Skip to main content

tv   Weekends With Alex Witt  MSNBC  July 27, 2019 9:00am-11:00am PDT

9:00 am
evices. best value. simple. easy. awesome. click, call or visit a store today. that's it for today. see you tomorrow on "am joy." alex wid
9:01 am
alex witt, take it away. >> thank you, joy, i'll do just that. the president launching insults at members of congress. congressman elijah cummings responding a short time ago. new reaction to the supreme court's decision. shake-up strategy. house democrats take a major step forward in their legal fight against the president. plus a new poll about impeachment, whether robert mueller's testimony changed any minds. but within this hour, the chair of the oversight committee, congressman elijah cummings responding to a tweet by the president. this morning the president called him a, quote, brutal bully, shouting and screaming at the men and women about conditions at the southern border. the president then read
9:02 am
cumming road, the most dangerous anywhere in the world. elijah cummings said, it is my moral duty to fight for my constituents. joining me now, mike vi krvique. >> he represents the black district covering baltimore that the president is talking about and other areas, other counties that surround the area. in his capacity, the oversight committee chairman had mcaleenan, and before that, he
9:03 am
ripped into mcaleenan about those detention facilities in mexico, saying those kids were sitting in their own filth and said they had a, quote, empathy deficit, and it went downhill from there in a big argument. fast-forward to the president watching television like he often does, his favorite network, fox news. a reporter went into west baltimore and videotaped some of the more troubled areas in the city where residents lacked certain basic sanitation, water facilities, trash collection, things of that nature, highlighting it. and that, of course, triggered the president just a few minutes later after that segment aired into tweeting about elijah cummings, his district, taking after the district as you reported, calling tait a rodent and rat-infested mess. as you report going back to his district every day, he says, and highlighting that the president
9:04 am
had promised him that he would get on board with a legislation that cummings has sponsored to lower the cost of prescription drugs by doing something the president has supported in the past, allowing the government to negotiate directly with drug companies to lower those prices. elijah cummings said that would directly affect the lives of his constituents, improve the lives of his constituents by offering lower cost drugs. the president has backed away from that promise. but, again, a majority black district, elijah cummings, and incidentally the second most affluent black district per capita income, as it happens. a lot of outrage, a lot of insults as the president attacks elijah cummings and the people of west baltimore. >> indeed. we'll pick up on this in the next hour. joining us now, a member of the judiciary committee.
9:05 am
welcome, ma'am, good to have you here to talk about numerous things. first of all, what do you think about the president's tweet about elijah cummings? >> it just shows that trump will never have the kind of grace and dignity of someone like the stature of elijah cummings has. i'm not surprised by these tweets anymore, and i've been talking quietly with my republican colleagues. are my republican colleagues going to stand up and say this is outrageous to attack in what, again, is another racist attack on a black chairman with a majority black district. let's be very clear, alex, these tweets are not just offensive. they actually undermine all of the progress that the united states has been trying to make on equality and justice. it affects the economic opportunities for black and brown people across the country.
9:06 am
for immigrants. this is a direct attack on our belief that all people are created equal. we had been moving forward, and yet now the president really wants to take us back. that's what he wants to do and it's just outrageous and shameful. i know that elijah cummings understands that, you know, his grace, his dignity, his ability to be an effective oversight chairman is exactly why trump is attacking him, because he's too effective and trump is just so ineffective. >> yeah. i want to play right now what congressman cummings had to say last sunday reacting to the president's recent attacks on four congresswomen of color. here's that now. >> remember, bleeding from my forehead when people were throwing bottles, and these were adults throwing bottles and saying, go home [ bleep ]. i would say right now, mr. president, we want you to be a
9:07 am
role model. we want somebody in that white house who our children can be proud of, who our children can emulate, who our children will look up to. and that is not the kind of example that you're setting, and i'm telling you, mr. president, you and we, our nation is better than that. >> elijah cummings has responded in a very measured way, but to your point, he offers the dignity befitting the office that he holds, and i'm talking about elijah cummings. at what point do you think any republicans that you suggested you wondered might respond to this? do you expect a response? >> well, i'm really hoping so,n yesterday i had a very emotional conversation with one leading figure on the republican side. a couple weekends ago when trump tweeted those racist tweets at the four congresswomen, but it wasn't just at them, alex. i'm one of only 14 naturalized u.s. citizens who is a congress member out of 535, born outside
9:08 am
the united states, proudly here since i was 16 years old. so this is affecting everybody across the country. what one republican told me a couple weeks ago when that tweet happened, he said, no, i'm so outraged by it, i told my children they should never say things like that. i said, sir, with respect, if you told your children that, say it publicly. we need you to come out and say it publicly. i'm trying to do what i can, behind the scenes, not revealing names or anything like that, just wanting my republican colleagues to remember that throughout the course of our country's history, we have needed great voices of moral clarity on either side to bring us back to the values that hold us together as americans. and right now that is sadly lacking on the other side of the aisle. and i don't believe it's because people don't know it's wrong. i believe it's because they're scared of the bully in the white house.
9:09 am
and we should not allow our constitution to be brought down because people are scared of a bully in the white house. >> i hope whatever you say behind the scenes is as accurate as you've said with me. let's talk about the supreme court allowing $250,000 pentagon so-called drug moneys to build part of the border wall. american taxpayers, not mexico as promised by the president, will pay for this wall. what options does congress have, or is the supreme court's decision the final word? >> it's not the final word because all the supreme court did -- very important, i'm not minimizing it -- was to stay a lower court's decision that the president could not use those emergency funds. i think it's a terrible decision. it's deeply disappointing, and basically what the supreme court is trying to do in terms of taking congressional authority away, the main power we have as congress -- one of the main powers we have as congress is the power of the purse.
9:10 am
we have said in a bipartisan way, you cannot have this money to build your wall. that was not just democrats, by the way, that was republicans as well. so for the president now to say he's going to just transfer money is going directly against the constitution in terms of congressional authority. now, in terms of our options, i think the case is still proceeding through the lower courts, through the appeals courts, and so we'll see what the final decision is, but i think we now as congress have to use the appropriations process differently. we have to stop the ability of the president to transfer authority between these departments, which has long existed in order to help presidents, if they do have to respond to urgent crises that are legitimate. but in this case, that is not what it is. so we're going to have to go back and use the appropriations process to stop this transfer authority, and then to start cutting money if the president and the administration continues to go outside of their bounds
9:11 am
and deny the authority of congress. at the end of the day, what disa appointments me about this is the president manufactured this crisis along the border, but if you listen to his rhetoric, it is supposedly about the surge of immigrants coming across the border. it is not about, you know, drug smuggling and all these other violent crimes that are happening. they try to make it about that, but that's not the reality. if that was really what they were worried about, they should be investing in more dogs to sniff out drugs, more technology that actually identifies where drugs are hidden. most of the drugs that come over the border, they're hidden in different places. some of the border patrol stations have that technology, others do not. there are lots of effective things to do to fight drug smuggling on the southern border which was prominent in the supreme court appeal. but none of this is based on reality, alex. a wall is not the solution to this, remain in mexico metering,
9:12 am
none of these things are about the actual problem. certainly kids in cages and separating families, which we just had a hearing on in judiciary, is a stunning low for a country that has at least purported to put human rights first and try to be the policer of that even in other countries around the world. >> yeah, for sure. i do want to get your thoughts on impeachment because you and three other democratic congress members wrote that you are moving forward with impeachment and that mueller's testimony was a watershed moment. you questioned mueller. how was his testimony in your mind a watershed moment? because even some democratic voices are suggesting it was not particularly a public success with respect to impeachment prospects. >> i think people have focused on, was mueller good or not, did he bring more information? i just think that's the wrong question. i think the question is what was in the mueller report? remember that attorney general barr intercepted the mueller
9:13 am
report before it got to the people, before it got to congress. he lied about what was in the report. he and the president and republicans have been trying to spin this thing as, you know, no collusion, no obstruction, no conspiracy. they tried to spin it as the mueller report exonerated the president. so for the vast majority of americans who have not read the report the way some of us in congress have done, a lot of people didn't understand what was in the mueller report. so the number one goal of the hearing was to have robert mueller there to himself corroborate what he wrote in this report, which was a stunning revelation of numerous counts of obstruction of justice committed by the president. witness tampering, which is what i focused on with paul manafort, lies, himself but also encouraging other people to lie, his attempts to fire the special counsel. and we went through those with a great deal of diligence to lay out the case.
9:14 am
and all we needed robert mueller to do was to say yes and no, and frankly, i think his testimony was stunning because the report is stunning. and we had to get that across to the american people. so what we have said now and what chairman nadler said yesterday and what the speaker herself has approved, this is is all going forward as a unified position, is that we are in an impeachment investigation. that is a process we are considering as part of the article 1 powers that are afforded to the house judiciary committee by the constitution. we are considering all options in front of us to hold this president accountable because nobody should be above the law, and it is clear to me that he has violated numerous -- he has committed crimes that any other american would be prosecuted for. so the impeachment process begins with our being able to get in an expedited fashion the materials we need so that we can
9:15 am
consider real articles of impeachment and decide whether or not to recommend them to the full house for a vote. >> congresswoman pramil pramila jayapal, thank you for being here. >> thank you, alex. how voters are responding to robert mueller's testimony. they found that 46% are in favor of filing an impeachment process against the president, 37% are for. 41% say he was not exonerated, 35% say he was. what do you say about this push for impeachment following robert mueller's testimony? >> reporter: we've talked to about a dozen people at this
9:16 am
farmer's market here in concord. it did not come up in conversation when we talked about general politics here in the granite state, but when we asked about it, i thought it was fascinating that the range we heard from democrats and democratic voters, a wide range of opinions here on the question of impeachment. let's listen to what folks said to us today. >> the system works, but if somebody is in power, they're above the law. that needs to be changed. and i think if trump is acting as if he's above the law and acting accordingly, anybody who does that should be impeached. >> reporter: do you think the democrats should be moving forward with impeachment? >> i think he's done things that would condone impeachment, and i would love to have him, like, be out of office, but i don't want to -- i guess i'm nervous of all of government stopping to make that happen and then everything
9:17 am
else just gets sidelined. >> personally i think just get him out this next cycle. just make sure we don't give him another four years. i think that might be the least destructive way to do it. >> reporter: look, alex, a lot of things those voters said are things we're hearing from democratic candidates themselves. that last voter harrison saying it might be best just to beat him at the ballot box and leave the impeachment inquiries aside. but on the other side, we've heard from voters who said this is not about politics. if somebody is breaking the law, even the president, they should be held accountable for that. it's amazing hearing those two debates channelling back to you from both the people who will be deciding who the next president is and the people who are running for that job. >> thank you for bringing that to us, ali vitale in new hampshire. i'll talk to president trump's republican challenger
9:18 am
w about that. and what was behind the split. d. huh, boring, boring, you don't need to see that. oh, here we go. can you believe my client steig had never heard of a home and auto bundle or that renters could bundle? wait, you're a lawyer? only licensed in stockholm. what is happening? jamie: anyway, game show, kumite, cinderella story. you know karate? no, alan, i practice muay thai, completely different skillset. and i don't add trup the years.s. but what i do count on... is boost® delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more
9:19 am
e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. you eat right... mostly. to homes 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.
9:20 am
hey! i live on my own now! i've got xfinity, because i like to live life in the fast lane. unlike my parents. you rambling about xfinity again? you're so cute when you get excited... anyways... i've got their app right here, i can troubleshoot. i can schedule a time for them to call me back, it's great! you have our number programmed in? ya i don't even know your phone anymore... excuse me?! what? i don't know your phone number. aw well. he doesn't know our phone number! you have our fax number, obviously... today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'll pass.
9:21 am
the president is hailing a decision by the supreme court allowing the nation to use $225 million in pentagon funds to build the wall. the 2.5 billion would come from the defense department's
9:22 am
counter-drug money and build about 100 miles of wall. joining me now, bob kuzak, editor in chief at the hill, and gabby. the president tweeted, wow, big victory on the wall. big win for border security and the wall. how significant is this right now going into an election, even though we should know american taxpayers are the ones paying for it, not mexico as the president said it would. how is it going to play? >> it allows him to get started on construction of the wall using these funds. it caused a great deal of disagreement between congress and the administration, and that could prove to be a huge thing for his base heading into 2020. so far president trump has not built a single new piece of new border wall. he has updated parts of existing border infrastructure, but not a single part of the so-called trump border wall has actually been built along the border, so it's tough for him to go out on a campaign trail and talk to
9:23 am
voters in states where he's going to need their support and say, i have followed through on my promises of immigration, i've built the wall, when he has not. the court will use this ruling to their advantage and hopefully for them accelerate the construction of the border wall. it was interesting to see what justice brier wrote about this court opinion yesterday evening. he said this is sort of a risky move for the court to approve of, because this allows for construction, not just preparatory work, but actual construction of a border wall, and that is something that is quite difficult to undo if president trump ends up losing this legal battle and the supreme court early on. >> i have to say, i'm seeing the footage of all this, but anyway, we ever house speaker pelosi tweeting the decision to allows the president, quote, to steal
9:24 am
military funds to spend on a wasteful, ineffective border. and you have chuck schumer saying it is a deeply regrettable and nonsensical decision. >> congressional authority over the past couple decades has diminished, and whether that's president obama, president george w. bush or president trump, they like this type of power. this is a big decision. now, remember, this is the difference between merrick garland getting on the court as opposed to gorsuch as a 5-4 decision. that's the difference. >> all right, guys, moving to impeachment. this week house democrats escalat escalated the possibility of impeachment. how significant is it? >> the democrats are going to have to make a decision over the
9:25 am
next several months whether they're going to impeach. there are a number of democrats who are for opening an inquiry, and there were several this week after the mueller hearing ended. that was not a victory for democrats, but that's not even half the democrats. they're nowhere close to getting the votes, and i think. the spotlight hasn't been on the a general darks it's been on robert mueller, and i think before 2020 starts, they're probably going to take impeachment off the table for a number of reasons, but number one is they don't have the votes to do it. >> gabby, do you want to weigh in on this as well? >> nancy pelosi has said she's not running out the clock on impeachment, but that is sort of exactly what's happening here. there will come a point in time where they're going to have to make a decision and it's hard to see democrats growing their support where they could pursue knowing they would get it through the house of representativ
9:26 am
representatives. inside robert mueller's testimony, a different view from someone who worked close with him at the fbi. next. m at the fbi next most people think a button is just a button. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination. most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer.
9:27 am
9:28 am
9:29 am
9:30 am
our task now is to get the evidence behind that out to the american people, and we will do that starting today. >> how? >> we're going to go to court today to ask for the grand jury information underlying the mueller report, and monday and tuesday to enforce our subpoena from white house counsel don mcgahn. >> congressman jerry nadler there, house judiciary chair, outlining the steps the democrats will take against the president. the filing argues that information is needed to know whether to waive articles of institution against the president. kurt bardella and spokesperson for the house oversight committee. welcome, guys, good to see you both. chuck, you first here.
9:31 am
how strong a case does the judiciary committee have to try to get this material, and is this how you would go about it? >> they have a reasonably strong case. think about this on the spectrum, alex. on the far left side, you want the grand jury investigation at a mere curiosity, and you want the grand jury information because it's in connection with a judicial proceeding. so the further you are on that spectrum to being in connection with the judicial proceeding, the more likely you are to win. and that's the case law, and that's the federal rules of criminal procedure. so what the democrats will argue is that they need the grand jury information because it's connected to a judicial proceeding, in this case, an impeachment inquiry. i think they ever a tolerable claim. >> what testimony do you think the judiciary would have given the mueller report? >> i'm glad you asked that question because the mueller
9:32 am
report was very lightly redacted. there isn't all that much that's missing, particularly from volume 2, the obstruction of justice section. i recommend you read the report. i have, and i think it's fascinating. you can see everything you need in order to decide whether impeachment is appropriate or whether reelection is appropriate or the president ought to be charged when he leaves office. it's all there. sure, you'll pick up a few details with grand jury information if, in fact, it's provided to the committee at some point, but i think you have what you need right in the report. >> okay. kurt, this filing says, quote, articles of impeachment are under consideration as part of the committee's investigation, although no final determination has been made. so how big a step is this? is this what it looks like to begin an impeachment process? >> well, i think what they're doing is laying the legal groundwork to justify moving forward with an impeachment proceeding. one of two things will happen,
9:33 am
alex. the court will either agree with you judiciary committee, and they'll continue getting documents to support the impeachment, or they'll reject it, and the democrats will say, look, impeachment is the only way we'll get the totality of everything robert mueller has. chairman nadler is looking to use every vehicle that he can to uphold congress oversight's authority. >> it argues that the house doesn't even need a formal impeachment inquiry to get the materials in mueller's report. is that true, and if so, what's holding him back? >> here's the thing. we saw this. when i worked with the oversight committee during the obama years, when the justice department stopped us from getting information, we took them to court, sued them for
9:34 am
documents and the court, so i think they're just using the obstruction measure to pursue a legal case. >> so how do they respond to this case without a formal impeachment inquiry? what do they consider in this petition? >> i think kurt is generally right. i agree with him. you don't need a formal impeachment inquiry open in the house. congress has an important oversight function. in fact, in order to open an impeachment proceeding, it's completely legitimate for them to inquire as to whether or not an impeachment proceeding is warranted. and so when i talk about that spectrum, i think either a formal impeachment inquiry or something preliminary to it, whatever you want to call it. what seems to be going on right now, in fact, alex, would warrant information to the grand jury. i come back to the point i made
9:35 am
earlier. i don't think they need it because there's so much in the mueller report that already justifies anything they might want to do. they ought to look at the report, they ought to read the report. it still appears to me that many members of congress have not done so, and that in itself could form the basis for anything they want to do. >> look, chuck, you served as the counsel to then-director robert mueller. you know him very well. you have a strong opinion as to the style, the substance. for anyone who missed it, give me your assessment. >> i'm biased, alex. i'm completely biased. i think the world of bob mueller, one of ta privilege of professional lifetime. i thought the book was better than the movie, but we shouldn't be surprised by that, because bob mueller told us back in may at his press conference that if he were called to testify, he would stick strictly -- strictly -- to the report that
9:36 am
he wrote. when he did so, people were disappointed which sort of surprisesmueller, and particularly if you worked for bob mueller, you know he's a man of his word. i didn't learn anything. i'm not surprised by that. the report said everything i needed to know, and bob, as he promised to do, stuck to the report. >> i appreciate both your words today, chuck rosenberg and bob p p przybyla, thank you very much. ,. what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
9:37 am
9:38 am
9:39 am
{tires screeching} {truck honking} [alarm beeping] (avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can. (dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent. the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru.
9:40 am
the republican running against president trump is not mincing words and condemning the president's racially charged attacks. this week former massachusetts governor william weld was the only republican to join the naacp candidate forum in detroit. >> donald trump is a raging racist, okay? he's a complete and thorough racist. unless the republican party in washington expressly -- expressly -- rejects the racism of donald trump, they're going to come to be universally viewed as the party of racism in america. and a lot of them like to think that it's a political choice, but it's not a political choice, it's a moral choice.
9:41 am
>> and that presidential candidate, william weld, is joining me right now. welcome, governor, it's very nice to see you, sir. let's get right into this. >> thank you, alex. >> i'm curious why more elected candidates are not speaking out as you just did there against the president's comments on race and immigration. you said it's not necessarily politics, it's a moral choice, but does it come down to electoral overage that the president seems to have over them, or the fear of getting some stupid twitter nickname? >> i don't get it, alex. i think it's such an obvious situation where you have to stand up and be counted. i'm beginning to have a vision of the future, and my vision of the future is that this president is becoming increasingly unhinged and over the top, and his latest ludicrous attack on elijah cummings is just more of the same. i think he's going to take the party down with him. they may have a little dunkirk or an island of the states that
9:42 am
george wallace took in 1968, but that's about it. i think the days of this particular constellation of the republican party in washington, their days as a national party could be finished and go down with donald trump in 2020. that's my honest view of the future. >> that's an extraordinary view, but one that i've not heard only articulated by you, we should say that. i do, sir, want to get to what the house did this week, which was pass a budget deal, expend the debt limit so the president can continue borrowing for the next few years. the new agreement could add a few trillion dollars to the debt over the next year. can the democrats not reel this in? >> even before this last deal, $30 trillion, not $20 trillion.
9:43 am
and now this is another trillion dollars and counting and no one is representing the taxpayer in d.c. i say all the time, we need a balanced budget down there. every government has to balance the budget in every state. only washington do they think last yaer's appropriations. they're going to have to pay that bill, they're not going to get social security. mr. trump doesn't care because his generation can whistle past the graveyard for the next few months so he can get reelected and not have to engage in climate change. we'll see what the next few months brings. >> it's extraordinary because reigning in federal governments
9:44 am
in spending has always been the republican party. you've got mitch mcconnell supporting the deal. and the new yorker saying, the willingness of donald trump, mitch mcconnell and other leading republicans to sign on to such a piece of legislation only confirms what many of us have long suspected, that the gop's devotion to fiscal conservatism was a sham, a cynical political strategy rather than the expression of a core philosophical principle. >> it's donald trump against free trade, he's against foreign policy, he's a total isolationist, he's a reckless spender. he's not the guy who represents the values of the republican party, quite the opposite. >> all right, very quickly, sir, your candidacy. the president has pretty high approval ratings among republicans. i know you've been added for a
9:45 am
while. we've spoken to you since the beginning. of course you're welcome to come on any time and talk about it, but what's it going to take to break through with your message? >> what it's going to take is enlarging the electorate that's going to vote in the republican primary so millennials will come in. i propose letting those millennials vote with a cell phone. 49% of them voted last time. if 75% voted, donald trump wouldn't win a single primary. many. if women vote, minorities vote, then i think we'll win the new hampshire primary outright and that could be fatal for a sitting president of the united states. >> it could also give you some legs, that's for sure. william weld and presidential candidate, nice to see you
9:46 am
again, sir. thank you very much. >> thank you, alex. will the impeachment efforts survive the long layoff? survive the long layoff?
9:47 am
9:48 am
9:49 am
9:50 am
you're saying there is a difference between what you're doing now and an impeachment inquiry, right? >> a lot of people believe we've been in an impeachment inquiry ever since we started looking into high crimes and misdemeanors in the context of the executive branch. other people think impeachment doesn't begin until you actually have articles of impeachment. i would say we're an impeachment investigation. >> we are now officially entering into an examination of whether or not to recommend the article of impeachment. we have crossed a threshold. >> some house democrats there changing their tone on impeachment just before leaving washington for the august recess. joining me now, talina maxwell, progressive programming for sirius xm, william martin, host of "martin unfiltered" and
9:51 am
politico juournalist. talina, you first. >> it's about time. >> so you agree with this shift? >> i think saying we will take the documented crimes in robert mueller's report, we'll take those crimes seriously and say this is not a precedent we want to set with tolerable behavior by a president. it doesn't matter if you're calling it an impeachment inquiry versus an investigation. ultimately we're trying to strengthen your cases in court and put everything under the same umbrella for the american people so you're investigating corruption, you're investigating his financial dealings and ties and potentially some of the behavior that he did during the 2016 campaign that was outlined in the mueller report that may be crimes. so i think it's important for
9:52 am
them to not normalize this behavior, so i'm glad. it's about time, as i said, that they at least call it an impeachment investigation and put it under one umbrella. >> well, maybe it was the mueller testimony that switched, because rowland just last week, congressman al green introduced those impeachment articles on the president's talk about "the squad." what do you make of the shift of top democrats only several days later? was it all about what happened on wednesday? >> i think it was -- oh, sorry. >> i think it was a combination of the attacks on those fresh members of congress and also his behavior. look what he said today about congressman elijah cummings. what democrats have to decide is whether or not they are going to actually make a decision to say no president is above the law. you have someone here who is so
9:53 am
despicable and shameful in his behavior, i refuse to call him president, who he believes. i am above the law. ik liter i can literally do whatever i want, say what i want, so the precedent is really bad. the republican party used to be the so-called party of law and order. it's now lawlessness. so the democrats have to decide for the future of america whether or not you're going to do something, because you have to look at it. mueller was sobering, he was clear, concise. all these journalists who were saying, it was just boring. no, no, no. i listened to that and i said, no person in the oval office can get away with these sort of actions. democrats must stand now. >> and rick, there have been a number of democrats calling for impeachment inquiry since mueller testified. politico counting at least 100 now. you have morning consul out with a poll that stands at 37%.
9:54 am
that's down from 39% in january. do you think that 37% is more or less going to be the ceiling for public impeachment support under this president? >> i do, and i think the mueller testimony ended any chance that we would get or there would be for impeachment. let me say from the outset, we need to stop grandstanding so they can make their magic viral moment. it's a disservice to the truth. they should select -- very few people get to ask questions, including staff. ask the questions and let people answer the questions. that didn't happen. he was constantly interrupted. by the time they got to the citation, they were on to the next question, their time was running out. it's just a colossal injustice to getting at the truth. having said that, let me just explain something about the news
9:55 am
media. the news media has thoroughly reported what was in the mueller report. nothing new was learned in the mueller hearings. there was no -- we all pay attention, but nothing new was learned. somehow people believe people are going to turn from "the price is right" and watch the c-span hearing. it was ridiculous. keep in mind, alex, if you took the top show on all three news networks, and let's say everybody who watched all those shows watched the mueller report, you would reach less than 3% of the nation. so this had no chance of breaking through. people weren't going to watch it, the news media couldn't cover it, and the structure of the hearings are just a disservice to the american people. >> look, it's sobering when you say that because i got to say -- >> i have to push back on rick there. >> go ahead. >> here's the problem that you had. first of all, when you say the mueller report was out there, how many people actually read it? >> i covered that, roland. no one read it and no one saw it, either.
9:56 am
>> rick, one second. you hit the framing of the report. the framing of the report by barr and the media pretty much reported whatever he said because it wasn't made initially available. so you have members of congress who are actually going over the report, and a lot of people actually hearing for the first time, and yet the actual guy who led it who was answering those questions. now, if you go back to watergate, it's not like there was a groundswell of americans who said, impeach nixon. it was as a result of hearings when the public began to hear testimony, began to hear what he did, it gn to build and build and build. >> the difference between watergate and the mueller report was no one expected nixon did these things, and the american people were truly shocked. i remember the nixon investigations. i watched them in the summertime at my grandma's house. people were shocked. no one had any idea the president was capable of these things. what were they going to find in
9:57 am
these hearings with mueller, that trump didn't pay a parking ticket or there was another porn star? come on. >> i don't think the american people are okay with the crimes outlined in the mueller report and reaffirmed by robert mueller, and i think that there was new information -- excuse me. i let both of you talk a lot. there was new information in the hearing. there is an ongoing counter-intelligence investigation that goes to our national security which we did not have any idea about before robert mueller affirmed that on wednesday. so i think that's actually where our focus needs to be because our national security has always been at risk because we have a president who doesn't really care about russia's attacks on our democracy. >> all right. listen, guys, taehat's going to have to be a rap. good conversation, both of you. have a good weekend. three days after the mueller hearings, what people think about the president and the prospects of impeachment. it's ahead. ment
9:58 am
it's ahead it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge. for an amazing taste... ...that outlasts your craving. new nicorette ice mint. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. i wish i could shake your hand. granted. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
9:59 am
10:00 am
we like drip coffee, layovers- -and waiting on hold. what we don't like is relying on fancy technology for help. snail mail! we were invited to a y2k party... uh, didn't that happen, like, 20 years ago? oh, look, karolyn, we've got a mathematician on our hands!
10:01 am
check it out! now you can schedule a callback or reschedule an appointment, even on nights and weekends. today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'd rather not. lashing out. the president hurling insults at another member of congress on twitter. what's his war of words and how are lawmakers responding? in p for push, more americans are calling for the "i" word. an american teenager spends more than three weeks at the border detention center without a lawyer, without a phone or even access to a shower.
10:02 am
good day, everyone, welcome to msnbc headquarters. welcome to "weekends with alex witt." cummings responded to an attack by the president. here's what cummings is reacting to. this morning the president called him, quote, a brutal bully, shouting at men and women at border patrol. he then called his county a disgusting rodent and rat-infested mess. cummings said, mr. president, each day i go home to my district. each morning i wake up and i go and fight for my neighbors. it is my constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the executive branch. but it is my moral duty to fight for my constituents. >> it just shows that trump will
10:03 am
never have the kind of grace e cummings has. i have been texting privately with some of my republican colleagues on the other side, because at this point it is about the republican party. what do they stand for? are my republican colleagues going to stand up and say this is outrageous to attack in what, again, is another racist attack on a black chairman with a majority black district. >> nbc's hans nichols is at the white house. i have to tell you, hans, i heard it and last hour i was shocked to have to report it, but i have to ask you, what is behind this tweet from the president? >> reporter: it appears the president is being pretty transparent about what's behind it, and he doesn't like the line of questioning that elijah cummings, who is chairman of the house oversight committee, took when he grilled the house oversight committee on july 19. you saw chairman cummings
10:04 am
exercising his oversight authority, and now you have the president saying cummings was screaming and shouting, accusing cummings of being a bully. it is the president making such a strong nexus between that july 18 hearing and what he is now accusing cummings of, which is to say conditions in his west baltimore district are worse than they are on the border. the president is also claiming vindication that that congressional tour down the border showed the conditions were challenging but they are actually in fairly good shape down there on the border. so you have the president once again using a slow weekend to pick a fight with a member of congress. this time he's being a little more forthright and transparent about why he's doing it. he doesn't like the oversight, and the president is giving an example or taste of what lawmakers can expect, and that is a big blast on twitter. now, couple mingummings for his fighting back. he says he wants to work with the president on lowering prescription drug prices. he's not disputing the
10:05 am
conditions of his district, but he says he has a moral obligation to fight for those people in his district and he has a moral constitutional obligation to defend his constituents. >> the house oversight committee talks about impeachment of the president. >> we use our full powers to investigate the conduct of the president and to consider what remedies there are. >> i would say we are an impeachment investigation. and as to the results of the investigation, it could lead to articles of impeachment or it could lead to something else. >> joining me now here in the studio, tennessee representative steve cullen, a member of the judiciary committee. it was good to hear you asking questions there on wednesday of robert mueller. you did a great job. but to the point made there, can you give me insight of your legal strategy? is that a road more toward
10:06 am
impeachment proceedings? >> it is trying to get the documents that the president has refused and the witnesses that we want. besides the obvious mcgahn, we want to get corwrespon corbin l landowski and we want to get the people that witnessed obstruction of justice. we ever great counsel, norm eisen and barry burke, that have made sure we have questions in the past about article i, and we are in an investigation. we have been in an impeachment investigation for a while -- the grand jury investigation is the meat and potatoes. that's the big stuff.
10:07 am
it's deleted. why is it x-ed out? it's the law, but why won't he go in with us to get it as every other attorney general has done? because they don't want the american public to see that because that's even more damning evidence about the person we have in the white house fighting the law. >> so going to get testimony from don mcgahn, his name is always on the top of the list. how close are you to getting him in for testimony and how much is his testimony going to matter? >> well, we're going into court next week, monday or tuesday, to ask the court to order him to appear. his testimony will be very important because he'll be able to testify what was in the mueller report and when the president asked him to fire mueller, and later when mcgahn refused to do it and said he was going to resign because he refused to do such a thing. the president told him, he wrote a memo and said, change your memo and don't say i asked this. he's asking him to lie. he's basically obstructing
10:08 am
justice and subordinating perjury, both of which mcgahn can testify to. >> all of which mueller confirmed, by the way. >> mueller did a fine job. he had seven hours of testimony. he did a great job as the special counsel. he showed that the president on at least five occasions, all the elements of obstruction of justice were met, and five others argued that they might have been met. and there were over 100 contacts with the trump administration in russia, and never did they report it to law enforcement and they encouraged it. when he went out there and said, russia, are you listening? why would he even say that if he didn't know russia was playing ball with him? you have this guy in the southern district as individual 1. he's the officer of the legal counsel's memorandum that says you can't indict a sitting president. a man who should have been indicted twice should be up the river with michael cohen and both times it was to win the
10:09 am
election. paying money to stormy daniels and karen mcdougal, that was a campaign violation. not report ing it to the fbi, that was to win the election. obstruction of justice came later. he'll do anything to win. the guy is not playing by the rules and he's doing it now with not complying to document requests, urging people not to comply with subpoena requests and then going after people like elijah cummings. >> i remember when yours was a lone voice calling for impeachment proceedings. we had you on and you were making your case. now politico reports there are over 100 that are supporting. that would include katherine clark who is the most senior of the democrats. how much does a voice like hers and the sheer volume constitute something of a magic number? do you think more now will come on board? >> we had about six or seven since mueller, and the press at first jumped on the fact there was only one person, lori
10:10 am
trahan. after that there was lawrence carson who was on the committee and was able to listen to that. yesterday mark levin was the most recent from california. more and more people will get on, but it's going to take nancy to push it to a number where we'll feel comfortable going to the house to ask for impeachment. but we have to get this information and the data, and once we get the information -- the republican guy you had on, if we get mcgahn to testify, that number is going to zoom up. it will be 45 to 50 real quick. there's no question about it. we did a good job. we stayed on point. there was nobody using their five minutes to grandstand -- >> on the democratic side. there were a lot of republicans who tried to grandstand. >> it was orderly and went straight on. there was nobody who tried to make themselves an exception. we were a team. the republicans, they were chaos. don adams. remember "get smart"?
10:11 am
>> yes. >> chaos. >> agent 99 here. with regard to the democrats who are pushing for impeachment, you have jackie speier from california. she spoke with my colleague chris matthews and had this to say about the timeline. take a listen to this, everybody. >> we should be able to decide september when we come back either we're doing it or we're not doing it. i do think that if we don't do it then, then we're not doing it. >> do you agree? >> we need to do it sometime in september/october. there is a time limit. but i think we need to get these people in to testify and we need to see that 6e material. that's going to turn a lot of the public's heads. >> why is that the timeline? is that a drop dead timeline because you need all of this to percolate with regard to how it might play out in an election, or what? >> because people are starting to concentrate too much on the election core and the primaries
10:12 am
will have started. if you don't get it done before thanksgiving break, christmas and new year's, then you have the super tuesday and colossal wednesday and other things. >> what are you doing here? get to work. just kidding. goo good to see you. >> good to see you, too. voters are reacting to robert mueller's testimony. politico found 46% of voters are against starting an impeachment process, 37% are in failure. 35% say the president was exonerated, 41% said he was not. ali vitale is outside the white house. what do people say about this?
10:13 am
>> we talked to about a dozen voters about what they think about the possibility of impeachment. surprise, surprise, many voters we talked to said they would like to see a new president in 2020, but they were divergent when they were asked if impeachment was of the way to get there. do you get the sense that robert mueller physically going to the hill and testifying helped the argument for impeachment? >> i think it just reiterated it more than anything. i don't know if it brought that much new things that we didn't already know. now it's in the cycle again. >> i think the democrats need to stand for something. >> reporter: is that impeachment? >> it could be. the system works, but if somebody is in power, they're above the law. that needs to be changed. >> personally i think the best bet is just get him out this next cycle jur, just make sure don't get another four years. that might be the least destructive way to do it.
10:14 am
>> reporter: alex, i feel like we talk about this a lot, that impeachment the way voters are talking about in 2020, it's not top priority. in the conversations i had with voters, when i asked them what the big issues were for 2020, it was really about health care and the environment. so even folks who say they do think it's time to begin an impeachment inquiry, they're not saying that's the top issue in 2020, so when i talk to catalys catalysts, strategists say you have to look at what happened in 2018, focus on those bread and butter economic issues, health care included, to win over democratic voters in 2019 and 2020. it may not be about impeachment, though that will definitely be continuing in the background as we've seen. >> it's important that what people care about hits home, health care and others. what has the president
10:15 am
declaring victory. plus, an american teenager found himself in border custody for weeks without access to a lawyer. o a lawyer all you can eat is back. how do you like that? applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. {tires screeching} {truck honking} [alarm beeping] (avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can. (dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent. the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru.
10:16 am
when you start with a better that's no way to treat a dog... can do no wrong. where did you learn that? the internet... yeah? mmm! with no artificial preservatives or added nitrates or nitrites, it's all for the love of hot dogs. we all use our phones differently. i can manage the time they spend on their phone, who they're texting with, all of that. it's a win for all of us. (vo) the network more people rely on, gives you more.
10:17 am
like plans families can mix and match, including the new just kids plan. that's verizon. that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. [ sigh ] not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please... [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installe. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of min.
10:18 am
here comes the kryptonite. ♪ come on! [ screaming ] breaking late on friday, the supreme court cleared the way for the trump administration to use $2.5 billion of defense department moneys to build part of a planned wall along the u.s.-mexico border. the 5-4 board lifted a stay by a judge in california in late may.
10:19 am
the 2.5 billion would come from the counter-intelligence drug money to help pay for the wall. john harwood, cnbc editor at large. the 5-4 split between conservative justices and liberal ones, is there that much ambiguity in this case that there is room to make judgments split along political lines? >> pretty much every major contested case gets decided along political lines. not all of them, but we've seen in the decision of bush v. gore that that's the way the cookie tends to crumble in these cases. even though this was not a final ruling in the supreme court, the signals from the suggestion by the court that the plaintiffs might not have legal standing to actually bring this case in their view suggests that the
10:20 am
trump administration is going to win this in the end. it is a 5-4 republican-appointed conservative court that has consequences and we've seen it here. >> the president tweeted, wow, big victory on the wall. big win for border security and the rule of law. how significant is this for the president going into an election year even though american taxpayers are the ones that are going to pay for it, not mexico, as the president said it would? >> in some ways this is quite significant just in terms of what trump can say to his base. there was actually a washington examiner article in the past week. it's a fairly right-leaning publication that generally supports the president's immigration policies, and they had an article slamming him for not building a single new mile of wall. and so to see sort of right wing media criticizing the president for not building new mileage of wall, this is the type of ruling that will actually allow him to
10:21 am
buy the time we get to next year's election, possibly say i actually built this new mileage of law instead of mostly replacement fencing that we've seen in the past. but, you know, at the end of the day whether any of his supporters would turn on the question of whether or not physical miles of wall was added to the southern border fence. i don't know if that's a positive thing in people's minds, but it's also a signal that a lot of these immigration policies he's been pursuing, they're still at the and how that could completely reshape the election going into a year from november. >> could i just make a point about the common thread we saw this week on a series fd. as tal just mentioned, we had
10:22 am
the support to build the wall. that didn't happen. he has time to play with it a little here and convince people it's going to get done, but it hasn't gotten done. we had a budget deal this week that showed the deficit is expanding dramatically. the president said he was passing a tax cut that was going to pay for itself. third, we got gdp numbers on friday that showed the economy did not achieve 3% growth after the trump deregulation. all of these things are the major promises donald trump has made and none of them have been borne out. the people can see that, and that's why we see the president turn to more and more this open invocation of racism. >> john, the first poll after mueller's testimony is from
10:23 am
morning consult and politico which found 46% of registered voters are against starting an impeachment process. what do the democrats do with this? how do they read these numbers? >> the democrats know that this is very risky territory for them. they've got 31 members in their caucus of 235lys that supported donald trump. they're wary of asking for trump's impeachment before 2020. democrats are going to have to do this all on their own. public opinion is not going to shift dramatically as a result of the mueller hearings of the the facts of the mueller report that he affirmed in that testimony were damning to the president, but the public is split and if democrats search their consciences and decide that he needs to be impeached, they're going to have to make a
10:24 am
determination with public opinion behind them. >> as far as the tweet between the president and elijah cummings this morning, what does the president gain by going after him that way? >> what does he gain? that's an interesting way to put it. i keep thinking bark. they held a press conference responding to the president's racist fweetweets, targeting th. what alexandria ocasio-cortez said was when the president doesn't debate on policy, he escorts them. those women said, we don't want to get down in the mud on this personal wlefl the president, we want to argue that the president will often or sometimes use his twitter account as a distraction to get the narrative off
10:25 am
something he doesn't really like. i don't know if going directly after elijah cummings, a widely respected, very senior member of the democratic party is really the type of fight he wants to pick. it could further galvanize democrats at the, he could use them to drive the parties further apart. now this will bring them back together in a heartbeat because elijah cummings is so well liked, and that includes his district. but here we are spending another day talking about that. i don't know whether it's a winner or not. >> alex, i understand the distraction theory, but the president described cummings'
10:26 am
district as rodent and rat infested. he does this because this is who he is, and he has an electoral situation where he's alienated so many of his people, and the only way this is effective. he's turning off a lot of college voters in order to get reelected in 2020. many you don't really talk about your insurance unless you're complaining about it. you go on about how...'s so confusing it hurts my brain. ya i hear ya... or say you can't believe...
10:27 am much of a hassle it is! and tell anyone who'll listen... (garbled)'s so expensive! she said it's so expensive. tell me about it. yes.. well i'm telling the people at home. that's why esurance is making the whole experience surprisingly painless. so, you never have to talk about it, unless you're their spokesperson. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go. to deal with the problem.icians but they wouldn't. so we took it to the voters and forced big tobacco to pay its share of healthcare costs. we fought oil companies for new clean air laws and closed a billion dollar corporate tax loophole to fund public schools. by going directly to the people we got results. that's not something you see a lot of from washington these days.
10:28 am
i'm tom steyer and i approve this message. let's make change happen. most people think a button is just a button. ♪
10:29 am
that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination. most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer.
10:30 am
10:31 am
10:32 am
10:33 am
10:34 am
. new efforts today by the democratic judiciary committee suggesting impeachment. with me now, mila. is this a litigation you expect him to win? >> hi, alex. look, i think that they should win this, okay? and this is big. court, whatever you want to call it, we should have the powers under article 1 of impeachment. you can call it an impeachment investigation, you can call it an impeachment inquiry. you cannot use the impeachment word, it doesn't matter, but the powers that come with that ability to look into high crimes, misdemeanors, et cetera, that is what we should have here because we are conducting that investigation. we are looking into whether or not the president has done those things. that is a very i c1 jury materials unsealed, this pi i think the law and precedent will win out, but i hesitate for the reason i just said. >> okay. turning to mueller now with you as he revealed the past week as the president gave contradictory answers, others tried to impede his work. >> there are questions you asked the president that he simply didn't answer, is that correct? >> true. >> and there were other things you gathered to the investigation, is that correct? >> yes. >> trump officials and
10:35 am
administration officials impeded your investigation? >> i would generally agree with that. >> talk about why that exchange right there matters. how did that impact the outcome of the investigation? >> that was a huge sort of nu nugget that hasn't been talked about enough. they got mueller to say the answers had been incomplete, impeded the investigation. we do not know sitting here today, nobody knows, not even robert mueller, the extent of trump and his camp trying to
10:36 am
impede the investigation. whether or not you have a hard line charge, you want to hold people responsible. it doesn't necessarily have to be a criminal prosecution. otherwise it is the most successful obstructors, the people who impede the best, that get away from it. that seems to be what happened other than the obstructors. joe biden now has the edge over the president. w has the ede over the president every day, visionaries are creating the future.
10:37 am
so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. e-commerce deliveries to homes liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
10:38 am
ahh... your teeth hurt? sensitivity. gotta do something about it. new crest gum and sensitivity starts treating sensitivity immediately, at the gum line, for relief within days and wraps your teeth in sensitivity protection. ohh. your teeth? no, it's brain freeze! crest. if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make or break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it or take xgeva® serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip,
10:39 am
or tongue swelling rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium; serious infections which could need hospitalization; skin problems; and severe bone joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones.
10:40 am
i would say we are an impeachment investigation. as to the result of the investigation, it could lead to articles of impeachment or it could lead to something else. but from my personal standpoint, i think we are in an impeachment investigation. >> congressman jamie raskin, member of the judiciary committee, say they are examining whether to recommend articles of impeachment for the president. joining me now, dani moody millmill mills. congresswoman, i'll reach out to you first here. you tweeted out your support for impeachment, but i would like to know how it is for democrats overall. do you think this is a turning point on the pursuit of
10:41 am
impeachment? >> i think little. i think that the steps the judiciary committee has taken and the move to the courts to get additional information is really important to the proceeding. i don't want to get into semantics, because i think the democrats are trying to thread a very thin needle, but impeachment investigation, take the source out, they are synonyms. i think democrats are on the pathway toward developing articles of impeachment against this president. i think it's the right pathway to take, and the language of the constitution gives them all they need to proceed. >> what do you think, danielle, in terms of timing? because as you know, congress doesn't get back to work until september 9, so how do you think the timing factored into the tone, if at all? >> i think the word impeachment
10:42 am
provides a level of gravitas on where the party needs to go to bring in donald trump, in order to stop this rampage of lawlessness. right now what i think nancy pelosi needs to do, she needs to direct her caucus to go back home to their home districts and have town halls about impeachment, to talk to their constituents about the mueller report, to talk to them about how a lawless president affects their day-to-day lives and why it's important that democrats move forward. the poll numbers are down in terms of where people think impeachment should go, only 46%, but the reality is the more people learn, the more they're likely to say, oh, my goodness, we need to do something about this. >> but going for impeachment as a result of the mueller probe, what do you think of this strategy? >> i'm not a democrat, but as my counterpart said, it's at the
10:43 am
bottom of the list in terms of what people are looking for in an election year. although it's an important thing to do, it may not serve the democrats really well right now when there's two things at hand. first of all, the republican party has outraised the dnc by almost double. they need to concentrate on building that war chest and getting that message out. if they concentrate and keep in the media with impeachment and activities around impeachment, they may lose some arguments when it comes to things that are very important to people like health care and, you know, immigration and other things that are going to be on the forefront of everyday people sitting down at their american table. >> let's look, noell erk lrklno, as democrats are saying joe biden is ahead by 10%
10:44 am
nationwide. should the president really be encouraging people to dismiss these numbers outright? >> i'm just going to take a guess, but i think that he is trying to do this because when he was pitted against hillary clinton, it showed him losing. nobody really expected him to win. so people -- i think what he's trying to do is say, don't pay attention to these polls because i smoked hillary clinton and i'm going to blow right outside biden, so don't pay any of this any attention. that's the only thing i can think of. and do you guys really think that donald trump is going to, you know, loan validity to any of these polls that show him not winning? do you really think he's going to go, that's a darn good poll and i think joe biden is going to eat my lunch. he's not going to do that, he's going to discount the polls. >> i think we can all agree on that. there is a quinnipiac poll in ohio that also shows joe biden ahead of the president by 8%
10:45 am
there. what stock do you put in these numbers? >> i think these state polls are actually very important. and although the president says she doesn't care about them, he should be in his camp where joe biden is double dij ilts ahead -- digits ahead. will people say, i think the numbers will be okay under any president. this president should be very concerned about the numbers coming out of ohio. >> danielle, i wanted to ask you about "vanity fair" reporting on some new fears about republicans about new fears imposed by senator kamala harris. what do you think it is capturing their attention? why do you think the president
10:46 am
has held back going after her but he's certainly taking aim at other 2020 democrats thus far? >> i think because the only thing he can use against kamala harris is the fact that she's a black woman. he's going to go where he always goes to which is. he can't go after her based on her policies because his policies are a treshs, right? and he saw -- everyone saw the performance that she gave on the debate stage in the first debate, and it was amazing. they are scared that if put up against kamala harris that donald trump will look ridiculous. he will look like he has no idea what he's doing, he has no idea what he's saying, and the vision of him stalking the stage in the way that he did. she will say, look, what did you
10:47 am
do now? >> i was envisioning that. congresswoman, before i let you go, can you weigh in on the back and forth between the president in a rather despicable tweet and elijah cummings coming back with dignity in his response about his district there in maryland? >> the president always goes back to his racist playbook and that's what he did when he tweeted elijah cummings. he brought attention to what's happening on the border and offered some moral clarity that and it just reveals who he is, and mr. trump, you're the biggest bully on twitter. >> thank you all very much.
10:48 am
trapped at the border. how an american teenager spent three weeks at the border without even a shower. he describes that ordeal, next. . he describes that ordeal, next let's go! ♪ but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth...
10:49 am
are you in good hands? ♪ (pirate girl) ahoy!!!!! gotcha! (girl) nooooooooooooo! (man) nooooo! (vo) quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker,
10:50 am
and is two times more absorbent. bounty, the quicker picker upper. doctor bob, what should i take for back pain? before you take anything, i recommend applying topical relievers first. salonpas lidocaine patch blocks pain receptors for effective, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu. if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, every day can begin with flakes. it's a reminder of your struggles with psoriasis. but what if your psoriasis symptoms didn't follow you around? that's why there's ilumya. with just 2 doses, a majority of people were clear or almost clear. and over time, even more people were clear or almost clear. all with dosing 4 times a year...
10:51 am
after 2 initial doses. plus, ilumya was shown to have similar risks of infections compared to placebo. don't use if you are allergic to ilumya or any of its ingredients. before starting treatment, your doctor should check for tuberculosis and infections. after checking there is no need for routine lab monitoring unless your doctor advises it. ilumya may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms, or if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. this could be your chance to leave your psoriasis symptoms behind. ask your doctor for ilumya today, for a clearer tomorrow. new questions today about how and why an american
10:52 am
teenager, a citizen spent 26 days in immigration detention. francisco irwin galisia was freed on wednesday. you can feel the pain he and his mother have been through. he spent 24 days at a detention center. he got zero access to a lawyer, zero phone calls and no showers. he told his story through a translator on msnbc's all in with chris hayes. >> an official with the u.s. immigration services said that you never told them you were a u.s. citizen. is he telling the truth? >> translator: i always said i was an american citizen and i showed my documents. they even charged me because they said my papers were falsified. they contradict themselves.
10:53 am
because they charged me for supposedly falsifying my citizenship. when i am a citizen here. >> it doesn't make sense what they're saying. >> joining me now professor at the university of texas. with a welcome to you here, when you hear this young man saying it doesn't make sense, how does this happen to an american citizen. >> for a while we thought this was the stuff of movies, you think of that old 1980s movie where cheech marin gets caught up in an immigration raid. this happens and it happens a lot. ice is dangerously inaccurate, the cato institute came out with a report about a year ago that showed from 2006 to 2017, 3500 people were wrongfully detained by ice. here in texas alone. multiply that number across the
10:54 am
whole of the united states. there's a case that the new york times highlighted recently of a nonhispanic, nonimmigrant white woman in florida that was detained for close to a year. what we're seeing here in this case in texas isn't an isolated incident. it's not the exception that confirmed the rule that ice is able to correctly determine folks immigration status. this is something that is very worry some, not just to immigrants but to all latinos and nonlatinos in this country. ice can come and get you, by the time they figure out whether they're supposed to detain you or not. days, weeks, and months can pass. >> which is extraordinary, despite the fact that he said he was a u.s. citizen. let's take a look at this citation here. this is what he has. he -- the citation was given to him saying he falsely represented himself as a u.s. citizen.
10:55 am
more can any immigrant door when an agent has their mind made up. >> carry your documents with you. carry your passport with you, because if something like this happens, have documentation that shows you are not an undocumented status. we shouldn't have to come to this, but we may have to be prepared to come to this. the other piece of it is the lack of bureaucratic functioning of ice. so they mistakenly thought that he was undocumented. it shouldn't take 23 days to figure that out. figure it out in a day, max two. >> here's another part of it, francisco was not wanted for any crime. how would he be held without a court appearance for almost a month? >> they couldn't figure it out. this is also remember, under the trump administration, also zooming out into making priority enforcement. that is something of the obama administration, all folks who
10:56 am
are undocumented or considered to be undocumented are in the mix. i think this is part of that, even though he didn't have a criminal record. the belief he was undocumented by himself was enough to keep him. >> thanks so much, good to see you. president trump's fight to free asap rocky, how far will the president go to help the rap star. star some reach a level of top safety pick. but only a select few of the very safest vehicles are awarded a top safety pick plus. the highest level of safety possible. how many 2019 top safety pick plus-winning vehicles does your brand have? one. two. how about eight? subaru has more 2019 top safety pick plus awards than honda and toyota brands combined. there's safe, and then there's subaru safe.
10:57 am
our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ [ referee whistle sounds ] ♪ sport dr[ cheering ]s when you need the fuel to be your nephew's number one fan. holiday inn express. we're there. so you can be too. be right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease, i was there, just not always where i needed to be.
10:58 am
is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.
10:59 am
that's it for me for this
11:00 am
hour. you need to mark this down, kendis gibson. >> whole 15 seconds early. >> early. take it, it's all yours. >> appreciate it. we'll take that 15 seconds. i'm kendis gibson. a win for president trump in his fight for a boarder wall. the supreme court has given him the green light to use military funds to start construction, the legal fight to stop him is not over. bashing baltimore, president trump launches a new attack on a predominantly black city and a black congressional leader, calling congressman elijah cummings a brutal bully and describing his district as a disgusting wreck and rodent infested mess. the arrest of two american teenagers locked up abroad, accused of stabbing an italian police officer to death. that police officer just coming off