tv MTP Daily MSNBC December 28, 2018 1:00am-2:00am PST
>> that's a great point. a lot of snap-back across the rust belt. thanks for joining us. that is "all in" for this evening. good evening. welcome to mtp daily. we have got a busy show tonight. like i said yesterday, this is not your typical holiday news cycle. we have new developments in a number of stories. they point toward a presidency veering toward a possible series of political disasters. first the shutdown as critical government agenies remain closed for the sixth day. the president's negotiating position is about to get worse
when democrats take the house. the president's twitter feed today combined with the latest statement from the white house press office suggests he's searching for ways to avoid being blamed for this whole mess. disaster number two, the president's legal woes as the president's lawyer lays out another puzzling legal defense. rudy giuliani gave one hum dinger of an interview to the hill in which he argued it would not be illegal for the president to one, conspire with russia to influence the election. two, obstruct the investigation. three, order prosecutors to drop their case against michael flynn and four, make hush money payments during the election. rudy giuliani said mueller should be investigated for crimes and the president was done with mueller.
>> do you expect he will have to answer more questions in writing? >> i think i announced ten days ago over my dead body and i'm not dead yet. >> that answers that. >> then there's the stock market and the economy. markets were up but are still on pace for the worst december since the financial crisis thanks to fears that include the president's trade spat with china and his argument with the fed over raising interesting rates. we have said it before but it bears repeating, usually, a presidency is tested by a crisis. what happens when the presidency itself is largely the crisis? or in this case, crises. we have the latest fall out over the shutdown. msnbc legal analyst and former u.s. attorney joyce vance is here to break down those legal woes. the panel is here for what it means politically.
mike, i want to start with you. what are you hearing? looks like the shutdown will last into the new year? >> right. at least until january 3rd. the constitutionally mandated day for a new congress. everybody has gone home at this point. even the tourists. >> i have never seen it as quiet as it is right now. >> listen to this. echo, echo, echo. it's just empty in here. i saw four members of the house today. that's four more than i've seen since last week. they had a quick little session on the house floor. there was some theatrics. a democrat flew down here trying to bring up a bill. the house residing officer would not recognize him. he came out and talked and said
the president must have gone off his meds because we had a deal to keep the government open. we're on the path toward january 3rd. there's no incentive for democrats to give any ground here because they know a week from today they will be in charge and able to pass something out of house. the senate in all likelihood. it will be a close call. it will probably pass if there's no political points to be made. the question becomes will the president sign something without 5 billion dollar or something less than that and would it be called a wall. clearly it won't be called a wall if the democrats have anything to say with it. there's no room for compromise. if the democrats go along with something, they are part of something they have deemed immoral. the president is not giving any ground. that's where we stand. >> i wonder how long this could be. if both sides are digging in
their heel, will we get to a point of a disagreement of what they call a border fence or a border wall or a border barrier. will it come down do semantics in other words for this deal to get made, to reopen the government? >> i think we're past that point. there was a time last year where there was a semantic discussion about if democrats call it border security rather than a wall. trump calls it a barrier instead of wall maybe they could meet in between and come up with something they agree to. everybody agrees there needs to be border security. that's not the part that's controversial. president trump has treated to his original point, the wall. he'll call it slats. he wants the physical barrier. he wants wall. with the democrats coming into control the house next week, that gave them the fortitude to say if we're talk about a wall, we're not going to do it. nobody will budge. it's very unpreductive.
the stand off could last a little longer. >> my prediction is when the holiday season has ended and the full effect of a government shutdown for citizens who don't work for the government, when that becomes obvious, combined with instability on wall street that those two factors will probably converge and i think push the republicans to force the president to find some kind of compromise. the democrats have no incentive to compromise and give anything. they just came off of a huge win. there's no reason for them to. i just think the government shutdown full effect of it hasn't been felt yet because we're still in the holidays. >> we're still in the middle of the holidays. people are getting their paychecks because of the delay and how paychecks are processed. bill the president said something weird about who is being affected by this.
he was talking about how this was all affecting democrats because democrats are federal workers. here is the tweet. the democrats finally realize we need border security and wall on the southern border. need to stop drug, human trafficking and gang members from coming into our country. do the dems realize most of the people not getting paid are democrats. what's he saying here? is him just assuming all federal employees are democrats or him saying i'm okay with shutting down the government because democrats didn't vote for me and i'm governing for those who voted for me? i don't understand it. >> i think some of both of those. generally president trump doesn't honor previous restraints that presidents have mostly followed about not attacking all civil servants as being one party or the other. i guess this is to appeal to his
base. trump is the least republican republican president. he has no history in the republican party or the conservative movement. he gave money to hillary clinton and chuck schumer. he's adopted the most crass version of conservative, really dumb kind of conservative talking points. we don't like the government. we're the anti-government party. every one that works for the government is democrat. it's a very -- it's the stupidist shutdown ever. they shutdown the government over medicare in 1995. kind of a big issue. 2013, obama care. the fights were a little more substantive. this is about $5 billion which isn't much in the budget. trump reversed himself after accepting a continuing resolution for the parts of the government covered.
i think the interesting thing to watch, i think it's the senate republicans. if you think about it, the house democrats, the democrats will control the house. they will pass a clean continuing resolution and might add disaster relief. trump is saying i've got to have wall. the third party in this triangle is the senate republican controlled by the republicans. i think they are less automatically likely to line up with trump than would have been the case a month or two ago. watching the senate republicans, do they cut a deal with nancy pelosi and tell trump this is the deal. sign it or we might have to override your veto. do they stay in lock step as why pressure mounts of why we're having this shutdown which woent -- won't be spent any way. it's interesting to see where mcconnell and other republicans end up. >> we'll have to wait and see. again, it's important to remind
everybody that a year ago the president was offered 20 billion for his wall which is something he asked for. the democrats were willing to give that to him. at the last minute he turned around and demanded more things beyond that wall including ending chain migration, et cetera. he had the money for his wall and he chose not to take that deal at one point. let's go to rudy giuliani. listen to rudy giuliani talking to the hill and talking about the mueller investigation. then tell me what you think. let's play it. >> the thing they started investigating can't a crime. collusion. >> is there anything that mueller -- >> the second thing they investigated isn't a crime. collusion. the third thing, the ddonation. making the payment to stormy daniels and mcdougal.
asking the fbi in the name of comey to go easy on flynn. he was doing what thousands of people do with prosecutors and judges and plead for mercy. he could have done far more than that. he could have ordered him not to prosecute flynn. he has that power under article two. >> what is this legal strategy? >> he sounds worried to me. i think they are increasingly concerned that mueller has strong evidence on all counts. conspiracy we've talked about a lot. if there's evidence an agreement was reached to do something illegal in connection with the election, then mueller will indict the appropriate people. obstruction hit a lot closer to home for the president, at least based on what we have seen publicly. there's strong evidence of obstruction committed in public view. rudy giuliani, a former u.s. attorney knows that. similarly it's his old office that's looking at campaign finance violations based on the public record.
we know that the president is exposed and we know that the president is deeply concerned based upon reporting last week that he talked with his acting attorney general matt whittaker and said he was upset about prosecutors in the southern district of new york going rogue. for this president going rogue mines -- means investigating me personally. they look worried. if he won't testify voluntarily, they've got to be feeling the pressure. >> we have fact checked this so many times since rudy giuliani brought it up. how is this different than the edwards case? >> it's really different from the case in it's a much stronger case. the lynch pin issue was whether or not the dnations edwards received were intended to impact the campaign which would have made them illegal. we know it's the opposite. this is decades old affairs
almost that trump was having and payments were made to the women involved on the eve of the election. clearly in effort after the access hollywood tape to minimize any additional damage in that area. if these were contributions that were connected to the campaign they would violate limits, would violate reporting requirements. if the only open issue is whether or not they were meant to influence or to be contributions connected to the campaign then trump is in serious danger where edwards wasn't. >> the legal strategy is just muddy the water, it seems. >> i can't understand what rudy giuliani is saying day-to-day. >> he contradicted himself like five times this week. >> that sound bite was full of contradictions. first it was over my dead body and then maybe it would happen. >> he said the day was november 2016 when the paper work shows june 2016.
that's when the discussions about that ended or whether donald trump knew about the payments to stormy daniels or karen mcdougal. he's all over the place. >> specifically to muddy the waters or he doesn't know and he's going out and jackpoting with this word salad. >> how does that benefit the president? >> i think the one thing that is consistent is what does the president's surrogates do. tries to discredit mueller. tries to cast doubt on the report. tries to get half the country to say this is a partisan witch hunt. it's investigate things that aren't really crimes or contradictions. they don't care about any of it as long as they can sustain their own support, their own political support against the mueller report or the subsequent mueller indictments or both which are likely to come soon. this is entirely a political strategy. none of it matters legally. whatever happens in court will happen.
this is an attempt to raise as many doubts as possible. it was working for a while. we looked at the polls over the first part of 2018. mueller's numbers were slipping. he was doing nothing to defend himself except ding his job. what's striking is mueller's numbers are stabilized or gone up. he's succeeded in discrediting the investigation among republicans but not as much as he hoped. it's got a lot of support. the house will pass it quickly. there's a lot of republican senator who is are open to it. the appointment of whittaker is part of that. the day after the election in november. this is very much a strategy that's oriented towards february 15th when the mueller report comes out and fighting that report. it's not a real legal strategy of the kind we normally see. >> i think it is interesting an worthwhile to note as joyce was saying, rudy giuliani, is getting more erratic in the way he answers questions in
interviews. just contradicting himself and claiming crimes aren't crimes. from mayor of new york city who would prosecute squegee men now trying to say crimes aren't crimes. it bears repeating. ahead, the silent shutdown. nobody is talking. nothing is happening and the clock just keeps on ticking. we'll talk to a member of democratic leadership, next.
this partial shutdown is it's not ending any time soon. republicans and democrats are remaining in touch but the major players don't seem to be talking. both chambers were gavelled into session for a grand total of under five minutes. most members are still at home including my next guest. he's the out going chair of the democratic congressional campaign committee and will soon be the assistant speaker of the house. thank you for very much. should we take it as a sign that you're back in new mexico and not in washington? >> well, we got a notice today from the republican leadership in the house of representatives that no votes are expected this week. i think that clearly shows that president trump is not willing to do the right thing and end the trump shutdown. >> whose talking to each other right now? is anyone?
>> well, it's hard to understand who president trump is talking to and who he's not talking to. seems his eyes on fixated on fox news. republicans can end this shutdown today if they were willing to come forward and just accept one of the compromises the democrats put on the table, including one that passed the senate unanimously. >> are democrats talking to senate republicans right now to find way to bring this to a close come january 3rd or try to? >> the senate passed a piece of legislation that would have kept the government open unanimously. if only speaker paul ryan would have allowed that bill to come to the floor. the government would not be shutdown today.
>> it's part of a continuing resolution and send it to the white house. >> i think the path to continuing resolution is already on the table. when democrats are in charge in the new majority come january 3rd, we will swiftly pass a continuing resolution to keep the government open. it resembles what the senate passed. the question is what other aspects could be included similar to disaster relief. the path is there. it's a matter of will republicans allow us to vote on it before january 3rd. i'm confident that's exactly one of the first actions that will be taken by speaker pelosi. >> are democrats willing to go
up from the $1.3 billion they are offering the president this border security? >> the president's wall is ineffective. it's expenive and ridiculous. there's no reason for democrats to work to support the president's wall. i think we have been very clear about that. i went to a visit down on the border. sadly where young jakeline lost her life. down in antelope they didn't have running water. recent tests show it was contaminated. you can't bathe or cook with it. you can't use a toilet with it. we need to make sure we're putting money toward facility and make sure border agents have the equipment and capacity to care for young children so they don't die while in their custody. that's where the investment should be and the president is blind to all of this.
>> in terms of negotiating an end to this. say the democrats were willing to give the president more money for a wall. what would you try to ask for in return. the president brought up daca today. would you try to ask for protection for dreamers in return or would you just throw anything you could at the wall in order to get it passed with the president getting a little more money for his wall? is there something, a dream list on your agenda that you might want to get done if you're going to have to trade something to get this shutdown done? >> i'm not open to giving a penny to president trump for this ridiculous wall of his. there is already a continuing resolution that has an authored and put on the table that passed the u.s. senate unanimously and then now in the new democratic majority work with our new colleagues and reach across the aisle with our republican peers and see what we can do to get things back up and running. that's what the american people
have elected us to do. i'm not open to supporting president trump's wall in one form or another. >> talking about in one form or another, is slats a wall or is that a fence? >> i think the president is trying to come up with any way that he can to save face. what democrats have been very clear about is we do support border security. we have laid forth foundations for pieces of legislation in the past. when the president brings the cameras in he'll accept a deal. as soon as the cameras are out and he turns the television onto listen to sean hannity or rush limbaugh, he throws the deal out the door. i'm what he will support. >> i'm wondering what border security means. are the democrats happy with something that looks like fencing? in the past the democrats have supported fencing or does it
mean more border patrol agents? what's the definition there? >> one of the most recent provisions with a strong majority of support was a piece of legislation put together by congressmen will hurd called the usa act. it included provisions with homeland security, border security as well as addressing the atrocities that the president has taken toward dreamers. that's an example where democrats were willing to work with the republicans when they were in the majority. >> congressman, thank you for joining us. happy new year. >> thank you for having me. happy new year as well. >> good luck. ahead, president trump's trip to iraq complete with exaggerations and outright untruths.
welcome back. we want to take a moment to look back at some of the people in politics, the media and culture whom we lost in 2018. >> how did five and a half years in a prison cell in north vietnam as a prisoner of war prepare you for the presidency? >> i think it helped me define the principles that i already held. i think it gave me a better understanding of the value of commitment to a cause. amazing grace ♪
>> i have never considered the united nations irrelevant. i think it's a unique organization. an organization that can bring the whole world together. >> a lot of have been required of the kennedys along the way. >> at 12:52 p.m., the announcement came. the courts decision on ending segregation was unanimous.
>> it's not easy to meet the press. i have had the privilege of meeting the press in many countries and i must say i make it as much a matter of prayer as i do any sermon that i ever preached. >> when we part, we don't say good-bye. instead we say until we meet again. >> somewhere out in this audience may even be someone who will one day follow in my footsteps and preside over the white house as the president's spouse and i wish him well. >> i will keep america moving forward. always forward. for a better america. for an endless enduring dream and a thousands points of light.
i don't know if you folks are aware of what's happening. we want to have strong borders in the united states. the democrats don't want to let us have strong borders. only for one reason. you know why? because i want it. just looking at this warrior group, i think i'll say, i don't want the wall and then they'll give it to me. i figured out the solution. >> welcome back. that was part of president trump yesterday on his trip to iraq. a trip where he injected domestic politics into his speech to troops. a speech where he told the troops he gave them a big pay raise and it was their first in ten years. it was not. a trip where he revealed the classified location of seal team five member of a video he
tweeted and a trip where his press secretary revealed the date of mike pompeo's previously unannounced trip to baghdad next month. with me is national security spokesperson and he was a special assistant to president obama. he's now an msnbc national security analyst. the panel is also back. ned, why is it so unusual for the president to do all the things he did yesterday? he tweeted a video of the seal team. the press secretary saying when the secretary of state will visit a war zone. i don't know. talking about military pay raises that don't exist, et cetera. >> i guess i would have to put this in the category of things that over the longer course of history should be shocking but with this president are not surprising. to talk about what should be shocking, there used to be this
very bright line between the president of the united states and getting involved in partisan matters especially when it pertains to our national security. every president of the united states is a political animal. that's why he has been able to ascends to the highest office of the land. all of his predecessors have been able to shed that partisan coat when they went to settings like this. donald trump has never been able to do that. that's why it's not surprising. his first full day in office he tral travld traveled to cia headquarters and bragged about the size of the crowd at his inauguration the day before. he went before the boy scouts and talked about the size of his victory over hillary clinton in is a president who has been unable to abide by these norms in some of most solemn situations.
that's what we saw yesterday. >> let's put the box aside for a a moment. what about tweeting the video of seal team 5 members. >> we have never had a president been so fluent in twitter. it's an honor and a privilege for members of our military to get videos with the president. normally that is done in president. when i was travel with president obama, soldiers and troops of all kinds wanted their picture taken with the commander in chief. what we have now is a president who tweets before he thinks or tweets before he consults with the security people traveling with him 24 hours day. had he consulted them, i highly suspect he would have been urged not to post that. you almost never see images of our special operations community with their faces fully exposed as they were as has been noted.
the deployments of the seal teams, including seal team 5 is not something that is ever publicly articulated. it was that tradition held until yesterday. >> you put safety at risk. let's listen to president talking about troop pay. >> you just got one of the biggest pay raises you've ever received unless you don't want it. you haven't gotten one in more than ten years. we have you big one. i got you a big one. plenty of people that came up and said we could make it smaller. we could make it 3%, 2%. we could make it 4%. i said make it 10%. it's been a long time. it's been more than ten years. >> god, he's just full of it. none of that is true. look at this graphic. it will show you the pay raises for the military in the past ten years. for 2019 they are getting a 2.6% raise. not a 10% raise.
it's not the first pay raise in ten years. there's been a pay raise every year in the past ten years. the biggest one was in 2010. it was a 3.4% raise. could the president have just gotten his numbers confused? is he just that bad at numbers or is he deliberately lying? >> he's lying. this is really one of those moments for me where what is striking is not his behavior but is the continued followship among his supporters. it really does depress me as an american and makes me wonder, gosh, this is america first. this is what it looks like? how can we say this president is putting country before party or country before his own well being and his own popularity and his own political fortunes. he's clearly not interested in our democratic institutions or in protecting our military.
yet he's able to wrap himself in the flag and call himself a patriot and frankly, you cannot see that video and see the reaction to it from his supporters and think about how people would reacted if barack obama had done anything like that. >> were those military members going back and looking at their pay stubs or going back to their bosses and saying are we getting a 10% raise? are getting a higher raise? is this the news? >> most of them know they have gotten pay raises all the the way along. that's will be made clear to them. we're starting to see in polling there's some doubts about president trump being, especially by a lot of military members. more so than usual. members of the military very supportive of president particular in it's a republican. that's not quite the case with this presidency. the point i wanted to make to what ned said about we're seeing the president being political. i feel like he's not being political as just yet again all about himself. he used this occasion to grandize himself.
he's not outlying a republican philosophy or talking about the good of the country or his vision will make the country better. it's all about let me trash comey while here in the war zone. let me talk about the wall. all these things that have nothing to do with this visit to the members of military. he cannot get out of his own way. he cannot get out of his own bubble to think about what he represents in this theater of war instead of how does this help me, donald trump, specifically. >> bill i'm still stuck on the pay raises. you told me i'm getting a 10% raise and only a 2.6 raise, i'm be pretty pissed off especially if i was in war zone risking my life every day. to hear i'm getting a 10% raise from the commander in chief, i would be a little bummed if i found out that's not the case. >> i can get you a 10% raise. it will be there tomorrow
morning. it's unbelievable. it's a flat out lie and so grotesque as the i got you this raise. a normal president would say i appreciate your service. work with congress we got you a suitable pay raise for next year. most people don't mention pay raise when speaking to active duty troops in a theater of conflict. it's kind of beneath the dignity of most of the moment. even if you'll say that at some vfw conference you do it and not i got you this raise. i got you 10%. it's all about him and saying things. when you're a con man you get away with it. i don't know if he's getting away with it. there was a pretty big reaction to this. i do really think this -- the combination of the elections, general mattis leaving and
markets and other people leaving the administration, there's a lot of nervousness that was not there two months ago among republican elected official, republican donors. republican party types republican operatives. >> just go back to donald trump's book which he co-wrote. didn't really write. he starts it off by saying he believes in truthful hyberbole which is basically bs. one last thing, annual military pay raises come from linked to the increase in private sector wages as measured by the employment cost index. they can be raised by an act of congress. thank you very much. michael bloomberg's new message to all democrats who may run for president including himself.
welcome back. tonight, according to one potential presidential candidate, every democrat that runs for the white house in 2020 needs to have a definitive plan to combat climate change. that's what michael bloomberg told chuck todd in an exclusive interview. take a listen. >> any candidate for federal office better have a plan to deal with the problem that the trump science add vierzs say would end this world. >> is that fair if you run for
president all your policy proposals will be through the lens of -- >> the presidency is not an entry level job. we have real problems. if you don't come in with real concrete answers, i think the public is tired of listening to the same platitudes that they get. we're in favor of god, mother and apple pie and i'll have plan when i get there. no. you have to have a plan. i will be out there demanding that anybody that's running has a plan. i want to hear the plan and everybody to look and say whether it's doable. >> you can catch more this sunday. we're back with more mtp daily right after this.
really big editorial on climate change talking about all the ways that countries come together for the paris climate accord have failed to live up to many of their promises. germany. they talk about poland going in and saying we're not going to cut back on coal. australia ousting a prime minister. trump, obviously, pulling out of the paris climate accords and rolling back every single environmental regulation that he can of president obama's. >> yeah. what's unfortunate here is that it really is an area where our leadership is important. and i think, you know, president trump's absence on the national or on the international stage. >> not absence. it is antagonism. >> it is antagonism. but it is also, it is unfortunate. because it basically says to other countries they can do whatever they want. so there is no consequences for
pulling out of the agreements because the united states isn't adhering to its own agreements. japan pulled out an international whaling. there was a lot of bad news on that front. and that is what happens when you have a breakdown in the international order unfortunately. you know, we also had a piece looking at the effect of climate change on average american citizens, which is also really important. it is hard to bring that issue home to help people understand how it affects their every day lives. but when you look at the wild fires, hurricanes. these things are all related to climate change. so there is no good news on that front. but i do think that the real effect to people's lives that will help all americans of parties to understand this is an issue. >> how it affects average people around the world and the world, places that are livable for humans is getting smaller and smaller. how much is this an issue in 2020? >> different candidates are trying to make it an issue. mayor bloomburg. jay inslee. he's talked about climate.
unfortunately he goes into a room and says the word climate and everybody just kind of fall ace sleep. it is hard for politicians to grab the issue and make it urgent the way it needs to be. we have others coming. new congresswoman pushing something called the green new deal. like a moon shot where you reduce carb gases by half and create all these new jobs. and nancy pelosi pushed but a bill last time in 2009 and the house passed it. the senate never did. and a lot of those members of the congress lost their job because it was seen as too radical. i think we're seeing fear among democrats about how far to go on this. >> what will it take for republicans to get behind any climate policies? >> i they republican challenge tore trump might well em blas conservative market oriented
i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪
in case you missed it or if you have been living under a rock or having too much eggnog, there is no border wall deal but that doesn't mean there can't be. the president says he's flexible. >> you have to have the see through. you have to know what's on the other side of the wall. >> the wall. or a fence, or very, very substantial barriers. >> a barrier, wall, or steel slat. >> solid concrete on top. or steel and concrete on top. >> concrete. steel slats. doesn't matter. incoming speaker nancy pelosi says this week he's backed off the cement now he's down to i think a beaded curtain or something. not a bad idea nancy pelosi. but how much would a beaded curtain wall cost? we crunched the numbers with our ntp daily mega calculator. here's what we came with. by some estimates some 900 miles
long. a curtain we found on amazon for $12.77. our estimation we'd need 1.4 million of those. that is a cost of 8.6 million dollars. an absolute bargain. but we also need something to hang them on. curtain rods. we found one for 24 bucks. if we buy 528 thousand of those and hook them together we can cover 900 miles for 12.6 million dollars. that is an m., not a b. total cost for a beaded curtain wall, 31.3 million dollars. again an m not a b. that is .006% of the 5 billion the president wants. this right here is the definition of fiscal sensibility, people. and here is the best part.
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on