doesn't happen without vladimir putin ordered. >> dan coats condemnation of vladimir putin is at odds with the message coming out of the white house. is the dni's job now in jeopardy? we'll be talking about it with the vice chair of the senate intel committee, mark warner. "morning joe" will be right back.
that's transfarency. when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com. and got them back on track. you might be missing something.y healthy. your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite. ocuvite helps replenish nutrients your eyes can lose as you age. it has lutein, zeaxanthin and omega-3.
to help us monitor and respond to dangerous weather. hi, i'm allison bagley, a meteorologist with pg&e's community wildfire safety program. we're working now, to enhance our weather forecasting capabilities, building a network of new weather stations to identify when and where extreme wildfire conditions may occur, so we can respond faster and better. we're installing cutting edge technology to provide real-time mapping and tracking of weather patterns. and we use this information in partnership with first responders and california's emergency response systems. to learn more about the community wildfire safety program and how you can help keep your home and community safe, visit pge.com/wildfiresafety we discussed lots of good things for both countries, frankly, but there are things that we can do for both countries that are very good.
now, we then go to a news conference. i mean, i had some of these fools from the media saying, why didn't you stand there, look him in the face, walk over to him, and start shouting at him? i said, are these people crazy? i want to make a deal. i want to make a deal. you can't do that. i have been far tougher on russia than any president any many, many years, maybe ever. look at the sanctions i've put on. look at the diplomats i threw out. look at all of the things that i've done. nobody else did what i've done. obama didn't do it. obama was a patsy for russia. he was a total patsy. getting along with president putin, getting along with russia is a positive, not a negative. >> right. >> now, with that being said, if that doesn't work out, i'll be the worst enemy he's ever had, the worst he's ever had. >> that was president trump in
his new interview with cnbc that aired this morning. we have the vice chairman of the intelligence committee, democratic senator mark warner of virginia. it's interesting, the president is talking about the media, the idiots in the media. lot of those actually work at rupert murdoch-backed media outlets and i guess donald trump is calling rupert murdoch an idiot, calling rupert murdoch the purveyor of fake news because you had the "wall street journal," fox news, the "new york post "attacking the president for being putin's p s patsy, putin's poodle. the most surprising things and i want to get your reaction if you agreed with the "wall street journal" editorial page that congress needs to implement a containment policy, not only for vladimir putin, but for donald trump. >> well, joe, there are a number of us who warned about this.
we said why would you send in donald trump who prides himself on not doing any preparation against a trained kgb agent, 18 years as leader of his country. we would come in prepped and i was terrified and i think this may have been what happened, putin will come in with facts, with details, might have come in with a map of ukraine and syria and trump got played, he got played for a fool and he embarrassed our country and frankly embarrassed lots of my colleagues across the board, democrats, republicans alike, so we are going to need to figure out ways to put some constraints. we took some actions this past week, past two weeks, reinforcement from nato, that didn't do much in terms of trump's approach to nato. we sent out a message saying no way you're going to turn over american diplomats to russian officials, that was unanimous but i say that builds upon our senate intelligence committee's work that has reinforced the intelligence community's conclusion that not only did the russians intervene in our
elections, but they intervened to help trump and hurt clinton, and that unanimous agreement from our senate intel committee has also been reinforced by facebook, by twitter, by google who all acknowledged russians misuse their platform, so i wonder why mr. trump continues to be willing to kind of cowtow to this autocrat. does he not understand our allies in europe are not only defense allies but allies in democracies in terms of belief in a free press, one person, one vote, open society, all things that putin frankly stands against taken stairs the dickens out of me it seems like trump continues to side with putin. >> and of course, in that press conference again, donald trump is talking about how tough he was standing next to vladimir putin, but the fact was that he undercut his intelligence community. he said that he didn't think
that, had no reason to believe that vladimir putin had interfered with the 2016 elections, and that's something that, again, going back to media outlet that is seen as an ally of donald trump, rupert murdoch's "new york post" attacked him for taking a "see no evil" approach. >> joe, if you just think -- >> is that a fair characterization? >> i think it's a fair characterization, because there were no shades of gray here. this was a very weak performance by donald trump, cowtowing to a russian leader. think about this in historical context. if john f. kennedy had said and accepted khrushchev's allegation there were no missiles in cuba the country and the world would have been very different. if ronald reagan said to then soviet leader gorbachev, hey, keep the wall, you figure out when you want to reform your own country, our world would be
different. america has been the leader of the west standing up to soviet and russian aggression, that all in many ways disappeared this past monday. >> john heilemann? >> my question for you, senator warren, is two-fold. the first fold is, what does it say to you that, given what president trump now says about his grudging acceptance of the intelligence community's assessment of what happened in 2016 that he is now in the same weak turned around and offered not punishment but a reward to vladimir putin by giving him a summit in washington, d.c., and second, what can we do to find out what else those two leaders talked about in the two hours without anybody else but interpreters present? >> let's take both those. one, i think it's outrageous that the president is rewarding putin with another meeting
before the election, particularly since dan coats and other intelligence community leaders and for that matter the social media platforms indicated the russians will be back. they were successful in 2016, in terms of sowing disarray in our electoral process, and the fact that in a normal administration with this kind of threat there would be somebody in the white house designated on election security, somebody designated to work bet we are social media companies to make sure we're protected against the misinformation and disinformation, that's not happening. we're trying to do that in a bipartisan way out of our senate intel committee but that's a huge ongoing concern, and then the notion that he was willing or was going to at least think about the idea of turning over an american diplomat to russian authorities, it's just -- you don't need to think about that. that's a straight out no, unacceptable, particularly when we, the work that bob mueller has done with the 12 russian
agents, russian spies, gru agents that we've got documentation on those individuals, yes, we need to pursue them. i'm not sure that putin's going to actually turn them over to us, but it is a warning signal that the russians were successful in 2016 and every indication is they'll be back in 2018 and my feeling is again, this president's getting played. >> senator, it's jonathan lam e lamiere. there are concerns what the president may have said in the private meeting with president putin. the only other people there were interpreters. there's been an idea suggested a subpoena may be issued to the translators to get them to testify as to what they heard, but that of course is not their skill set. it's a real time thing, they're translating, they're not taking notes, they're not necessarily the most reliable witnesses, so i want to get your take, why do you think that would be effective, is it appropriate and what sort of precedent might it set going forward for future one on one summits between not just
this president but future presidents and other leaders which is something that happens from time to time. >> no, you're right. there have been one on one meetings between russian leaders and american presidents in the past, but generally those american presidents go in prepped, prepared. they have their teams, they think about the meetings with advanced warning and i think there is a, yes, if the translator can testify or present their version of what's happened, i think we need to get that, because this is such an extraordinary case. i also think we need a read-out from mike pompeo, jon huntsman from other members of the president's team who were there. again, i feel somewhat bad for some of the intelligence community leaders all what accepted that russian intervened like dan coats and the cia director and the fbi director, the nsa director, but then this president constantly undercuts them by his behavior and performance not only in helsinki, but what's equally embarrassing is performance after the fact. >> senator, donny deutsch, nice to chat with you. in the backdrop you're at the
opportunity 2020 conference, democratic leaders getting together to kind of shape where the party is going in 2020, we were talking about messaging earlier. i have a concern when i see kind of the front-runner presidential face is the bernie sanders, elizabeth warrens, what happened in one of the new york congressional districts there's a tendency for the party to really lean hard, hard, hard left, which i think is an electoral mistake. i'd love your thoughts on where you'd see this going and what 2020 is trying to do. >> donny, i think that we need to get out of this false choice of red versus blue, or left versus right. i think our politics and the insecurity that donald trump has played so well upon is because people are uncertain about the future, globalization, technology, automation. i think the democrats have got to be willing to lean in to the future. those issues are not going away. the democrats ought to be the party that says we want to give everybody in this country an opportunity to earn a good life, and so that means we need to
address not only why trump is bad and i think people disagree with trump, i think they agree with democratic values in terms of immigration, in terms of fairness, but i think we also have an economic theory that says, yes, we have to address economic inequality, and there are ways we can do that through the government, also ways we can do that in terms of rewarding businesses that look for long-term value rather than short term. we need to look at a tax code that says if you buy a computer, that's an asset, you invest in a human being that's a cost so we got to think business and government action together. i think we ought to look at economic insecurity, which i think is one of the great unspoken questions. nobody's going to work for the same job for 35 years the way my dad did, yet we had a social contract that basically said the only way you're going to get benefits is if you work full time. third of the american workforce today doesn't work full time. they work part-time, independent contractors, we need a new social contract that basically
is built upon portal benefits and finally we need to realize there's a crisis of opportunity in this country. parts of this country, new york, boston, san francisco, they're doing great, but something is wrong when 75% of all the venture capital goes to three states, massachusetts, california, and new york, and when less than 1% of the venture capital, and i used to be a venture capitalist goes to african americans that is going to present a crisis of opportunity. begot wide swathes of prosperity but 2000 of the 3,000 counties in america have not seen a net job increase in the last ten years. democrats ought to be about spreading that opportunity, economic insecurity, yes taking on economic inequality but it's going to take a forward-leaning and frankly pro-growth agenda to do that and i might add along the way, something i've spent a lot of time on recently the questions around national security, america just spent $713 billion on a defense budget, largest ever. russia spent $67 billion. i sometimes wonder are we buying
the world's best 20th century military in terms of planes, tanks, trucks, when we've seen that conflict in the 21st century particularly with near peer adversaries like russia and china, they are our peers in the recommend of cyber and disinformation. we need a national security agenda for the 21st century. >> senator mark warner, thanks for being with us, we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> coming up next, something different to cleanse our palettes after another week of head spinning development. if you're a fan of "the simpsons" you're not going to want to miss our next interview. . ...commanded armies... ...yielded to no one. when i found you in my dna, i learned where my strength comes from. my name is courtney mckinney, and this is my ancestrydna story.
now with 2 times more geographic detail than other dna tests. order your kit at ancestrydna.com. ♪ it's so hard to believe ♪ but it's all coming back me. ♪ baby, baby, baby. all you can eat is back, baby. applebee's. it's a high-tech sleep revolution. the sleep number 360 smart bed intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts.
♪ 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?
as you know we inherited quite a budget crunch from president trump. how bad is it? >> we're broke. >> that was part of an episode of "the simpsons" that actually aired 18 years ago in march of 2000 when "the simpsons" correctly predicted a donald trump presidency. during a 2016 interview, simpsons writer dan greenie called the scene a "warning to america." well, we recently sat down with one of the original writers of the longest running animated sitcom of all-time, mike reiss. he's the author of the new book
"springfield confidential: jokes, secrets and outright lies from a life time of writing for the simpsons." we begin our conversation talking about the number of predictions that his show has gotten right. didn't you guys predict if fox was going to buy disney? >> oh my gosh. >> disney would buy fox and we predicted the u.s. would win the gold medal in curling but that's it. you got three things right in 30 years. get one thing right every decade and that makes us some of the best psychics in america. >> pretty darned good. so talk about the book, the extraordinary run, and the fact that my 10-year-old and i, and we pull mika into this, too, can select from, you know, 30 seasons of simpsons. who could have believed when you started i guess tracy ullman show that 30 years later you're still here. >> nobody saw it coming. nobody saw it coming and in
fact, i tell the story too much that two weeks before the show came on the air, we were sitting in our writer's trailer because fox wouldn't even commit to a realment radio, so we're in a trailer and if the show failed they were planning to back the trailer up to the ocean and drown us all. i said how long do you think the show is going to last, and everybody said six weeks. and we had made 13, so we never even thought they'd show everything we made. so we're in our 1500th week right now, and -- >> wow. >> it's still i think the number one, number two show on fox. >> so what happened? when did you realize, hey, wait a second -- >> this is my life. >> this is craze why i here. >> it was funny, we had a premiere party the night the show debuted in a bowling alley. again, this is how much faith fox had in us, we're in a bowling alley and they showed the show on these monitors where you usually see your score and everyone is sitting there going,
hey, this is pretty good. none of us realized until that moment the show was any good, and then they came in with the reviews from all over the country, and they said the critics figured it out. they said this is a game changer. we go, wow, and then the next morning, we found out we had debuted to the highest ratings in the history of the fox network. so it really took a half hour before we took america. it was a slow struggle. >> so much animated comedy now, mike, that it's easy to forget that what you guys did was revolutionary and people didn't maybe get the concept at first that you were going to have cartoon characters, we're used to being sweet, cuddly people but in this razor sharp edged comedy. it was kind of a step off the cliff at that moment. >> it sure was, yeah. again, i got the call to do the job from sam simon, one of the creators, and i said, you don't know me? why are you calling me? he said because everyone else has turned this job down.
and that was it. it was supposed to be a summer job, and i didn't tell anyone what i was doing. i thought, i have hit rock bottom, and so we just had fun. i think it may be be sort of th- >> that's sort of the key. nothing to lose. swing for the fences. >> we said no one's going to see this so let's just fill it with the kind of stuff we want to see on tv. we'll never get this chance again. >> run through some of the people who were sitting in that writer's room. >> we had conan o'brien there. that's about it. you wouldn't have heard about any of the other 99 people who have written for the show. conan o'brien and craig daniels who created "the office" and "king of the hill." mostly it's just a bunch of guys you never heard of. i have officially become the most famous writer ever for the simpsons by being here. >> answer the question, where is springfield? >> okay.
>> springfield, right here. >> dad, it's over here. >> hey, what you doing? >> nobody watches this show, right, so i can tell you, because it's a closely guarded secret. we know and the answer is springfield is in hawaii. >> what? no. >> it's nowhere. it's like -- >> it's everywhere but nowhere. >> it's ohio. >> we chose the name because there are 48 springfields in america. in 43 states. which means five states have two springfields. >> is there one or two episodes that stand out to you? >> you know, there's two years i didn't work on the show. two years i went off and -- >> which seasons? >> seasons six and seven i think. >> those were great years. >> the best years. the show is so much better without me. >> no. >> so there's one, there's a halloween show i really love. we did 3-d homer in it and that
was pretty exciting. it was funny because the software to do that caused $750,000 at the time. and now it's a free app. that was a good one. and i don't know, i like the one certainly when we had thomas pinchen on the show. we had him on twice. a guy who won't be interviewed, won't be photographed. he came on our show twice because he said i got to do something to impress my kids. >> so what do you like about homer? >> homer's a comedy writer's dream. he's got everything wrong with him. he's fat. he's bald. he's stupid. he's angry. he's drunk. he's lazy. i think he's got all seven deadly sins. and then season four, we had him walk into a pet shop and the pet shop owner goes -- >> oh, my, what is that smell? ooh, it's you. >> one of the writers goes, i
guess he smells now too. >> i got to say, my favorite -- the seven deadly sins. >> yes. >> i think my favorite moment, and it is impossible because, again, we've seen them all, and my sons have seen them all. i think my favorite moment was when homer sold his soul to the devil for a doughnut. >> ahh! >> now, remember, the instant you finish it, i own your soul for -- >> but devtle says he immediately goes to hell and he's chained to a conveyer belt and the devil goes, oh, you like doughnuts do you, and he presses the button and of course, you know, it's supposed to be -- and he keeps eating the doughnuts. and then it's like 30 minutes later and the devil's looking, like, basically forget it. this always works. and, like, he ran out of
doughnuts. that is home e er simpson. >> what do you think about marge? >> she's great. >> bart? >> bart is the guy all the writers wish they were in school. they wish they had been bart but they were all little lisas who were too smart and had no friends and then one day they grew up and they're homer. never had a bart phase. >> and poor lisa, talk about lisa. >> lisa's the heart and soul of the show. >> is she really? >> yes. >> you consider her the heart and soul of the show? >> absolutely. oh, my gosh, you don't see that? >> that was very early in the run of the show. james l. brooks came to me and my partner and said, i have a plot for an episode you got to write. we go, great, what is it? lisa is sad. that was a great use of the animated medium. but we did that episode and it changed the series.
that's where people sort of woke up and said oh, this show can touch my heart. maggie. >> maggie. it hit me the other day, if the show -- if the characters age like real people, maggie would be a 31-year-old people who never talks. so she'd be jared kushner. >> oh. >> it's like a brilliant mind. >> there's no reason to think about the end of this show because it's still going strong but have you guys talked over the years about how you might end the simpsons? >> we've been talking about it for 29 years. it's no joke to say nobody's ever had a good idea. i think it's one reason the show keeps running is because we don't know how to end it. no one has had one good suggestion for it. >> wow. >> so william shatner was the first celebrity to refuse? >> yes. >> would not do self-parody? >> would not. now he is self-parody. >> and springsteen also a holdout?
>> yes, springsteen is the guy we go after year after year, he always says no. >> george lucas? >> there's three celebrities who asked to be on the show and then we wrote them a part and they turned it down. george lucas was the best part. where we had him hanging around with comic book guy and he was always talking about "star wars" but he didn't seem to really know the film. and he's always saying -- >> that's hilarious. >> the comic book guy, he says, you and me, we're like the guys in my movie, you know, the guy in the vest and the big dog. >> so, you know, mike, perhaps the greatest simpsons fan -- despite the fact i've seen every one, is our executive producer alex, who i can actually say we need a clip from like i think it was the eighth season and he'll immediately go, oh, yeah. so alex, we haven't -- i don't know we've done this before but you've got to ask a couple of
questions to mike because you are our simpsons super computer. >> oh, boy. well, put me on the spot. so the simpsons movie. any talk of a sequel there? >> there's no talk of it. it was so hard to do the first one. they'd been asking us for 15 years to do a simpsons movie and we kept saying no, no, no. we said what can we show people that we can't show them on tv? and finally we said, oh, bart's wiener. so we did that. we got nothing left. i think sooner or later, yes, we'll make another one, but there's no plans. >> okay. >> i got one more. to make it a little bit on the political side of things. there's been a lot of discussion about apoo's character and the appropriateness, the mocking. any thoughts? >> there's a documentary out i think on netflix now about the problem with apoo. it's a great documentary.
but it's about three years too late because we became aware of it three years ago. and we did a whole episode addressing it. we had an indian character come on. >> you are ashamed of me? who has been as loyal to you. >> that's exactly what i'm talking about. you're my uncle and i love you but you're a stereotype. >> then we retired apoo. there's all these complaints. he hasn't been on the show for three years. we put him out to pasture. no one seems to notice. the documentary is like making a documentary saying val kilmer shouldn't play batman anymore. it's like nobody's asking. >> by the wait, apoo did bring mccartney to the simpsons. >> for 20 years, apoo was the only indian on television. he was a very popular character.
indian people would thank me for putting apoo on. times changed. it's an old show. the world has changed. we're trying to slowly keep up with it. >> all right. >> the book is "springfield confidential." jokes, secrets and outright lies from a lifetime of writing for the simpsons. mike, glad to meet you. >> if you meet them in an airport, they'll put you on the shot. >> exactly. easy. >> that's the secret of "morning joe." >> that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage right now. >> hi there, everyone, happy friday, i'm stephanie ruhle with a lot to cover this morning. unfortunately, starting with some very sad news. horrifying in fact. at least 13 people, including children, were killed in a duck boat accident. we're going to go live to branson, missouri, for latest as the search continues for the remaining who are still missing. a surprise summit
announcement. the white house letting us know new plans for a second meeting between vladimir putin and president trump that will take place in washington. catching many in the administration, including the director of national intelligence, completely off guard. >> vladimir putin is coming to the white house in the fall. >> say that again. okay. that's going to be special. >> and fed up. president trump breaks tradition. blasting the federal reserve and its chairman who he appointed, jerome powell, over raising interest rates. >> i'm not thrilled. because, you know, we go up and every time you go up, they want to raise rates again. and i don't really -- i am not happy about it. >> we begin with breaking and very tragic news this hour. i need to warn you, some of the video, it's clearly very disturbing to watch.