Skip to main content

tv   The 11th Hour With Brian Williams  MSNBC  January 16, 2019 1:00am-2:00am PST

1:00 am
writer she is. people all over the country know that the other thing is they take my potential candidacy seriously and in the third thing it says is they will be dirty. they will be nasty. i've seen carl rove come into my races and each time i've run, i know what he's up to. when i think about donald trump, i know that bullies are always cowards and we will be ready if it comes to that. >> all right, senator sherrod brown, thank you. >> that's "all in" for this evening. the 11th hour with brian williams start noise. the 11th hour with brian williams start noise
1:01 am
tonight, hints of more to come from robert mueller's investigation as the man expected to become mueller's supervisor as the next attorney general promises to protect the russia investigation, and he breaks with the president over whether or not it's a witch hunt. plus, what may be a very happy night at the kremlin. brexit has blown up. there are new questions over trump's commitment to nato while we fight among ourselves. and about that shutdown. this was day 25, and while more workers have been called back on the job including faa and irs, they still aren't getting paid and no one is about to blink as "the 11th hour" gets underway on a tuesday night. well, good evening once again from our msnbc headquarters. day number 626 of the trump administration. it's also day 25 of the government shutdown, it will be 26 in the next hour. this evening the mueller team did receive its latest court filing laying out point by point what it says former campaign chairman paul manafort lied about exactly after he began cooperating with law enforcement enforcement. while entire paragraphs are blacked out between the redactions, there are multiple headings that say things like,
1:02 am
quote, proof manafort's statements were false and misleading, relating to his alleged lies of contacts with russians as well as contacts with people in the trump administration. today we also learn that mueller is not done with manafort's former business partner, rick gates. in a joint filing, lawyers for both mueller and gates asked for another delay in sentencing because gates, quote, continues to cooperate with respect to several ongoing investigations. to put a finer point on this, they would be sentencing gates if they were done with gates, but he's apparently still being helpful. the "wall street journal" reports tonight that michael cohen's upcoming testimony to congress is expected to be highly restricted to avoid interfering with mueller's inquiry. we knew this was a possibility going into this february 7th appearance. the journal reports, quote, he is expected to give an explosive recounting of his experience working for mr. trump. his testimony is expected to focus on his life story, how he went from serving as one of mr. trump's most loyal aides for more than a decade to publicly breaking with him last year and implicating him in two federal crimes. today we also learn that mueller is not done with manafort's former business partner, rick gates. in a joint filing, lawyers for both mueller and gates asked for another delay in sentencing because gates, quote, continues to cooperate with respect to several ongoing investigations. to put a finer point on this, they would be sentencing gates if they were done with gates, but he's apparently still being helpful. the "wall street journal" reports tonight that michael cohen's upcoming testimony to congress is expected to be highly restricted to avoid interfering with mueller's inquiry.oienress i, incadealotel we knew this was a possibility going into this february 7th appearance. the journal reports, quote, he is expected to give an explosive recounting of his experience working for mr. trump.
1:03 am
his testimony is expected to focus on his life story, how he went from serving as one of mr. trump's most loyal aides for more than a decade to publicly breaking with him last year and implicating him in two federal crimes. a person familiar with cohen's prepared remarks tells nbc news that he plans on describing trump as, quote, a madman. the testimony will give you chills, according to this source. before these new developments tonight, mueller's prospective new supervisor appeared before the senate judiciary committee, william barr, a former u.s. attorney general in the early '90s and trump's pick to be our next attorney general had his confirmation hearing begin today. a lot of the questioning dealt with the mueller investigation and the lengths he will go to protect it. barr has also come under scrutiny for a memo he wrote to the justice department sent around town in washington that no one had requested, because it questioned mueller's investigation into obstruction. well, today he stressed his support for the special counsele and the inquiry.
1:04 am
>> i believe that it is vitally important that the special counsel be allowed to complete l his investigation. when he was named special counsel, i said his selection was good news and that knowing him, i had confidence he would handle the matter properly. and i still have that confidence today. >> do you believe mr. mueller would be involved in a witch le hunt against anybody? >> i don't -- i don't believe mr. mueller would be involved in a witch hunt. i believe the russians interfered or attempted to interfere with the election, and i think we have to get to the bottom of it. >> the issue of recusal also came up today. current acting a.g. matthew whitaker who was critical of the investigation refused to recuse himself. here was barr's response to the committee. >> let's imagine it was a judgment call and the judgment by the career ethics officials in the agency are that you
1:05 am
recuse yourself. under what scenario would you not follow their recommendation? >> if i disagreed with it. >> what would the basis of that disagreement be? >> i came to a different judgment. >> on what basis? >> the facts. >> barr was also asked whether he would release mueller's report to the public. his response to that appeared to suggest that not all of the findings would be revealed. >> it is very important that the public and congress be informed of the results of the special counsel's work. r >> when his report comes to you, will you share it with us as much as possible?wi >> consistent with regulations and the law, yes. under the current regulations, the special counsel report is confidential. a report that goes public would be a report by the attorney general. >> in spite of the fact that you want to be transparent, neither congress nor the public will get the mueller report because that's confidential. so what we will be getting is your report of the mueller t report subject to applicable
1:06 am
laws limiting disclosure. is that what you're telling us? >> i don't know what -- at the end of the day what will be releasable. i don't know what bob mueller is writing. >> just to underscore there, we don't know that there will be a mueller report. we don't tend to know anything about the mueller investigation in realtime. despite barr's assurances of support for mueller, he was also asked point blank about the future of the investigation. >> are there any circumstances that would cause you to terminate the investigation or any component of it or significantly restrict its funding? >> under the regulations, bob mueller could only be terminated for good cause, and frankly, it's unimaginable to me that bob
1:07 am
would ever do anything that gave rise to good cause. >> the two men are friends. more on that in a minute. let's bring in our lead-off panel for a tuesday night. peter baker, correspondent for the "new york times," myra wiley, former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, now with the new school here in new york.th and chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney, former senior fbi u. official. and chuck, i'd like to begin with you. did barr say enough? did he do enough to convince you that the mueller investigation would be sealed, protected, walled off under his good care? >> yes, he did, brian. let me explain why. though i don't share his view on several matters of law that camh up today, and while i imagine i don't share his politics, i've always believed bill barr to be a man of integrity, a principled man. he said the right things as far as i'm concerned in terms of bob mueller's character, the nature
1:08 am
of the investigation specifically that wasn't a witch hunt which, of course, we know as well that he would do what he could to protect it, that mueller would not be removed except for good cause as the regulations require, and that he, bill barr, couldn't imagine mueller doing anything that would rise to the level of good cause. those types of statements give me great comfort, and i think bill barr undoubtedly will be confirmed to the job. >> maya, as i tried to point out, we're all assuming there will be a nicely bound 400-page report that will be easy for america to understand. what is this technical difference that barr seems to be hinting at that what he gets from mueller may be different than what he releases to the gest of us? >> i think mr. barr did a good job of being very clear about the regulation in his confirmation testimony, which hb basically said, look, i get a confidential report.
1:09 am
i then decide what's releasable. now, in theory, he could actually take verbatim everything that is in the robert mueller report and make it a public. he does have the power to do that.oe so i thought he was being a little cute by half sort of suggesting that there was a requirement that it be something literally different. i don't read that in the rag. >> things like grand jury information would be sealed off from the rest of us, anyway. >> certainly. certainly there are things that he says are right when he says there are regulations that may preclude. i don't know if they'll say something that is national security. so certainly he has the obligation to go through that report to see if anything would be precluded from being made public. i don't think that answers the question, though, and i do differ a little bit with chuck rosenberg, which i don't generally, but about how comfortable i feel. it's certainly true, and i think
1:10 am
clear, that barr is saying he's not getting fired on my watch. if i thought that i was being directed to do something inappropriate, i would resign. certainly those are comforting statements. but remember that his memoranduo actually stated that the president had very broad powers to start and stop prosecutions. that's literally -- so he didn't distance himself at all from that statement in the memo which sets up the potential for if bob mueller says, in my report i actually am recommending that there was abuse of authority here and actually obstruction of justice, and he says, i don't think that that's actually, you know, warranted. he would have to write a report. but it doesn't actually square necessarily with whether he will be in lockstep at all with wi robert mueller simply because he respects him. so i think he was very creative and very smart in his answers.
1:11 am
i don't disbelieve him in terms of his strong feelings about the law, but i actually think there are some things that should give us pause. >> peter baker, some of our analysts today said there were two bill barrs at this hearing today. there was the guy who wrote this voluminous memo that no one had asked for that was sent all around town, and the bill barr who said, you know, our life is pretty great, my wife and me. we've raised a family. i wasn't looking for work. so i guess it's in the eyes of the beholder to decide that. one thing there was not, fireworks, fisticuffs, not even a single protester. what has your reporting revealed in the hours since? was it the way it seemed to us? >> i do think that you saw a bill barr today who was softening some of the things he has said publicly and even privately over the last two years of the trump administration. he took more of an advocate's kind of point of view in making public comments about the way
1:12 am
things were going and the president's power. in the past, of course, even before the trump administration had been a pretty outspoken advocate of the idea of pretty n wide and expansive executive authority for the president. i think you heard him today sort of presenting a pretty more measured accounting of his re views, saying what he needs to say to the committee to reassure them that he is not going to be a tool of the president, but he's going to be an independent administrator of the department of justice the way he was when he was working for the bush administration back in bush 41. he's addressing the committee because he wants to make confirmation. he says things that are consistent with the way he plans to run the justice department at this point. there will be places where the people say, you said this then and now you're saying this now, and they'll find contrast to
1:13 am
draw. >> chuck, you and i spoke about the following topic a little bit earlier today, but because of your years of service to the fbi, i wanted to raise it again. tonight the opening headline on fox news' 10:00 p.m. hour was the fbi's sickening war against trump. last night their analyst said this is a controversy and frankly it's time that it be halted in its tracks and get reorganization.ly it's time the administration get reorganized. they opened today with an attack on the doj and the fbi, and my question to you is, how do you square this concerning this agency where you spent so much of your adult life? >> i found those comments, both on fox and by the chairman, despicable and disgusting, brian. i have stronger words, but i won't use them here. what's happening, sadly, is an
1:14 am
effort to undermine the men and women of the fbi. look, and we discussed this earlier, when they are executing an arrest warrant or a search warrant, when they're knocking on a door to talk to a witness, they need people to trust what t they are and what they do. because what they are and what they do is protect us. and so to the extent that this constant drumbeat, this drip, drip, drip undermines them and their work, it's deeply destructive. i'll say one other thing. the fbi, the fbi at which i work both for jim comey and bob mueller is closely tethered to the rule of law and to the constitution. in fact, in the counterintelligence world, it i, the most highly regulated and the most closely supervised investigative work that they do. so the notion that this is a rogue agency out on a frolic and detour is nonsense, and it's deeply hurtful and deeply destructive.
1:15 am
>> maya wylie, let me take the other side of the argument and that is for a republican aging nominee of donald trump, this man today really did try to stake his claim to independence, and he went out of his way to say the right things regarding the integrity of the investigation. r if you're donald trump, who has wistfully spoken of where is my roy kohn, might this be a case of watch what you wish for. you're nodding. >> i keep going back to why does william barr want this job, and i think he's getting those questions today. it's an incredibly powerful and important position, and who wouldn't want to be the nation's top lawyer.ti and he's been the nation's top lawyer for a sitting president, and he has seen trump's behavior repeatedly towards the ee department he loves.
1:16 am
i don't disbelieve at all that william barr loves the department of justice and is committed to it. not for a minute do i question that. so it's very, very hard to square how this relationship will play out if he is, in fact, confirmed. certainly i believe him when he says i will resign before i am willing to do something that is completely wrong. i am just concerned, though, how he will interpret that in conjunction with his read of vast executive power on the part of the president.ea and remember that we know that he deeply shocked that memo that he wrote around washington, including sending it to sokolow and his attorney.ee >> you and i didn't get one. >> i can't believe it. >> tell us about an interaction
1:17 am
you had with barr in, i believe, 2017. >> yeah, this came up at the hearing today. he was asked about a quote and story that i wrote in 2017 20 quoting him. ar i it was a time when the president was calling on the justice department to open s investigations into hillary clinton and his political foes. i reached out to most of the living former attorney generals to see if they thought it was appropriate or not. he's the one who answered me and said it's nothing wrong asking i for an investigation. it depends on the circumstances of it. in an e-mail to me he said, for instance, he thought there was more of a basis for investigating the hillary clinton uranium 1 issue that has been raised by conservatives than there might be on the collusion of president trump. that became an issue today at the hearing. he remembered the quote somewhat differently, so i went ahead and pulled out the e-mail that he
1:18 am
had sent and put it on twitter so everybody could judge exactly what he said word for word, and people can determine for themselves what they believe he meant. what the democrats are seeing from this is, well, look, he's buying into what the fox news people say about hillary clinton and minimizing the possibility that there is a collusion, you know, predicate for this investigation that bob mueller is running in this e-mail. he's saying, no, that's overruling what i was saying. i was just making an argument that there are lots of things out there and a lot of things the justice did not can and can't investigate. >> i can't thank the big three for being with us tonight after this long tuesday and points west. peter baker, maya wylie and chuck rosenberg, thank you. the news in london that is likely making vladimir putin very happy. and later, day 25 of this shutdown stalemate. no end in sight. all congress could seem to agree on today was steve king.
1:19 am
"the 11th hour" just getting started on this tuesday evening. i am a family man.
1:20 am
1:21 am
i am a techie dad. i believe the best technology should feel effortless. like magic. at comcast, it's my job to develop, apps and tools that simplify your experience.
1:22 am
my name is mike, i'm in product development at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome. important developments over these past 24 hours, as we said, that are likely to have pleased vladimir putin. it was just last night at this time. our friends at the "new york times" reported president trump discussed pulling the united states from nato on multiple occasions last year. major parts of the united states government, as you're aware, remain closed tonight as the longest shutdown in our history is about to enter its 26th day, and tonight our closest ally across the atlantic is regrouping while it decides on nothing short of the future of its economy and culture. earlier today the british parliament resoundingly rejected prime minister's theresa may's plan for britain to leave the eu. while it was expected to fail,
1:23 am
not like this. not by a margin of 230 votes, making it the most lopsided major vote in the modern history, i.e., post world war i of great britain. after today's vote, may called on members of parliament to find some sort of a path forward. >> it is clear that the house does not support this deal. but tonight's vote tells us nothing about what it does support. nothing about how -- nothing about how or even if it intends to honor the decision the british people took in a referendum parliament decided to hold. people, particularly you citizens who have made your home here, and u.k. citizens living in the eu, deserve clarity on these questions as soon as possible. >> no one quite does understatement like the brits. the "new york times" reports
1:24 am
that with no clear consensus forward, more radical solutions are gaining momentum. quote, one group of lawmakers is campaigning for a repeat referendum, which could lead to a decision to leave the eu. another favors leaving the bloc as planned on march 29 without a withdrawal agreement, a so-called hard brexit. in light of today's news, we're so lucky to have with us tonight nicholas kristof, columnist for the "new york times." nick, for members of our audience who may not understand its importance, why is it important to all americans what happened in the house of commons today? >> so if britain pulls out with a hard brexit, then there will be disarray and a huge blow to the british economy and to the european economy at a time when
1:25 am
those economies, and indeed the world economy, are weak. and that is going to have ramifications across america as well and around the world. but beyond that, you know, the european union was put in place not fundamentally just as an economic measure, but really as a security architecture to avoid a repeat of the two world wars. and in a broader sense, what we're seeing right now being challenged is this architecture that a bunch of very smart strategists put in place 70 years ago. the u.n., what became the european union, trade organizations, nato to try to prevent global chaos and further wars. and you sort of alluded to this early on, but russia and china have been trying to undermine this architecture all along because they worked so much to the america's advantage and to the west's advantage over the decades, and now they are being
1:26 am
dismantled by their own side. >> indeed. i don't want to get too cute about this in a tv way, but why isn't this a great night to be in the kremlin? the nato alliance, talk of the u.s. pulling out, our longest alliance, the special relationship between the u.s. and the u.k., american upon american. our politics lays broken by the side of the road. all of these things together. >> that's right, and both russia and china have made the argument that, well, democracy may look nice, but it fundamentally doesn't work, it doesn't lead to efficient outcomes, it doesn't lead to a nation's strength. you look at britain, a company and economy on the abyss. you look at america that is shut down and in complete chaos. you look at france and italy, both huge problems of their own. germany has a much weaker leader, or is about to assume a weaker leader. and they're more able to make those arguments now than they were a year or two ago. and, you know, for those of us who think that we fundamentally
1:27 am
do have the right kind of government and the right structure, it's really sad to see our side enabling russia to make those arguments more compellingly in ways that will disadvantage our government and disadvantage our economy and our societies perhaps for years to come. >> the one scientific experiment in american history that we reference more than any other on this broadcast is the famous frog-boiling experiment. >> yeah. >> the slow death of our friend the frog. it's my contention that we have yet to grasp the impact of the headline friday night in your newspaper that an american president, because of his actions and words, did enough to trigger an inquiry on whether or not he was a witting or unwitt ing tool of a foreign power. when will that sink in with the rest of us?
1:28 am
>> it was staggering to see that in the newspaper. i instagramed it because it was so incredible to see that. at the end of the day, whether it's witting or unwitting, it's still the case -- i don't know if the president thinks he's doing this with the kremlin, but his politics are clearly benefiting putin -- if putin wanted to create arguments to undermine the u.s., to undermine britain, to undermine the western order, then he would be seeking to shut down the u.s. government for a while. he would be seeking to support the brexit campaigners, he would be seeking to undermine the u.n., he would be talking about withdrawing from nato and collapsing this nato that has stood up to russia all along. he would be doing exactly what president trump has been doing. is it witting or unwitting, i don't know, but is it serving putin's interest? absolutely.
1:29 am
>> we're happy to have you with us, thank you. >> thank you. >> nicholas kristof from the "new york times." as airports close security lines, tsa agents are called back to work without pay. more on the record-long government shutdown.
1:30 am
1:31 am
1:32 am
1:33 am
while republicans are feeling the heat, trump some but he seems impervious to people's pain, which is just disgusting. but our republican colleagues in the senate are, and more and more of them are beginning to scramble. our argument is simple. open the government. three words to trump, mcconnell and the government. open the government. >> 25 days, the longest shutdown in our history. moderate house democrats declined president donald trump's lunch invitation tuesday because they were on the menu. trump's strategy, white house officials say, is to make an end run around democratic leaders and cut a deal that builds the wall and opens the government. president trump maintains he won't sign anything that doesn't include billions for his wall, which he now calls a barrier. also today, a federal judge
1:34 am
denied a request to pay air traffic controllers and other federal workers who remain on the job. that ruling came down even as some furloughed workers at the irs, tens of thousands of them in the faa, are being called back to work with no pay. with us tonight to talk about it, donna edwards, former democratic member of congress representing the great state of maryland, and phil rucker, pulitzer prize-winning white house bureau chief for the "washington post." phil, any movement, any offramps that you know of? >> none, brian, and that's the problem facing both republican and democratic leaders on capitol hill, and they're growing exasperated because they know that it's possible to get out of this shutdown quickly. they can pass the spending bills that already cleared the house and sort of table a debate on border security, but that's not something the president will tolerate or support. he's demanding his border wall funding, and frk democrats will not tolerate that.
1:35 am
and what we have now is a stalemate where neither side seems to be talking to the other. there has been no negotiation between the white house and democratic congressional leaders in several days now. i'm not sure any is on the agenda tomorrow, at least with the leadership. and so federal workers are here in the crosshairs, and lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned that there is no end in sight. >> congresswoman, i've heard otherwise smart, able people say only half in jest that if you want to end this, what it would take would be the tsa not coming in to work. pick a day, tomorrow, strangling u.s. air transportation. that would get everyone's attention. when chuck schumer says trump is impervious to people's pain, why doesn't that move people? >> people don't want to do the responsible thing.
1:36 am
the responsible thing is to pass the bills. there are republicans and you hear them rumbling, and it's going to compel mitch mcconnell to bring those bills up for a vote. then do the legislative work. if the president doesn't want to sign the bills or wants to veto those bills, he can do that, but the federal government will open because those bills will have passed the house and the senate. i think there would be an override of that veto. there is an offramp here, and the offramp is to open government by passing the spending bills. negotiate later if you want to over border security. democrats continue to offer up border security whether it's technology or personnel and smart ways to do border security, and so this notion that somehow democrats have not kept that on the table is really just wrong, and there are not going to be democrats who break with the democratic leadership because democrats are actually
1:37 am
united in the call to open government and provide smart border security. >> phil, it's not like congress can't agree on anything. they agreed to condemn the racist language of steve king. he's already been stripped of his committee assignments. i want to play for you a clip from a radio interview he gave tonight. we'll talk about it on the other side. >> we reached a place here now where i'm pretty comfortable with this. i mean, i am, i am at peace in my soul with this, and i'm confident that, you know, what i have done has been true and right and just and honest. and much of those folks over there, you know, i don't condemn anybody, especially not to eternity, but i would -- i'm very comfortable standing before god and answering to all of this. >> phil, he is barely hanging on to a congressional seat in iowa.
1:38 am
is this story over, do you think? >> i don't think it is, brian. you know, he's been condemned this week over those racist remarks, but that's not the first time that congressman king has made racist remarks like this. i've been covering him for years, including on the campaign trail in iowa. he is always a flamboyant speaker, and he has made racist comments before and republican leaders have sort of turned the other way when he's done. so this is the first time they're really confronting it head on, you know, condemning him in the congress today. we'll see if there's going to be any more disciplinary action, if perhaps there is any sort of move to seriously pressure him to resign or somehow expel him. i'm also curious to see, frankly, when president trump is going to weigh in on this.
1:39 am
he was actually asked earlier this week about these comments, and he claims to not be aware of them despite all the many hours we know he watches cable television. he somehow missed all the reporting on congressman king's remarks. but he probably has not missed it now, so we'll see what he has to say the next time he's asked. >> donna, to phil's point, when you were in the house with him, he's been steve king the same guy for many years. do you think this can correctly be converted into shining a brighter light on the president's choice of words and idealogy? >> i think there certainly is a link between the president and steve king. i mean, there's really virtually no daylight between some of the remarks that the president has made and steve king. and frankly, i don't think that the action that was taken today on the house floor, while a motion of disapproval is important, i think it's time for steve king to leave the congress.
1:40 am
this is not about a choice of free speech. steve king can have his free speech outside the congress of the united states. he has brought real disrepute upon the congress, repugned the congress, and i think the republican party needs to cut him loose. otherwise it's like a cancer that continues to grow on the republican party. the des moines register today, in fact, called for his resignation. this is the first time that an iowa democrat has not -- or an iowa representative has not served on the agriculture committee, which is important to iowa. he is not serving the citizens of his congressional district. i believe it's time for him to leave, and then he can have all the free speech he wants. >> really important point about the committee chairman, committee memberships. donna edwards, phil rucker, our thanks for you both for coming on this tuesday night. coming up for us, another dark night in early 2019 with shadows now cast clear across the atlantic. we'll ask the historian jon meacham what it might take to repair a paralyzed government, a damaged alliance, when we come
1:41 am
back.
1:42 am
1:43 am
1:44 am
despite hundreds of thousands of federal employees going without paychecks due to the shutdown, despite the stories of genuine hardship in just about every community in america, it's not enough to get anyone in our government to move. the great divide in american politics has brought us the longest ever government shutdown, and so we are fortunate to have back with us tonight the pulitzer prize-winning author and historian jon meacham whose latest work is "the soul of america," as i remind him all the time. take your pick. the story this week the president has discussed exiting from nato. speaking of exits, there is the failure of brexit and a huge question mark over our special relationship.
1:45 am
then there's the fact that our government is paralyzed. please. >> everything is working out great. >> yeah. >> the thing that worries me most about the shutdown is one of the main reasons donald trump is president is because of an erosion of trust in the institutions that built nato, that gave rise to the martial plan, that won the second world war. the gallup found the highest amount, do you trust him to do right by the government. it was at 74% in 1964. it's now at 17% and falling. i think there is a sense that the world is collapsing, and when the world is collapsing, what you hope people do is they reach for order. what they reached for in 2016 was they reached for more chaos. and i think the big question for every political leader not named trump is what can we do, what can we say persistently to make the case that these institutions are worth defending. >> so that helps answer another
1:46 am
question i had. does this shutdown -- you know, the '94-'95 clinton shutdown is kind of hazy in history. is this the shutdown we remember for all the wrong reasons? also subset question, how are we ever going to attract people to work in government jobs again? it can be a noble calling, as you know. >> absolutely. the interesting thing about '95-'96 was that was a big idealogical question. basically clinton in some ways said to gingrich, you all say you don't want government. let's close it down. and gingrich did it. and they adjudicated it and the country decided they wanted the government. so we found ourselves in that kind of centrist position. this is very specific, right? there is this -- and donald trump has the remarkable capacity to make things peripheral central. it's why he's president again, is that he has -- he manages to
1:47 am
dazzle us and distract us from the big questions we face. the fight over this particular border, this particular wall, i don't think is going to turn out well for him because ultimately the country knows, whether they know it intellectually -- i think they know it in their bones that we have always done better the more widely we've opened our arms. and that's not a liberal point. fundamentally it's a 19th century conservative point. the "wall street journal" says, free ideas, free men, free flow of goods. if you believe in adam smith, you believe in an open world. you believe in let's get out there and compete. i was thinking the other day about the first time george h.w. bush went back to the white house. you were probably covering it. it was june of '93. it was to sell nafta. and it was ford, carter, clinton and bush. clinton gets up by protocol and goes first and gives this marvelous synthetic explanation of why globalization, da, da,
1:48 am
da, perfect. 41 gets up there and says, we've just seen once again why he's here and i'm not. think of that picture. carter, ford ran against each other. >> continuity. >> it represented -- now, somebody on the other side of the economic equation is going to say to us, easy for you guys because you're not struggling. fair enough. but ultimately if you look at this in the sweep of history, prosperity leads to reform, reform leads to what jefferson called the pursuit of happiness. >> we'll pursue a final question with jon meacham on the other side of this break. migraine with botox®.
1:49 am
1:50 am
what if you had fewer headaches and migraines a month? botox® prevents headaches and migraines before they even start. botox® is for adults with chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month,
1:51 am
each lasting 4 hours or more. botox® injections take about 15 mins. in your doctor's office and are covered by most insurance. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. with the botox® savings program, most people with commercial insurance pay nothing out of pocket. talk to your doctor and visit botoxchronicmigraine.com to enroll. we are back with the historian and author jon meacham. i'll put it this way, our fathers' generation went to their graves probably believing that white nationalism was at least defeated in their time.
1:52 am
>> true. >> and wouldn't roar back and be a thing again in this country they loved. how wrong they were. >> how wrong they were. persistent theme comes out largely out of the lost 'cause mythology that developed right after app mattics. in fact, in january of 1866, so the surrender was barely -- the ink was barely dry. richmond journalist named edward alfred pollered wrote something called "the lost cause: a new southern history of the old war." there was no new history. >> thank you very much. >> he was arguing we lost slavery therefore we have to carry on this battle by other means. it reads like steve king could have talked about it. we have to fight against consolidated government, which was there term for centralized government. this is about white supremacy now, not slavery, and within the quarter century, right, 55 years ago in my native region we lived under functional apartheid.
1:53 am
it took the work of lyndon johnson, it took dr. king, rosa parks, john lewis, it took this remarkable protest far from the centers of power to reach the centers of power, but there is something in the american character and certainly in the european character that this flames up, and it's why it requires eternal vigilance. because if you don't stomp it out in the beginning, it gets bigger. >> by way of thanking you, it's not lost on us this would have been the 90th birthday of the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. had he been allowed to live old enough to brush gray hair. give me 30 seconds on what he might have been like in old age. >> taylor branch has the great line. he called dr. king a 20th century founding father, a modern founding father, and what he did in terms of nonviolence and in that speech in august of '63 called on us in the same way
1:54 am
lincoln did in gettysburg to really fulfill what jefferson laid out. i think he died on the cool side of the mountain. he was focused on vietnam. he was focused on economic justice. i think he would have been frustrated and i think -- but i know we'd be a better country if he had continued to lead us. >> sure would have been nice to know the answer to that. jon meacham, always a pleasure. thank you, sir. >> thanks, brian. coming up, the men and women who are on watch tonight. they have our back. the problem is the government is not currently behind them. ent is not currently behind them. i'm alex trebek here to tell you
1:55 am
about the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 65 and take medications.
1:56 am
what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you, too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the number one most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed, and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. and with this plan, you can pick your payment date, so you can time your premium due date to work with your budget. so call now for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, and it's yours just for calling. so call now.
1:57 am
last thing before we go tonight, a proud history
1:58 am
interrupted. this was the message today from the commandant of the u.s. coast guard, admiral carl schultz. this marks the first time in our nation's history that service members in a u.s. armed force have not been paid during a lapse in government appropriations. he goes on to say, "stay the course, stand the watch and serve with bride. you are not and will not be forgotten." there are 40,000 men and women on active duty in the coast guard. total payroll of close to 90,000. their motto is always ready and they are. they have fought in all of our wars. they are ready right now, wherever a vessel is foundering, wherever people are in peril from drug interdictions to high-sea rescues, they are there. from guam to san juan to san diego to corpus christi to portland, maine, to the top of the mississippi. they are on duty at this hour. they own the water.
1:59 am
their skilled aviators own the skies. here's a stat for you. after katrina, the u.s. coast guard saved 33,000 people. they have never needed saving themselves, yet at coast guard stations across our country their neighbors are stepping up. there are food banks open, bake sales, people are making donations, serving free meals. the red cross, get this, is actually helping distribute aid to coast guard personnel and families in need. because their families are hurting because washington is fighting, and from the fda to the tsa to the irs, the families of federal workers are suffering through no fault of their own. that is our broadcast on a tuesday night. thank you so very much for being here with us. good night from nbc news headquarters here in new york.
2:00 am
this morning the government shutdownhe continues to drag on. we reached day 26 with no end in sight. now tense of thousands of federal employees are being ordered back to work without pay. hotrump's pick william barr gets grilled as they drill him repeatedly about the john mueller probe. comments concerning white supremacywh made by congressman steve king. even king voted in support of the measure.

105 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on