Skip to main content

tv   AM Joy  MSNBC  May 26, 2019 7:00am-9:00am PDT

7:00 am
if the kinds of abuses that this president has committed are not impeachable, what would be? >> impeachment is coming. the hearings that are happening now that are driving democrats crazy because they -- we want impeachment proceedings now. well, they're kind of actually already happening. >> the fact is this is going to be a voting issue in 2020 and the people responsible for educating the electorate about why we need to impeach this president, if they believe that, are the people who are saying, we don't know what to do. constitutional crisis, but infrastructure. good morning and welcome to "a.m. joy." to impeach or not to impeach, that is the question. we focused our entire show on it yesterday, the pros, cons, and potential consequences. so what should democrats do? begin impeachment proceedings against donald trump now or wait until the election in the hopes that they will get him out then?
7:01 am
either way the debate is clearly dividing house democrats and those divisions are only becoming more apparent. the hill report that speaker nancy pelosi and judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler are tangling on the way forward. quote, the pair of powerful democrats clashed in recent days over whether to launch impeachment proceedings against trump and how soon to hold a contempt vote against attorney general william barr. the outcome of the debate is far from certain, but as constitutional law professor laurence tribe put it yesterday, democrats must ask themselves this important question -- >> we owe it to ourselves as a nation to ask the question if the kinds of abuses that this president has committed are not impeachable, what would be? >> joining me now is democratic congressman from california and member of the house oversight committee ro khanna. thank you for being here. >> thanks for having me on. >> where do you fall on this question, to impeach or not i'm
7:02 am
peach, to begin an impeachment inquiry? >> i'm where nancy pelosi is, jonathan capehart is. we need to get the public to approve of what we want to do and i think what we need to do is have aggressive committee hearings and build a case. >> in the case of richard nixon, the hearings that did ultimately change the public's mind took place in the united states senate. what we call the watergate hearings. this united states senate is not going to do that. republicans are fixed in place for donald trump. nothing about the opinion moves have moved, no matter what new information comes out republicans are not changing their minds. do you understand the argument from a lot of democrats out there that democrats insisting that some magical thing is going to happen, some new piece of information is going to come out that's going to suddenly make republicans accept the idea that donald trump has committed wrongdoing is fanciful and that it doesn't make sense and it's just a way for democrats such as
7:03 am
yourself to avoid impeaching this president. >> joy, i respect laurence tribe, i've head his book and understand that there is not a silver bullet or new evidence we are talking about. what we are talking about is building the public case. i get we may not convince other republican colleagues, but there is a difference between having a 448-page written report that many americans still haven't read in detail and having mueller come and testify on live tv, having don mcgahn come and testify. there is a reason this president is blocking that. he fears the public case that could be made. i believe adam schiff, jerry nadler, elijah cummings are doing terrific work in the committees. >> except that you all are not able to get these people to testify. thus far democrats have failed to get their subpoenas recognized, you have people like don mcgahn, even hope hicks saying they will think about it, consider whether to comply with subpoenas. you can't even seem to get robert mueller to agree to testify publicly. democrats keep saying we are going to have hearings but you can't even get the people to
7:04 am
appear. there is a frustration in the public about that because you keep saying the hearings are coming. the people aren't coming. >> i agree with that. the courts have to intervene. i do think it will be a full blown constitutional crisis if you have the administration defying a court order. >> what will the democrats do about that? >> then you have a crisis. if the administration defies a court order then i think all the options are on the table. >> what options? >> then i think -- then you do have impeachment on the table if you actually have the administration defying court orders. >> so you're saying if don mcgahn, if hope hicks, if even robert mueller refused to appear in public hearings where the public could see their testimony, then you would support impeachment as a remedy for that? >> i'm saying if there is a willful defiance of a court order. if the court says you need to do x and they exhaust their appeals and the court and then they violate the court order, then you have no other choice. that is a constitutional crisis. the worst president in american history in my view was james buchanan, he actually went and told the supreme court -- lobbied the supreme court on the
7:05 am
dred scott case. the solution was not simply congress acting, obviously congress needs to act, we will do our job, the solution was abraham lincoln coming and building a new culture about reverence to the laws and reverence to our country and constitution. i have heard your guests saying what are we doing? what message are we sending? i get that we need to do our part, we need to investigate, but this is a broader question in this country about citizens rededicating themselves to a culture of reverence for the constitution and the laws. >> are you essentially -- it sounds like what you're saying is that the american public has to take the burden of reigning in a president who is out of control and that congress is going to, a, wait for public sentiment to lead congress, rather than congress leading the public, and that, b, we're just going to wait and let the electorate handle donald trump. first of all, what message does that send to the public because the public elected you guys to lead, and second of all what message does it send to the next president who says if this guy didn't get impeached and he submitted 700, 800 former
7:06 am
attorneys say is obstruction of justice, couldn't the next president just throw the emoluments clause in the garbage, commit obstruction of justice, investigate his political enemies, essentially congress would be saying it's fine. >> two things, first of all, i do believe this president has committed grave misconduct and i agree with you and i do think congress is leading. not leading would be saying we're just going to do infrastructure. i saw one of your guests make that point. that's not the case. every day we're having four committees aggressively investigate, we are talking about the extraordinary obstruction, we're educating folks -- >> but you're also saying that buchanan did worse and wasn't impeached, therefore, donald trump doesn't merit impeachment. >> i'm not saying he doesn't merit impeachment. i'm saying we need to build a case. we need to make the case to the american public. >> couldn't you do that with an impeachment inn dwyery. that would be one set of haengs that wouldn't have to be limited to the phillip mena, as we heard from laurence tribe and several of our guests yesterday, an impeachment inquiry would allow congress to consolidate all these investigations into his
7:07 am
finances, potential misuse of the tax code, into potential money laundering, whatever it is that congress is individually investigating in these committees, an impeachment inquiry would tell the story in one set of televised hearings that the public could focus on and concentrate on. >> i think it's more accountable to the president to have four committees aggressively doing the work. i'm on the oversight committee, when we had michael cohen testifying the public tuned in and when jerry nadler is going to have mueller testify the public is going to tune in. >> if mueller testifies. at this point you have not been a i believe to compel these guys to agree to testify. >> we are doing everything we can to compel them and i'm confident we are going to succeed in doing that. one of the points that your guests made yesterday because i watched some of the show, they said a future president is going to commit niece abuses. >> why wouldn't they? >> because there used to be a sense in this country which donald trump is an exception to of having a patriotism, a reverence. >> you are going to count on that. the problem with counting on that is that you're just counting on that when this
7:08 am
president has demonstrated that someone who doesn't believe in those principles can become president thanks to the electoral college and can throughout all of those norms. if congress doesn't place a sanction on this president and said, wait a minute, the consequences for that are that you get this stain on your legacy, then the ex-president what if they don't share those values. you are counting on it. >> i am confident that donald trump will have that stain in his legacy in history and i'm confident that someone like barack obama or george w. bush or ronald reagan or jimmy carter this he would never act this way. >> but you're presuming the next president won't act this way. >> this president is stuck at below -- around 40% approval. >> and he still got in. >> this president is every day facing extraordinary inquiries, extraordinary investigations an no one has taken anything off the table. the congress is going to act. there are a lot of options on the table. >> specifically what option? if it's not impeachment then what options? >> that is on the table. the speaker has never taken that off the table. >> she said that congress is not
7:09 am
on a road to impeachment. >> she hasn't said that, not after the phillip mena came out, not after the obstruction. she has, i think, been very frustrated by the stonewalling of the administration and she has said that -- what she said is self-impeaching. >> what does that mean? >> if this continues and if there's constant obstruction and if the courts -- if there is defiance of court orders then the congress will be left with no choice. >> let me play rashida tlaib talking about this issue. this is congresswoman tlaib. >> this is not about a 2020 election, it is about doing what's right now for our country. this is going to be a precedent that we set when we don't hold this president accountable to the rule of law and to the united states constitution. >> there is a sense, i think, from a lot of people, and i'm not going to speak for the congresswoman, that the democrats have a great deal of i don't know if it would be called patience or tolerance for a slow-moving process that we will
7:10 am
go to court, send a letter, send another letter, we will say this is the deadline, when they blow the deadline we will give you another deadline. there is this slow moving process, right, but donald trump doesn't respect process and doesn't respect those norms and so why are the democrats taking this slow and deliberate approach when there is a sense of real panic and alarm about what this president is doing. he is about to investigate potentially members of the fbi. he's going to have his consigliere the attorney general doing that. >> it's not out of timiditiy, it's not out of political calculation. it's because most democrats believed in the promise of barack obama that someone could help reconcile this nation, someone could -- >> do you think donald trump can do that? >> no. i think we still have that hope for this country. we don't want to further tear this country around. donald trump is a destructor, if we play the same game we haven't doing something better. i believe in michelle obama did, she said people go low, we go
7:11 am
high. i still believe in her, i still believe in the obama principle for this nation. there is a deep conflict between holding someone accountable which is very important and not dividing the nation. and i think that's a very difficult judgment. i respect the people that come out on different sides of it, but the one thing i will assure you is there is not a single person in that caucus who is taking this as a political matter. they are trying to make the best judgment that they can. >> it does feel like that's a bit of a rose colored view of the country. barack obama was followed by donald trump and there were 60 million people who thought that the idea of prioritizing, deporting people, banning muslims from this country was a good idea. it's not a given that a barack obama will suddenly sweep into office and i wonder if maybe democrats aren't taking into account there is no guarantee the next election will be free of russian intervention, which now this attorney general has essentially said is fine, so you could have foreign intervention, voter suppression on a massive scale which we saw accelerating
7:12 am
after the voting rights act was gutted by this supreme court. where is the confidence coming from that the next election will even be a completely free and fair election and it will magically cure the country of trumpism? >> i'm not confident about that. i am very concerned about the russian interference which was systematic and sweeping in the phillip mena. i don't think the technology companies and law enforcement have done enough yet -- >> what is the congress doing about it? >> this is a place where you have had total republican obstructionism. the republicans are unwilling even to legislate -- >> but doesn't that mean that we are -- you just essentially have conceded that we are in danger because republicans will not allow the congress to cure that problem, that the next election is not certain to be free and fair. so then if we punt to the election -- >> i'm not -- >> -- knowing that the election is not necessarily going to be fair, then how is that a cure for what donald trump is doing? >> i think we have to do two things. we have to make sure that we put pressure to make sure the election is fair --
7:13 am
>> but how is that going to be done if the republicans just say, no. they're simply saying we are not going to do that. then what will democrats do about that? >> i think the house which we control has a lot of power and oversight. >> including impeachment. the one thing the house can do on their own is impeach the president. >> that won't stop interference. >> but it would place a sanction on this president that would be a historical sanction that he could not remove. it's the highest sanction -- it's the one sort of solo power that the house has over him and i just do wonder why democrats are so reluctant to wheeled that particular -- or the ones against william barr, for instance, that something the democrats might be do. >> i do think we should hold william barr in contempt. >> you do not think. >> i do. i think he lied to the american people and congress and i would support that. i also think this president is being held accountable. if you go to any member of congress and you sisi every say how much we are investigating, how much we are making a point of the contempt and the obstruction -- let me ask you
7:14 am
this, joy, or your viewers. do you have any view regardless of what congress does that donald trump will be regarded as one of the worst presidents in american history. >> i think historians have ranked him at the problem but the question is is what democrats are doing stopping him. now he has escalated to accusing people of treason. there is no evidence that william barr would not then prosecute whoever it is that donald trump tells him to. so, yes, he's being -- the democrats are acting against this president, but he is acting, too, and he's escalating not ratcheting down. >> and that's why we have to have some confidence in the courts. we won two court decisions, the courts have said -- >> what if they don't or what if he doesn't listen to him. >> then i do think you have a full constitutional crisis. >> don't we have one now? >> you would have a majority of the congress i think if there is a willful defiance of a court order, that's when i said i think that would be the red line where people would say, this is -- this is enough. but i don't think that we have gone there yet. i mean, i think the courts have actually been encouraging, the courts have ruled he has to give
7:15 am
up his tax returns, the courts have ruled initially against the worst version of muslin ban and judge roberts, he is an institutionalist he has to understand that the state of american democracy is at stake and i'm hoping that the courts will follow precedent and save our democracy by doing what's right. >> i know we are out of time but i will end on this. is that hope a strategy? because you're counting on a majority of republican supreme court, donald trump put two of them in their jobs, you know, justice roberts is the same guy who gutted the voting rights act. is what we're saying here is that the american people must count on justice roberts being more of an institutionalist than a republican? because at this point most republicans are behaving as republicans not as institutionalists. >> i agree. first of all, i do think justice roberts upheld obamacare and so he has shown more independents than most members of congress other than perhaps justin amash. i do think it's not the only
7:16 am
hope. also the congress is going to continue with an exceedingly aggressive investigation and building the public case and making sure that people are informed about the systematic misconduct. and i think that we will do that, though, in a way that's going to build people and consensus. my view is, you know, you should ask the president, but my view that if president obama were in congress or michelle obama were in congress they would be supporting speaker pelosi's approach. >> we would ask the president if he would coal on the show. president trump you are welcome to come on. >> president obama. >> we would love to have president obama on as well. congressman, thank you so much. appreciate it. all right. up next, brexiteers bring all the milkshakes to the yard. o thd billions of mouths.
7:17 am
billions of problems. morning breath? garlic breath? stinky breath? there's a therabreath for you. therabreath fresh breath oral rinse instantly fights all types of bad breath and works for 24 hours. so you can... breathe easy. there's therabreath at walmart. ♪ i was just finishing a ride. i felt this awful pain in my chest. i had a pe blood clot in my lung. i was scared. i had a dvt blood clot. having one really puts you in danger of having another. my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®. to help keep me protected. xarelto® is a latest-generation blood thinner that's proven to treat and reduce the risk
7:18 am
of dvt or pe blood clots from happening again. in clinical studies, almost 98% of patients on xarelto® did not experience another dvt or pe. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can... help protect yourself from another dvt or pe. ask your doctor about xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit
7:19 am
how janssen can help, at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
7:20 am
[ inaudible ]. >> i'm sorry. [ inaudible ]. >> sorry. >> call it the great milkshaking. in britain this week began with brexiteer nigel farage getting milk shakd.
7:21 am
it's a thing that anti-brexit activists are doing with the delicious treats and it ended with conservative prime minister theresa may tear flee announcing her resignation after she failed to broken britain's departure from the eu. elections are under way for the parliament with voters choosing representatives for the transnational body. nationalist and far right parties are looking to make major gains with an eye toward taking down the eu from the inside. joining me now from paris is the daily beast he is a chris dickey. let me play you quickly one of the reactions to theresa may's tearful exit interest from a britain. >> i think our media is express far more imp thee for the powerful. in his case she will lead a comfortable and affluent life to her end rather than the victims of their policies who i'm afraid have been driven into the misery, insecurity and turmoil as a direct result.
7:22 am
>> you respond on a human level. >> i have responded on a human level, i've spoken about the humanity of those who have suffered as a consequence of her policies, i wish the news would give far more space to them rather than discussing the prime minister because she can no longer hold the most powerful job in the country. >> chris, talk about the attitudes of britain's -- toward theresa may's exit and also the people to her right, the nigel ma r if a rad folks, are they in a position to accept power or is britain going to move somewhat to the left? >> i'm not sure if britain is going to move to the left. i'm not sure anything good is going to happen in british politics in the foreseeable future. essentially what's happened now is the entire british political system has been discredited over three years of brexit debates, failures, confusion. you have theresa may whose policy for getting out of the european union which is what the
7:23 am
referendum said people wanted to do has been voted down several times by parliament. you would think since she is resigning in a parliamentary system this would be the great moment for new elections, for general elections, let's have to new government, but no, there may not be new general elections until 2022, which means that the entire country is being held hostage by the torrey party where some 100 to 150,000 people will elect some new leadership over the next few months. impose that leadership on the rest of the country and basically britain will have to suck it up for months more of chaos. there might be a leftward movement if the labour party under jeremy corbin had taken a clear stand to reject brexit and to remain in the european union, but corbin for his own lefty internationalist reasons doesn't like the european union and he defies the majority of his own
7:24 am
party by sort of sitting on the fence, on the question of brexit. so we have this completely confused and discredited political system in britain and we're throwing -- i'm not, but people are throwing milkshakes, i think, out of shear frustration. >> at the same time, chris, we are looking at a world where the united states no longer can be credibly seen as the leader of the free world, the american president is in the pocket -- is in that sway of vladimir putin, but -- and then you have britain not able to lead because as you said it's chaos. what about the european union because now you've got all these far right parties that are like you, that are under the steve nan non-ite sway that are trying to take europe essentially to where hungary is now. what is going on with these elections. >> well, you know, to paraphrase tolstoy, happy europeans are all alike and unhappy europeans are all unhappy in their own way. i think that when we look at
7:25 am
this whole question of a far right surge we do see certain bannon-ite issues. we see steve bannon in a $9,000 a night suite in paris preaching about how he's going to help the poor. gradually people will come to understand that what the populists in europe are preaching and what, in fact, the populists in the united states are preaching is not how to give power to the powerless, which is what they claim, but how to give more power and more money to the powerful and to the rich, which is exactly what they're trying to do, exploiting fear and hatred. now, is that going to succeed in the european union elections? european parliament elections? i don't think it's going to succeed perhaps as well as some of the polls have indicated. we're supposed to in europe they are not supposed to publish early results, but some countries did vote early like the netherlands where they are thought to be very strong far right parties, they did very, very poorly in the european elections on thursday.
7:26 am
we will see. we will learn the results in a few hours here. >> it's a scary moment, i think, for the entire west. i mean, the west it feels like it's teetering on the brink of something awful. christopher dickey, thank you so much for sharing that with us. thank you very much. really appreciate you. coming up, the 147 democrats running for president are figuring out which parts of the base they should court. but some politicos are arguing that they should be shopping for votes among republicans. that's next. woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation
7:27 am
that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 7: go to to see proof in action. i'm missing out on our family outings because i can't find a bladder leakage product that fits. everything was too loose. but depend® fit-flex feels tailored to me. with a range of sizes for all body types. depend® fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit.
7:28 am
depend® fit-flex underwear but i can tell you liberty mutual customized my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
7:29 am
monitor their blood glucose every day. which means they have to stop. and stick their fingers. repeatedly. today, life-changing technology from abbott makes it possible to track glucose levels.
7:30 am
without drawing a drop of blood, again and again. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest. senator elizabeth warren and congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez are teaming up to demand more transparency from treasury secretary steve mnuchin regarding his time on the board of sears. he stepped down in 2016 and the company filed for bankruptcy two years later. the senator and congresswoman made their case while offering personal anecdotes about their connection to sears in a video that went viral on twitter. >> when my daddy had a heart attack when i was a girl my mama got a full-time job, minimum wage, answering phones at sears. now, today it's a very different
7:31 am
sears. >> and that's because in the early 2000s steven mnuchin's old college roommate, a rifle private investment fund owner named eddie lampert put his friend, steven mnuchin, on the sears board and then he drove the company into the ground. >> in a lawsuit filed last month the sears holding company accused former sears ceo eddie lampert, mnuchin and others of funneling billions of dollars from the company as it closed 3,500 stores and fired 20,000 workers. we will keep you posted as this story develops. more "a.m. joy" after the break. story develops more "a.m. joy" after the break. r young couples. then we noticed something...strange. oh, could you, uh, make me a burger? -poof -- you're a burger. [ laughter ] -everyone acts like their parents. -you have a tattoo. -yes. -fun. do you not work? -so, what kind of mower you got, seth? -i don't know. some kid comes over. we pay him to do it. -but it's not all bad. someone even showed us how we can save money by bundling home and auto with progressive.
7:32 am
progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. but we can protect your home and auto. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase.
7:33 am
7:34 am
7:35 am
consider the fact that in 2008 about 8% of republican voters voted for obama. that led to a historic result for him. at this point up to 12% in some polls of republican voters are skeptical of the president, disapprove of the president. that's a big block if that translates into votes in a general election. in a post-trump world i think we could do a lot together, republicans and democrats working on issues where we gray. >> j.w.verret is a live long republican who worked on the mccain and romney presidential campaigns and trump's transition team, but now he's calling for trump's impeachment and looking for a democrat to vote for in 2020. verret wrote in week in the atlantic, swing voters like she
7:36 am
could help democrats win in 2020 but the candidates have to respect our ideas to gain our votes. as a crowded democratic field cons freights on mobilizing the base should they also consider anti-trump republicans. joining knee no you is jennifer rubin, michael steele former rnc chairman and the most of "the man of steele podcast" jason johnson of the and e.j. dionne author of "one nation after trump." we book ended the "washington post"ees. let me start with you, jennifer, we were just having this conversation. j.w.verret is essentially saying that he wants to vote against donald trump but he also likes what mitch mcconnell is doing, he writes the following, i do not see any inconsistency between my support both of mcconnell and his republican caucus in the senate and of a moderate democrat such as vice president joe biden for president in 2020. is that not essentially saying i still want all the trump policies and all the far right
7:37 am
trump judges and all the an gagss of roe v. wade, i want all of that, give me that and then i will vote for a democrat. is that not something democrats should reject? >> i think they should reject it. it's not the way to win over people like me who have been disaffected from the republican. if you're supporting mitch mcconnell you're supporting obstruction, lying, a lot of behavior that is unacceptable in public life. i don't think it is necessary more advisable and i speak as someone who used to be a republican for the draths to become mini republicans. i think what they need to do is find those candidates, the candidates who win, the candidates who appeal to their pace and have a boarder appeal beyond the party. that's what barack obama did, that's what bill clinton did and that's what those women did in the suburbs who won overwhelmingly who delivered the house. these were women, some women of color, some white women in the suburbs, in the urban areas
7:38 am
across the board but many were not far left, they were center left and they were enormously successful in getting people like me. >> let's go to the chairman. let's just magically -- >> man of steele. >> slightly different view on this. >> democrats the base of the democratic party is scared and for good reason. >> they should be. >> people are being deported, we have had six children dying in u.s. custody, women's rights to choice are basically now they greatest risk they've been at least in my lifetime. so the idea for a lot of democrats that the way to go is to find a candidate who appeals to republicans feels like throwing their own base under the bus. >> because republicans vote, too. as the lead in piece stipulated, when you've got 12% of a voting block that's available to get in what will likely be a very close and contested race, that could make the difference. so the question then becomes how do you then appeal to a pro life
7:39 am
republican? do you do as the chairman of the democratic party did at the beginning of his tenure and say, we don't want them in the party? well, then you've just cut off 50% of the conversation. doesn't mean that you have to take on all of those policies and agree with all of those positions, but some degree of acknowledgment around some core issues is a way to begin to bring those voters in. when i go back and look at what i did in 2009 and 2010 in an environment where the president of the democratic party with, you know, country, but obviously a democrat, 60% plus approval, a party on the ropes as we were, how do i then go out and have a conversation to get center right democrats to begin to look at a party that they had rejected, very much like my friend here has, said, no, i don't want -- i don't like what you're selling. you have to go to where they are and begin to speak a little bit of that language in order to begin to open up that possibility to get those votes because in a close race it matters. you saw the success this past november with center left democrats, largely women,
7:40 am
winning in -- they weren't aoc democrats. >> she won and beat a center left democrat. >> she d but don't take that and take that that's the entire party or that's that entire class or that's where the democratic party is. i don't think it is. i think the party is center left in the main and the question is how do you then bring a center right leaning republican or independent voter to that space. >> let's get jason seas take on this. i suspect you have a different take. >> this is the political scientist. this is math. hillary clinton was one of the most loathed democratic nominees in history and won by 3 million in the popular vote and lots of people didn't like her. lots of centrist democrats didn't like her and she won by 3 million. if you look at what happened 2018, you had lots of democrats running on medicare for all, uning on impeachment. the democratic party doesn't need republicans right now in order to win in 2020 they just need someone who is not going to alienate people, somebody who
7:41 am
has a good message. i will also say this, it doesn't matter how a popular person is or what the numbers are if they don't engage in voter protection. they've already got the numbers there. they can already win. you look at the states where hillary clinton lost, the michigans, wisconsins, pennsylvanias, all of those places just elected democratic governor, you are already coming in with a lead. it's not that complicated. they literally will probably screw this up because they will fail to recognize that all you have to do is project voters. >> let's let e.j. weigh in. >> i want to agree totally on voter protection. that's going to be vital. i loath the anti-trump republicans, god bless every single one of them because their witness is very important, however, when you look at the house races, 6% of people who call themselves republican voted democratic in house races. now, maybe there are some really close districts where they mattered, but it was only 6%. most of the anti-trump republicans are writers and commentators whom we all know,
7:42 am
however, every -- >> they are probably all on this show. >> right. exactly. >> however, and i think my political scientist colleague will agree with me, every election is about both mobilization and conversion and you've got to figure out in a given election which matters. now, if you ask me i think mobilization will matter more than conversion, however, conversion is still important if you're going to carry swing states. not just pennsylvania, wisconsin, and michigan, but also georgia and florida and arizona. let me just say last quick point, there are trump voters who were anti-clinton who were not trumpists. sherrod brown got 12% of trump voters, debbie stabenow got a share, bob casey got 12%, tammy baldwin got 14% of trump voters. there are these voters who are not satisfied with trump, they are working people who will
7:43 am
respond to the same arguments you're going to make to the democratic base, which is trump hasn't delivered for us, i'm -- thank you next, if i can quota reena grande. >> of course you can. here is the thing, those are all incumben incumbents, people that those voters were familiar with. when you are talking about running a nonincumbent, the democrat will be the nonincumbent, i have not seen evidence that very many -- with all due respect with my friends here who have taken a stand dense donald trump. this is a farmer who leads the african-american farmers and was talking about his fellow farmers who were not african-american. take a listen. >> we need tear trade. all i want is a decent price, a fair price for the commodity that is grown. why these farmers are still supporting the president, i don't know. >> i mean, you go out, you hear these interviews with the
7:44 am
farmers saying my soybean crop isn't elg is, my life is being ruined but i'm still supporting trump. >> a few things. first of all, with due respect to my friend dr. johnson, the 40 seats that flipped not a single one was a bernie person. these were the moderate democrats. aoc won a deep blue state. >> bernie is an independent. >> when you are talking about centrist democrats those were the 40 seats that flipped. not a single one of them were endorsed by the aoc bernie kind of group. those people are vital for the party. this issue about whether they are drawing republicans or not, i think a lot of people stopped calling themselves republicans. >> that's changed. >> if someone had asked she are you a republican i would say, no, but i have voted republican for forever until donald trump. >> isn't that the case that fewer people are calling themselves republicans. >> exactly. when someone saying i'm an independent, you are a republican who is embarrassed. and i also think these switches happen every year.
7:45 am
you have 8 to 10 percent of the opposing party that always votes for the winner. have a strong message and you will win. >> sanders is an independent but running for the democratic nomination. please stay out of my mentions. >> potato/potato. >> jennifer rubin, michael steele, thank you. jason and e.j. are back in the next hour. next, the treasury department slams the brakes on the tubman 20. one of president barack obama's closest advisers valerie jarrett will be with me to discuss the fallout next. jarrett will be with me to discuss the fallout next ♪ ♪ (both) exhausted. but finally being able to make that volunteer trip happen was... awesome. awesome. you have to scrub. what do they... they use for washing. ♪ ♪ let's do it every year. we'll do it every year. i thought you'd say that - let's do it. ♪ ♪ see how investing with a j.p. morgan advisor can help you.
7:46 am
visit your local chase branch. what's going on? it's the 3pm slump. should have had a p3. oh yeah. should have had a p3. need energy? get p3. with a mix of meat, cheese and nuts. car vending machines and buying a car 100% online.vented now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it.
7:47 am
so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana. oh! oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk
7:48 am
of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪
7:49 am
ask your healthcare provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. right now i am focused on the security features of the u.s. currency, which is the reserve currency. >> reclaiming my time. so does that mean you have no intention of executing the redesign as planned by your predecessor? >> my position is that i am focused on my responsibility to deal with the security features and a decision -- >> you have addressed that. and what about imagery? what about the representation? >> again, it's not a decision that is likely to come until way past my term, even if i serve the second term for the president. the trump administration has decided to honor african-americans and the 100th
7:50 am
anniversary of women's suffrage by not honoring them at all. treasury secretary steven mnuchin announced on wednesday a redesign of the $20 bill which was authorized by president obama's treasury secretary and slated was slated to be revealed next year will be delayed until 2028. it would have been the image of harriet tubman. mnuchin's explanation for the delay? the treasury needs more time to address, feiting issues. or is it possible mnuchin is too afraid of denominating andrew jackson to the back of the bill. joining me now valerie jarrett, author of finding my voice, my journey to the west wing and the path forward. valerie, always great to see you. even in these circumstances. >> absolutely as we celebrate memorial day and all those who sacrificed for our country. >> and harriet tubman was also a
7:51 am
civil war hero. >> absolutely. >> the idea of not honoring her in this way when this was already sanctioned by the obama treasury secretary, what do you make of it? >> it is insulting not just to african-americans and women, but to anyone in our country who wants to celebrate an american hi hero. and the fact that they use the excuse that it has to be not counterfeited and it takes eight years doesn't make sense. >> are we such low tech? >> so you have to ask yourself why. but it is terribly insulting and i'm delighted to see so many people raising their voices in objection. >> is it unfair to speculate that donald trump's affinity for andrew jackson -- he has previously said according to a book that why should i put that face of harriet tubman on the $20 bill. this is maybe his attitude toward her, to african-americans, toward women?
7:52 am
>> i don't know what the motivation is. but if the president wanted to happen, it would happen. >> let's just play him talking about andrew jackson, this is back in 2017. >> had andrew jackson been a little bit later, you wouldn't have had the civil war. he was a very tough person. but he had a big heart and he was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the civil war. he said there's no reason for this. >> he has also -- and congresswoman presley made this point too that he's also said put harriet tubman on the $2 bill. he's elevated andrew jackson and disparaged harriet tubman before. >> absolutely. and when he said he was angry or whatever, i don't even understand what all that is. it is and i h but the country supports this and she is a wonderful hero. so why not do it.
7:53 am
>> what do you make of the stamps being made? >> i saw those. those are great. they should. >> and i want to talk about your book as well. it is called finding my voice, my journey to the west wing and the path forward. there was so much hope attached to the obama era. in part because of people like you. the elevation of an african-american him would, you come out of chicago and you are elevated to this influential position. does it feel now like that was almost a moment that floated into our lives but wasn't real? >> no, no, it feels very real. first of all, i was there eight years. so it was absolutely real. and we got an awful lot done in eight years. and look, our democracy is always challenging. we zig and zag and part of the roenz w reason why i wanted to write the book, i used to be shy and i didn't speak up for myself and i think we need more people finding their voices. when 43% of the country doesn't vote in an election, that they
7:54 am
don't think their voices matter, bad things happen. so part of what i'm trying to do is help people appreciate what they could do if they speak up, if they get involved. >> and women in particular do that, women of color, record numbers of women ran for office in 2018. as you are talking particularly to where i am as you are talking about this book, what are people saying is their core motivation for now becoming active citizens? >> worried about our rights. worried about our right to choose, worried about being disenfranchised, worried about not having equal pay and an opportunity for economic empowerment. worried about their health care. i mean, i hear women all over the country as i have been traveling on this book tour who are very angry and upset and motivated to get engaged and they are out there working on it. i just came back from texas, had a meeting with the democratic party down there. a fundraiser. the room was full of women engaged. >> and do you think there is a possibility that what you are
7:55 am
writing about here, what you are talking about as we you go on the road promoting this book might mean that democrats are ready to have a woman nominee for president again? >> i think we're certainly ready for about it and i think the question will be in this field of an embarrassment of riches, who emerges. >> do you have a favorite? >> i'm holding myself back a little bit because i want to see how they did on the campaign trail. just remember, this time when president obama was running, he was down by like 30 points. hillary clinton was the inevitable nominee. so i want to see if do they earn the respect and trust, do i feel confident that i want to put my life and the lives of my family in their hands, that they will execute on the values that i hold most dear. so let's see how it unfolds. it is an exciting time. but i'm confident that our party will turn out and vote and that we will galvanize behind whoever the nominee is. >> and there is a debate among the 447 democrats running -- it is actually 24. >> i think it is in and
7:56 am
counting. >> a football team. so i think a wave of nostalgia has washed across our audience because a lot of people are recalling the obama years of year he is of great dignity and hope. >> we can have it again. >> and you were a huge part of that. >> thank you. >> and the book, here it is, finding my voice, my journey to the west wing and the path forward. important read in this time. thank you. ime. thank you. ♪ corey is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+ / her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole.
7:57 am
patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. corey calls it her new normal because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc. has been excellent.
7:58 am
they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. alright, let's get going! ♪ and you want to make sure to aim it. i'm aiming it. ohhhhhhh! i ordered it for everyone. [laughing] (dad vo) we got the biggest subaru to help bring our family together. i'm just resting my eyes. (dad vo) even though we're generations apart. what a day. i just love those kids. (avo) presenting the all-new three-row subaru ascent. wave to grandma, everybody. (avo) love is now bigger than ever.
7:59 am
8:00 am
the government is now trying tos a certificate this brand new right to criminally prosecute people for publishing secret stuff. all sorts of different entities publish secret stuff all the time. what this is it is now a novel legal effort to punch a huge hole in the first amendment by labeling it spying, labeling it criminal espionage to publish secret stuff. in a country where we have a long proud journalistic history of journalistic entities publishing secret stuff. >> welcome back to "a.m. joy." quick moment of host privilege. anyone who has followed me over the years knows that i am not a fan of julian assange. i do not view the pugnacious australian as a journalist. rather, i view assange as an anti american anarchist, a man who hid from rape allegations
8:01 am
from two women which he denied by holing up in the he can with a toecuadorian for years and wh reportedly actively worked to subvert the american election by distributing materials stolen by russian intelligence to hurt hillary clinton's campaign. i always opposed what then chelsea manning did back in 2010, using her privileged access to classified material to download that material in bulk and send to wikileaks. i opposed that despite the fact that some of what manning found revealed outrages by the american military in a war i vehemently opposed. and yet i find myself in a very strange position of being equally opposed to the latest addition to the indictment of assange by the trump administration which had already indicted him on computer intrusion for allegedly helping manning to break into government
8:02 am
computers, to beat computer passwords and steal classified material. the trump justice department has now added to that indictment and now going after assange for publishing that material. and that is not just a danger to assange's freedom, it is a direct danger to every single actual journalist and journalistic outlet. the question is pretty simple. will donald trump's fixer bill cram b barr eventually please the boss? joining me now joyce vance, walter dellinger, and david corn. i have both journalists here at the table, both are in the position of often saying things the administration doesn't like. and it is pretty iconic that --
8:03 am
i mean look, i take no quarter at being very anti-julian assange. but it feels dangerous. >> just like you don't have to like jim comey and what he did in 2016 to find it outrageous that donald trump said this week that he could be charged with tree sotreason, you don't have find it outrageous that the 17 new charges being put against assange which is absurd, here is how they are repaid, we can put the irony to one side. but this is deeply dangerous. people are saying on twitter he is not adjourn allist, not the same thing. it is not about who the individual is, it is about the practice. the idea that youi criminalize getting sources in the government, obtaining that information without getting the government's before hand.
8:04 am
to criminalize that activity is the reason that you have the aclu, editorial boards all coming out and saying look, this is not about assange. >> and having william barr as the guy with the power to do it. and this is what the aclu said about the new charges. they said this is an extraordinary escalation of the attack on journalism. it establishes a dangerous precedent that can be used to target all news organizations that hold the government accountable by publishing its secrets. that is a mainstay of political journal aism. that is now in the spotlight of william barr. >> i had a report erd er in my borough and he said damn, this is what we do. when they first indicted assange
8:05 am
and said that they were getting him because he conspired with chelsea manning to hack a code on the government controlled computer system, i felt like okay people will argue about whether this is a slippery slope, but it seemed to be that is something that journalists don't do. i tell my reporters all the time that if you are dealing with someone in this situation, you cannot ask them to do anything illegal, you cannot suggest it, you cannot engage in it. that is a pretty bright line that journalists don't cross. he crossed that. maybe we can get away with just boxing him in that way. but the expansion of the some seedi sxr seedi superseding indictment put everybody on the line. and i think julian assange is one of the people responsible for electing donald trump. >> he said he wanted to. >> he released the documents in october, the john podesta emails -- >> this is nothing about war
8:06 am
crimes in iraq. >> yes, he helped give us donald trump who is now declaring the press of enemy of the people, putting targets on all our backs. and now going after julian as advantage in a way that set the table and everybody who works at nbc news, you know, in jeopardy. it is a terrible situation. it is not -- and i guess it is completely predictable. >> joyce, let me go to you. some of the prosecutors disagreed with this decision to charge assange under the espionage act. two involved in the case against wikileaks founder argued against the justice department's decision to accuse him of violating the espionage act because of fear that such charges pose serious risks for first protectiamendment protect other concerns. and in the case of what wikileaks did in the 2016 election, you had wikileaks directly contacting and in
8:07 am
contact with a foreign intelligence service. that is not what this is about. this is about the more classic kind of what journalists obtain from, you know, whistleblowers often which is essentially they discovered real outrages being committed by the american military in iraq. these things were part of this dum dump of documents that chelsea manning gave to wikileaks. that is what they are prosecu prosecuting him for publishing. that is what journalistic future outfits publish all the time. what do you make that this was done over some prosecutors in the bureau? >> i think that you start in the right place which is to clarify this does not involve anything that happened in the 2016 election. in fact the u.s. government will waive its ability to ever prosecute julian assange for charges related to that entire wikileaks event because once they file the extradition
8:08 am
request, they can't amend or add additional changes. so that will never be a part of this prosecution. and what we have here now is old facts. these are are the same series of factsing involving julian assange that were examined while eric holder was the attorney general, that prosecutors passed on at that time, both because they were concerned about the first amendment implications and i know you remember that the press was not a huge fan of the obama administration in this regard. so it is not like they were soft in this area. the facts weren't viewed as sufficient to warrant an indictment back then. nothing has changed. and that is why you see career people objecting. this case didn't get any better in the intervening four years. obviously there is a different reason that it was indicted last week. >> and walter, chelsea manning was prosecuted as the person who obtained the information in this case. and so people disagreed -- can disagree back and forth whether that was properly done. president obama did wind up
8:09 am
commuting the sentence because of that. but now what you're seeing, the trump administration ignoring and really in a sense willfully ignoring assange and wikileaks' participation in activities that got donald trump elected and going back, reaching back a decade to go after him for publishing information that had nothing to do with him working with a foreign intelligence service. >> you know, the target -- excuse me. sunday morning. the target of this indictment is not julian assange. the target of this indictment are all the reporters that engage in national security reporting. this indictment jumps over a line thatfore had been pretty well established, governments can keep its secrets secret by publishing leakers. but it can't go after the press or those who get this
8:10 am
information and then choose to disseminate it publicly and make it available to the people. and this indictment really jumps over that line. there are some activities that i think journalists could be prohibited from doing. for example, if the leaker is breaking in to a building, the journalist can't drive the getaway car and provide the lookout. they then become a participant and co-conspirator. the theory of this indictment is that merely by encouraging chelsea manning to obtain classified information and pass it on, which is what good reporters do all the time, they try to get information out of you, that that makes in this case assange and every journalist as has been noted this morning reads their own name in that, makes them a party to this. and that i think is part of the larger pattern where donald trump is using the powers of the presidency to go after both the
8:11 am
press and the system of justice, the two pillars we have that are supposed to keep the rule of law in check. >> and i want to come back to the table on this because this is happening in the context of donald trump's tv lawyer heading off of to ukraine and for a while trying to dig up dirt. a lot of people believing that william barr had given the green light to more activity with foreign governments intervening in the election. and you assume journalists are trying to find that out. >> and big picture is even bigger than you just depicted. think about what the other big you news from bill barr this week. he now has this unlimited power to investigate the investigators. the origins of the trump/russia investigation. really there is no mystery here. they are creating something completely out of whole cloth. so think about it, they don't want anybody in government thinking about investigating something trump does. who in the fbi or justice department would come up with any public corruption case now
8:12 am
knowing if they do, they are in the line of fire for doing their job and they don't want journalists, whether at the intercept, nbc, mother jones to protect from any inside our outside investigation. >> and to get even bigger, this is a war on leakers as well. leakers have a role to play in a democracy. and david mentioned a slippery slope. barack obama used the espionage act more than any previous presidents combined. on leakers. and he had ten process could you goes in the space of eight years. trump is on course to match that in two years. this is what happens when even presidents you like do things that they shouldn't do because it opens the door to the next person. do you want to -- there are so many powers that they have
8:13 am
institutional lized which someone like trump abuses. >> and this is why so much of us were very aware of the patriot act. when you give the institution of the presidency power, they rarely give it back. the only institution in our government that seems to give back power is congress. and i still don't understand that. the presidencies suck them up and they don't give them back. joyce, walter, david, thank you very much. up next, your moment of maxine. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
8:14 am
applebee's new loaded fajitas. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient applebee's new loaded fajitas. originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown
8:15 am
to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
8:16 am
at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
8:17 am
he knew the one court decision was getting into a territory he did not want touched and they did not report the mueller investigation to go into the president's personal finances. so it was a setback for him and he must have known that deutsche bank decision would be consistent. >> while calls for impeachment have grown louder, members of the house leadership have thus far favored fighting donald trump in court especially after rulings allowing access to his banking records with deutsche bank and capital one. but now trump's lawyers say they have reached an agreement with congressional leaders to delay handing over those bank records. so what happens now? joining me now maxine waters.
8:18 am
congresswoman, happy sunday. thanks so much for joining me. >> thank you, delighted to be here with you. >> so can we talk about this deal that has been made to essentially delay the handover of the records of deutsche bank and others? is your committee a party to that deal? >> that is being negotiated. and simply because the judge ramos for example ruled on the preliminary injunction, did not rule on the merits of the case. and we believe that if in fact the trump lawyers are asking for, you know, time, that we should show that we are willing to be cooperative. we think that it works in our favor. and so it does not mean that the subpoenas will not be honored. it just simply means that there is a delay that the subpoenas have to be responded to. >> and we know that the trump family has appealed the rulings that are allowing banks including doichl bank eutsche b
8:19 am
over records. eventually you believe that you will obtain the records and that they will be made available to the public? >> oh, i think so. like i said, judge ramos was pretty clear about what he said that he believes that we have a right to them. again, he didn't rule on the merits of the case, but he certainly ruled on the preliminary injunction so that he determined that we have a right to have that information. and so the appeal that has been filed by the trump people just, you know, carries it out a little bit longer and they have to get ready with the briefings and once the briefings are decided, the time for the oral arguments to be made in the court will probably end up around the latter part of july. >> and the other question is whether or not any of this might end up during the heat of the election. there is a piece that talks about the fact that the irs could be forced to release trump's tax returns because ultimately they will lose that
8:20 am
case most believe. supreme court could also be a dead end if the case doesn't present new legal issues. and i realize that is house ways and means, different committee than your. but could it be that the delays wind up putting both the tax returns and the bank records out right in the heat of the 2020 election? >> well, we absolutely cannot determine the absolute court calendar. but it is possible that for example once the appeals case has been ruled on, that there could be a request to have the case heard what they call unblocked or it could go to the supreme court. and the supreme court could decide to hear the case or not hear the case. the whole court i guess could end up hearing the case. and we just don't know exactly what that timing would be. but it could stretch out longer than any of us would like to stretch out. >> let's talk about -- let's
8:21 am
move to impeachment. you have been forward leaning on the issue of impeaching donald trump for a long time. the democratic leadership seems to be very reluctant. i want to play i what jyou what nadler said on thursday. take a listen. >> if you are in court seeking to enforce subpoenas, you have better odds in court if you can say this is part of your impeachment inquiry rather than just part of your oversight. that rationale is much weaker now since those two court decisions came down. >> meaning the courts are going your way anyway. >> or they seem to be. >> does the fact that courts so far are are ruling in favor of congress lessen in your mind the need for an impeachment requirery? >> no, i don't think so. i think that we should continue down the path of exercising our responsibility for oversight and investigation. and at the same time, there is a
8:22 am
growing unrest in the democratic caucus where there are some members who say simply let's do an inquiry, a resolution of inquiry, which would give us the opportunity to have a decision made going through our committees about whether or not there is room for an impeachment. so i don't think that you conclude that somehow because we have gotten these two court decisions that there is no need to think about impeachment. and i don't think that our members will allow that decision to just go away. i think that there still will be a growing number who want to do at least an inquiry. >> and we had ro khanna on this morning and he made the argument this morning about launching into an impeachment inquiry on the basis of needing to have more information and bring the public along. let me let you listen. >> there is not a silver bullet or new evidence that we're talking about. what we're talking about is building the public case. i get that we may not convince
8:23 am
other republican colleagues, but there is a difference between having a 448 page written report that many americans still haven't read in detail and having mueller come and testify on live tv, having don mcgahn testify. if the court says you need to do x and they exhaust their appeals and the court -- they violate the court order, i think you have no other choice. >> what do you make of that argument, that essentially congress should continue holding hearings, should try to obtain public testimony and try to build a public consensus that impeachment should happen and then only if the trump administration violates court orders then move to impeachment? >> well, i think that that kind of conclusion does not answer the question about whether or not you are really performing the public. i think an inquiry resolution gives you the opportunity to figure out whether or not there
8:24 am
should be impeachment because you do have the authorization for investigation which at least is more information. and that too informs the public. so i don't think that it is an either/or. i think that we should continue with our investigations. if an inquiry is introduced, that should go forward. and we will determine in the final analysis whether or not this president should be impeached. i don't take an either/or on that. >> what did you make of robert mueller's apparent reluctance to testify publicly? >> well, i'm disappointed. i'm disappointed for a number of reasons. we put a lot of faith and confidence in mueller. and i think that he did a pretty decent job. i believe that there is enough information to make a determination about collusion. he did not conclude that in the report. he did basically identify that
8:25 am
there was obstruction of justice in so many ways. and so i wish that he had just decided in that report that there needed to be an indictment. okay, he did not do that. and he seemed unhappy when barr came out and misrepresented his report. however, now he has an opportunity to come out and say what he really meant and talk about why he thinks barr misrepresented his report. and he doesn't want to do that. i don't get it. i think that he should come out and defend his work. i think that it should be public. and i don't buy this business about him not wanting to do it, it must be done in private. i think that he should step up to the plate and if he really believes in his work, he should come out and say so. >> all right. congresswoman maxine waters, thank you very much. appreciate your time. >> you're welcome. and coming up, the impeachment debate heats up the sunday shows. shows
8:26 am
featuring three new dishes that are planked-to-perfection. feast on new cedar-plank lobster & shrimp. or new colossal shrimp & salmon with a citrusy drizzle. tender, smoky, and together on one plank... ...but not for long- so hurry in! when crabe stronger...strong, with new nicorette coated ice mint. layered with flavor... it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge. for an amazing taste... ...that outlasts your craving. new nicorette ice mint. you get the freedom of what a 7-day return policy. this isn't some dealership test drive around the block. it's better. this is seven days to put your carvana car to the test and see if it fits your life. load it up with a week's worth of groceries. take the kiddos out for ice cream. check that it has enough wiggle room in your garage. you get the time to make sure you love it. and on the 6th day, we'll reach out
8:27 am
and make sure everything's amazing. if so... excellent. if not, swap it out for another or return it for a refund. it's that simple. because at carvana, your car happiness is what makes us happy.
8:28 am
8:29 am
on the eve memorial day, a day of remembering service members killed while serving their country, a note about the current president and his plans for america's armed forces. donald trump who used his bone
8:30 am
spurs excuse to avoid service in the military during vietnam, whose family has no history of serving the military, is dialing up the number of soldiers in the middle east. on friday he announced that the u.s. is sending 1500 troops to the middle east to respond to what the administration claims are credible threats from iran. it is unclear where these troops are going. all we know they are not going to iraq or syria. the news comes weeks after the banni banging the iran war drum. so this is in addition to the thousands already in iraq, syria and afghanistan. that is while donald trump is also consider pardoning military members convicted of war crimes in iraq. an action that military experts say would put our troops serving in the region in more danger. sobering news as we prepare to mark a somber date of remembrance for america's military. you try hard,
8:31 am
you eat right... mostly. you make time... when you can. but sometimes life gets in the way, and that stubborn fat just won't go away. coolsculpting takes you further. a non-surgical treatment that targets, freezes, and eliminates treated fat cells, for good. discuss coolsculpting with your doctor. some common side-effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. don't imagine results, see them. coolsculpting, take yourself further. shaving has been difficult for me. i have very sensitive skin, and i get ingrowing hairs.
8:32 am
so it's a daunting task. oh i love it. it's a great razor. it has that 'fence' in the middle. it gives a nice smooth shave. just stopping that irritation... that burn that i get is really life changing. has four levels of defenseremium gasoagainst gunk, wear, corrosion and friction. that helps keep your engine running like new. it's fuel for thought. what do all these people have in common, limu?oug [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need!
8:33 am
[ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ onmillionth order.r. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order? ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪ opportunity. what we deliver by delivering.
8:34 am
this is not about the 2020 election. this is about doing what is right now for our country. this is going to be a precedent that we set when we don't hold this president accountability to the united states constitution. >> why do you think you can't convince a majority of house democrats that it is time to impeach him? >> no, i think it is moving towards that. itle dema will demand it. and i think the american people understand that we can't come our job if the president thinks
8:35 am
he is above the law. >> congress ma'am tawoman rashi sounding pretty confident on impeachment. joining me now, jeremy johnson, and all are back with me. i want to play for you ro khanna who was on with me this morning and he talked about impeachment and he said the courts are going to be sort of the instigator of it. let's listen. >> yes, the democrats are acting against this president, but he is acting too and he is escalating not ratcheting down. >> and that is why we have to have some confidence in the courts. we've won two court decisions. >> what if he doesn't listen? >> then i think you had have a full constitutional crisis. and i think if there a willful defiance of a court order, i think that would be the red line where people would say this is
8:36 am
enough. but i don't think that we have gone there yet. >> so we now have a red line. i feel like we've gotten somewhere, we have a red line. the red line is the democrats will keep going to court, trying to demand that people answer their subpoenas when donald trump loses one of those court cases and then defies it, then we have the triggering mechanism for impeachment. >> the red line was two years ago and i wish that the rest of the democratic party would take note. the last two court rulings were against donald trump, but look at the judges who were deciding in these courts. donald trump is picking his own judge and jury right now. so to say that we'll put all our faith in the courts just like we were going to put all our faith in the mueller report, how many times does the system have to fail before the people who work in the system do something? >> there is also a notion that ro khanna believes that the public needs to basically have a
8:37 am
consensus for impeachment before democrats can do that. >> that is nonsense. he is 100% wrong. that is not what happened in the nixon period. and you are supposed to lead, not just fofollow. donald trump was asked to do traitors deserve execution. and he named then. jim comey and many others. so now the president is speculating about killing his opponents via execution. the red line was crossed long ago. and this is not just about russia. not just about mueller. he does impeachable things every single week. >> and one of them i think, whether or not people believe this is impeachable or not, we've crossed a rubicon when we have an attorney general who doesn't say that is absurd that you think it is spying to investigate whether a foreign power is intervening in our
8:38 am
election. he says yeah, that was fine. and now he is empowered essentially according to "washington post" piece by a very sober journalist, he could out the kremlin source who gave up the ghost on russian intrusion. he could out that source. and i'm quite sure vladimir putin wants the name of that source and donald trump loves to do what vladimir putin wants. >> trump has basically like made bill barr his hand. like go do whatever it is my commands are. and this is what is insane to me. i don't care if you are red shoes, red bottom, red knows, red light, i don't care. the fact of the matter is when the president is intimidating witnesses, threatening the your additioner a judiciary and the press, there is no explanation for not going through impeachment other than cau cowards. nancy pelosi is operating on this miystical math that nobody else seems to understand.
8:39 am
>> the democrats seem to be operating on the idea that the 2018 election was about health care and not about reining in donald trump and that they therefore want to get off of the topic of donald trump and back on to the issue of health care and that that is what they would rather do than impeachment. is their math to back up the idea that that is what motivated people to vote in 2018? >> that must have new math because i've never heard of that. it was not health care alone. it is never one thing. you had beto o'rourke ran on impeachment and he got 47%, 48% in texas. there are plenty of americans -- republicans who voted for democrats because they wanted to rein in trump. >> and let me play lindsey graham for you. the other challenge here is this what democrats are also saying, if no republicans will vote to convict, that you can't impeach because it is a waste of time, that is the other argument, and both of there -- here is lindsey graham. is he on fox news sunday, their favorite channel, sounding like
8:40 am
donald trump. here he is. >> the president gave him $11.4 documents to mueller. everybody was allowed to test fine. i never claimed executive privilege. mueller is the final word on this for me. so if clinton had stiffed ken starr, that is different. what nadler is doing is trying to destroy the president and his family. if i were the president, i'd fight back against this political revenge coming out of the house. mueller was the man of the law. mueller was an independent voice that we all trusted to be fair. i don't trust house democrats to be fair. >> can i just stipulate that that lindsey graham was one of the house impeachment managers who when we trusted him to be fair went after bill clinton for trying to remove him for having a sexual affair. >> and famously said you don't have to be accused of a crime. that was his standard then, not now. this idea that you have to be -- you won't get convicted in the
8:41 am
senate, first of all, that is not the point of impeachment. the point of impeachment is that the house of representatives to use the strongest tool that they have to hold a lawless president to account. and if the senate votes against it, let them go up against it in 2020, let them run on that record. and by the way, nancy pelosi can't have her cake and eat it -- can't say we want to talk about health care because she also says this president is unstable, we have problems. and what is her solution? his family and colleagues should stage an intervention. so she wants mike pence and melania trump to save the republic, not house democrats. >> and i think the challenge for the democrats is that speaker pelosi herself said donald trump is engaged in a coverup. so what is the remedy? >> a stern letter. >> that's right. that they will stay in court, stay the course, that they are winning court cases and they will do that and move on to doing an infrastructure bill with donald trump. >> yeah, so this will be a huge issue because when we talked
8:42 am
about pelosi before when she was running for speaker, you had a new sinsurgence of young people pressly was one that said i will vote for but you can't lead. how many times have we said we are tired of thoughts and prayers. when nancy pelosi said i wish we could pray for the president of the united states, no, we prayed and god sent us a my diverse congress to handle this dude in the white house and that is not happening. and the voters -- perception matters. and yes, there are innumerable investigations happening, but right now the trump administration is winning the message game. they look like they are knocking around these democrats like apollo creed. >> and let's go back to the math again. because there are -- we talked earlier in the show about some democrats and some thought leaders saying democrats need to start courting republicans, find never trump republicans and pull the three of them over. >> three? >> two. they were both on the show this
8:43 am
morning. so pull them over. there is this ground swell of that voter that is out there. and then there is the thought that what democrats need to do is to energize the obama base, the die investigativerse base, surged in 2018. i wonder if that second group of people will be motivated to give the democrats more power if they don't seem to be using the power they have already got. >> the greatest frustration that the base tends to have is when they put people in power who don't use the power. and i will give you an even more important piece of math. six. six children. dead in custody in the united states. under this administration. if you cannot bring yourself to impeach this immoral administration when something like that is happening with our tax money every single month, you should be ady indicauld abd. when everybody was fighting nancy pelosi and trying to keep her from becoming speaker, they were afraid that she wouldn't go far enough. she is now demonstrating that
8:44 am
she can't lead this coalition who are saying use the powers and resources at our dgs possis. it is her job to keep this president in check. >> and john capehart and others are arguing that her job is also to hold the house and that holding the house means hold willing t the midwest, holding the seats that flipped from republican to democrat in 2018. to hold those voters who might be against impeachment. >> it is memorial day weekend. in spades you say play to win. and she needs to play to win. this is not about politics. this is about the sanctity of our country. and we are a young democracy. and our democracy has never been tested like this before. right now we are seeing what is happening when you elect a white supremacist to the highest office of the land. we're seeing in our modern history, right? and for everybody said the civil
8:45 am
rights movement -- this is the time. what are you doing? >> and by the way one of those was andrew johnson and he defied the results of the civil war. >> and he was impeached. and what is interesting, he is trying to goad us to peechl impeachment? that is absurd. he wants to join bill clinton and andrew johnson? that is absurd. >> and also that he has played some kind of tricky game -- >> like calling aides to testify that he was not angry in a room. >> yeah. thank you very much. we'll b be back. up next, who won the week? y. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye.
8:46 am
when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix. introducing miracle-gro's next big thing: performance organics. this new organic collection of soil and plant food is what you've always wanted. no compromise. twice the results. guaranteed. miracle-gro performance organics.
8:47 am
8:48 am
you get the freedom of what a 7-day return policy. this isn't some dealership test drive around the block. it's better. this is seven days to put your carvana car to the test and see if it fits your life. load it up with a week's worth of groceries. take the kiddos out for ice cream. check that it has enough wiggle room in your garage. you get the time to make sure you love it. and on the 6th day, we'll reach out and make sure everything's amazing. if so... excellent. if not, swap it out for another or return it for a refund. it's that simple. because at carvana, your car happiness is what makes us happy. alright, let's get going! and you want to make sure to aim it. i'm aiming it. ohhhhhhh! i ordered it for everyone. [laughing]
8:49 am
(dad vo) we got the biggest subaru to help bring our family together. i'm just resting my eyes. (dad vo) even though we're generations apart. what a day. i just love those kids. (avo) presenting the all-new three-row subaru ascent. wave to grandma, everybody. (avo) love is now bigger than ever. now it is time to ask my panel the question that is on your mind for six whole days. until sunday. who won the week? first i'll do it in reverse, differently this time. i'm first going to tell you who i think won the week and then i'll ask you to see if you can beat it. katie porter, really good at
8:50 am
questioning, had ben carson in front of her and here is what happened with that. >> do you know what an reo is? >> an oreo? >> no, not an oreo. reo. reo. >> real estate. >> what's the o stand for. . >> o organization. >> real estate organization. >> ben carson stated that he has learned the difference between an reo and an oreo organization. eventually the picture will come up. essentially ben carson who is the head of the department of housing and urban development who is supposed to know what an reo is did not. he later learned that an reo and an oreo are two different things. he thinks that helps him. he posed with an oreo and thinks
8:51 am
it helps him in his pr situation. i am not convinced anybody can beat that, so i wanted to set the bar real high, and then i want you try to leap over that bar. >> i am attempting a leap, because who i think won the week, not only ben carson but also mnuchin. and that is iona presley. iona presley took out the two most incompetent. the only one she didn't take out was betsy devos. she basically got mnuchin to say, i hate black people, you're not getting me to change in 2020. he is not only incompetent, he is not only basically asleep doing his job, but he's also a sensitive fool. >> my hometown fellow t.i. won the week. he was on capitol hill this week advocating for investment in the black community. this is part of the opportunity
8:52 am
zones that correspotim scott an booker teamed up on. t.i. kind of picked up this mantel and said, look, we all need to be investing in the lower income communities, the black communities. you can see him with the avengers. he's a comic book guy. >> who won your week? >> i don't think anybody agrees with me because i think nancy pelosi won the week. i think nancy pelosi won the week by getting under trump's skin on cover-up. i think she raised the bar on impeachment, which none of you agree with, and i think she did something important because that fake video showing her allegedly drunk, she fought back against that and had the power to do it, which is a warning to the whole country of what we are in for between now and election day on
8:53 am
2020. we better be on top of all this fake stuff that we are going to confront between now and then. >> boo on facebook for taking down an activist who puts together anti-hate sort of artistic endeavors, taking her page down, but not taking down the nancy pelosi -- and saying, we'll let people decide. let people decide on the artistic stuff as well. but nancy pelosi is far more lucid, obviously, far more learned than donald trump. she knows what she's talking about on the matters of the constitution. i wonder if you think, e.j., that in terms of leading her caucus for impeachment, she seems to be disarming, unilaterally disarming the party. >> i have a theory. the democrats aren't divided on impeachment. an awful lot of people on the party believe two things at one time. they think, yeah, there are impeachable offenses here. the question is, how do we proceed from here to there? i talked to some members from
8:54 am
these marginal districts who are ready to go there, but they want to be able to tell their constituents, we did this very carefully, we didn't leap to it. because everybody says you have to do it and you can't think about politics. a lot of voters will think it's political if you leap there, so they are ready to act but they want to do it carefully. that's why pelosi is saying what she's saying. >> i get it. she's under his skin, she set up infrastructure in his head. it's great, right? she gets at donald trump. if you just consult him and don't actually use the powers at your disposal to restrain his behavior, it looks like a petty high school argument as opposed to doing your job as speaker of the house. >> all the people who came out in 2018 who gave money, they're saying, what did i give my money for? the chatter class has one way of looking at it. but rank and file -- >> don't vote democrat because of impeachment. all of the panel won the
8:55 am
week. you did a very good jab of leaping over the high bar of ben carson. thanks, you guys. tiffani cross, e.j. johnson. happy birthday to yvette miley. i work for a woman of color who is a boss in this business. happy birthday, my friend. we'll see you after the break. y. introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger, it's the right gear. with a terrain management system for... this. a bash plate for... that. an electronic locking rear differential for... yeah... this. heading to the supermarket? get any truck. heading out here? get the ford ranger. the only adventure gear built ford tough.
8:56 am
you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. so, i started with the stats regarding my
8:57 am
moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. like how humira has been prescribed to over 300,000 patients. and how many patients saw clear or almost clear skin in just 4 months - the kind of clearance that can last. humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to symptoms. numbers are great. and seeing clearer skin is pretty awesome, too. that's what i call a body of proof. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. want more proof? ask your dermatologist about humira. this is my body of proof.
8:58 am
at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
8:59 am
that does it for me. see you guys next weekend on "am joy." i'm going to throw it to my friend alex witt. alex, i missed you. do you have change for my tubman? is that not amazing? >> look at that, very cool. >> i don't know if you can see it through the tv, but the guy who came up with this covered the stamp of andrew jackson completely. >> it has the same angle and everything. that's what it would look like and it would look amazing. why do we have to wait until 20-whatever. >> 20-never. >> let's hope not. >> we hope that maybe the next president will change their mind. we'll see. we'll see. >> whoever that might be. hmm. i want to say one thing, too. i'm so glad you gave our boss a shoutout for her birthday.
9:00 am
she's awesome. thank you, so are you. >> bye. a good day to all of you at msnbc headquarters here in new york. high 90s in the east. on the same page with north korea's kim jong-un. what the press secretary said about the president's take on joe biden. >> we only get one shot at this. i want to make sure we get it right. >> democrats can sing and dance at the same time just like beyonce. >> the impeachment debate intensifying among democrats one month and counting. the first expectations for the debates. how the president is handling his moment in the spotlight overseas. that's where we begin, tokyo where the president started the day golfing, dining and wautchig a sumo race


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on