tv MSNBC Live With Ali Velshi MSNBC August 22, 2019 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
undermine our democracy. what's next sarah huckabee boasting family feud? that wraps up things this hour. ali velshi who i think would be great on dancing with the stars. >> i am the most uncoordinated person there is. >> no, i'm worse. >> i can't even walk down the stairs without there being some danger involved. >> have a great afternoon. it's thursday, august 22nd. make no mistake, we will not be resting on our laurels. that's from washington governor jay inslee after he formally. he was the only candidate who ran on a similar issue focusing on climate change and advancing that subject to the forefront of the 2020 competition. this weekend several 2020 candidates head to san francisco to speak with hundreds of members of the democratic national committee for the general summer meeting. and it's not just the democratic field that could see some
changes. conservative radio host and former illinois republican congressman joe walsh says he is, quote, considering a primary bid against the absolutely unfit donald trump. walsh told politico he's confident he could secure the resources and support to mount a challenge against the president. we're going to talk about all of this. but with me now from san francisco is nbc road warrior ali vitali. ali, talk to me about what the buzz is around jay inslee having left the competition. he was never somebody who could muster a lot of support in terms of percentage of the vote. but he had an outsized influence when it came to making the discussion of climate change central to the campaign. >> reporter: well, certainly he was someone who was able to bring climate change to the fore. i think on the campaign trail i was always struck by the number of people who he drew to his events. i am thinking specifically in places like new hampshire voters are really energized by the climate change issue. and jay inslee being the guy who
was the climate candidate did help to bolster his democratic brand whether or not they were going to vote for him, that didn't really pan out for him. but in terms of the way that he was also able to swing other candidates, he really did force the issue so that so many other candidates had to put out plans on climate change, had to prove that they would be climate crusaders. and even if you look at how he pressured the dnc on a single-issue debate about climate change, obviously the dnc says they're not going to do that. but other candidates really did jump on board up and down the democratic primary saying that they also wanted a race like that. and so all of that was because of jay inslee. you saw in that rachel maddow interview that he thought the issue was going to be taken care of by the other 2020 contenders. so that's why he's able to shift his focus to running for another term in 2020 in washington state. >> the gathering of democrats this weekend and the fact that joe biden's not going to be
there. >> reporter: joe biden's not going to be there, and neither is pete buttigieg. neither is beto o'rourke because, you know, these things are not mandatory, but they're suggested. it's good to be able to come and make your pitch alongside in this case 13 other democratic contenders and try to show people how you stack up. but at the same time joe biden has been to other dnc events, his advisers are going to be here. a campaign aid says he's campaigning in new hampshire and that's the way that they are looking to run their campaign. but if you look at what a weekend like this is really for from a dnc perspective, is they're laying the groundwork so that once there is a standard barrier for the democratic party next year, they can hit the ground running in terms of having a general election strategy across the map that's outside of what that specific campaign already has. you know that the rnc is already doing this for trump, that trump himself, i know you mentioned that he might have another primary contender against him, but right now he's sort of sailing there unscathed. and so the rnc is getting to put
together its ground game already knowing that they are mostly doing it around trump. he has co-opted the party in that sense. but the democrats here are really focused on how do they lay the best groundwork for the eventual nominee so that they can hit the ground running once that person is selected. >> ali vitali for us on the road in san francisco. after the president waffled back and forth on his decision pertaining to gun control, they will be releasing gun control proposals in the coming weeks. though aides declined to reveal specific details, politico reports that the white house did not give a timetable for the proposals which will likely include other legislation and executive actions addressing domestic terrorism, violent video games, and mental health treatment. but suggested the package would be time to congress' return in early september. aides did say the president would offer ways to close loopholes in the background check system, a system he praised just yesterday for being very, very strong. >> we have very, very strong background checks right now.
but we have sort of missing areas and areas that don't complete the whole circle. and we are looking at different things, and i have to tell you that it is a mental problem, and i've said it a hundred times it's not the gun that pulls the trigger, it's the person that pulls the trigger. these are sick people. >> as the president says we have very strong background checks. well, it's worth noting background checks are not required for anyone buying a gun through an unlicensed dealer which can be anyone selling a gun online at gun shows or through private sales. joining me now is nbc's white house correspondent jeff. what are they talking about here? what could the white house possibly be doing? the president talked about some background checks. then he spoke to wayne lapierre of the nra and suddenly there was no talk around background checks. >> reporter: let me break this down for you because the president has baffled lawmakers, those of us in the press. he's been staking out policy positions all over the map. on one hand suggesting that he's
all for strength and background checks. and the next day he's really articulating what are very specific nra talking points. he mentioned that tougher gun laws are a slippery slope in his view toward confiscation. i should use the trumpian-sized caveat that only the president can speak for himself because we've seen how time and time again he undercuts his staff and reverses his own position. but the view from the white house, ali, is that the president is still on board with what he initially called this is after those twin tragedies in texas and ohio, what he initially called meaningful background checks. so the white house is playing a bit of a semantic game. what he means is he supports background checks that would screen for people who are mentally ill, people who are disturbed, people who are getting treatment that those folks should not be able to procure firearms. it's not clear what that would look like in terms of black and white in terms of policy. it's not clear if democrats on capitol hill would go for a more narrow policy proposal as it relates to gun control. but one of the reasons that is
really -- one of the reasons why the president is having a hard time settling on a message is because he tends to view all of this through a political lens, even though national polling shows that there is broad support across the board for tougher background checks and some stricter gun restrictions. the president doesn't see it that way. he views it as that anything that might win him, say female voters in the suburbs that might cost him with his conservative base. so that's one of the reasons why you see him in realtime shifting all over the place. the one thing that i have learned both from my conversations with folks here at the white house and folks here on the hill is that the consensus seems to be that if they don't get something done by september, if they don't put something on the floor, if it doesn't happen in september, it's not going to happen at all before the 2020 election because republicans in particular don't want to expend too much political capital on this. and president trump himself would much rather pivot back to issues like immigration and some of those culture war issues he thinks he's stronger on as we
head towards the 2020 election. >> i don't know if it's a strong or not strong position. it's just remarkably inconsistent. geoff bennett for us at the white house. gun safety reform is the bias for joe biden's new campaign ad. my next guest says the ad separates him from the rest of the field of contenders. "washington post" opinion writer jennifer rubin shows first he shows frankly how easy it. second the last few seconds are perhaps the most important. joe biden has beat the nra twice and will do it again. the point here is that talk is cheap, and there is no evidence that any of biden's opponents who are offering quite similar proposals will be able to fulfill their promises on guns. with me now is jennifer rubin and msnbc political contributor. talk to me about why you think because i think there are a lot of viewers who are not sure about the differences between
democratic candidates and their positions on guns. why you think joe biden's is more effective. >> i think you have to look at this not so much as the substance because, frankly, most of them have the same proposals in terms of expanding the background checks, banning assault weapons, those sorts of things. i think it's his ability to message it that is a little bit different. this is a meat and potatoes campaign. there's not a lot of fancy moves here. what he is saying first of all is look how disjointed, incoherent erratic the president is. and in your previous segment you just showed that even worse that on a day-to-day basis he will say anything to get whoever is asking the question to
leave him alone, but ultimately the bottom line is he does nothing. and then the second part of that is he really is trying to play the experience card. i think the sense is that right now we have a chaos president as jeb bush correctly predicted. we are every day at sea as to
what the policy is, what's going on, much of nothing is getting done. and i think biden is offering some calm, some maturity, some experience. and there is a statement of the electorate who wants the noise and the craziness to stop. and he is aiming directly at those. so the message is simple. trump is all over the map. he's bonkers and unreliable. steady joe, i've done it before, i can do it again. and that's basically the message. >> i'm always puzzled by this one because our opinion polls indicate the vast majority of people would support basically fairly common sense things about guns. some people don't like to call it gun control. i have zero problem calling it gun control because it is what it is. we would control some access to guns for some people. it's easy to push back on the slippery slope argument the nra makes. why not depart from the president as republicans on his
inconsistent positions on guns? the president swaps around his positions, waffles like nobody i've ever seen on guns. the but republicans could come up with something formidable to say we are fundamentally standing behind second amendment rights and fixing some of the problem that we've got going on. >> there are two reasons. first of all is the money reason. the nra, not only are they intimidated by ads or polling support by those people who are single-issue voters that the nra can mobilize. and the second reason is fear. they are trapped between wanting to appeal to a broader audience, suburban women, for example, which would be delighted to get some real gun control and their hardcore base. for many of these people, certainly congressman and gerrymander districts but also some senators in red states, it's just too big a gamble for them. they might pick up some suburban women, but they can't afford to depress enthusiasm in those
deep, deep red areas. so they are making a political calculation. i think what they're seeing what we're beginning to see is that political calculation has to change. we saw how suburban women turned out in droves. we saw 40 seats in the suburbs flip. so i think the more people who feel passionately about this issue, many of them moms, moms demand action. the harder it is going to be for those republicans to do nothing. many of them still-and certainly in the house they aren't going to do anything. but you may see a little bit of softness around the edges. and ultimately this is a campaign issue. ultimately this is a popular issue. if democrats can run
on it fully and with passion, perhaps they will knock some of those senators out. >> let's talk about jay inslee leaving the race. a lot of people liked him. a lot of people liked the fact that he made climate change easy to explain. i'm not going to be the standard
bearer so i'm out. >> how refreshing, going out like a class act. he really did have some substantive things to say. i sort of wonder whether he had too much emphasis on simply the climate issue. he had a really impressive run as governor. he has improved on jobs, on health care, on education, running as the complete package of a progressive governor. maybe there would have been a different result. but it's not. he is not a flash in the pan kind of guy. he is not a super sound byte kind of guy. unfortunately our political system tends to punish those sorts of people. i think he would be on the short list for multiple cabinet positions if a democrat does get elected. whaxlt a world if we weren't in a super sound byte kind of world where we just discussed everything in as great depth as we'd like to. jennifer rubin, opinion writer at "the washington post." up next, the economy created that of a million fewer jobs.
the largest downward job revision since 2009 when we had the last recession. we're going to tell you which six sectors were hardest hit and how the revision might affect you after the break. plus, telephone companies are teaming up with state attorneys general to fight those annoying robo calls we all get. we'll tell you about it on the other side. you are watching msnbc. even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin... i want that too. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. what's next? reeling in a nice one. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding.
while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden sign of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you. it made hered my mom feel proud.esults, ancestry specifically showed the regions that my family was from. new features. greater details. richer stories. get your dna kit today at ancestry.com. let's see, aleve is than tylenol extra strength. and last longer with fewer pills. so why am i still thinking about this? i'll take aleve. aleve. proven better on pain. this is rhis life is...of pretty comfortable. rick blomquist thought he had comfort all figured out.
as strong as first thought. the labor department says employers added half a million fewer jobs than previously reported in 2018 and early in 2019. the largest revision since the end of the recession in 2009. the revision is preliminary as the bureau of labor statistics aligns its estimates of the number of jobs created with more definitive data from the state unemployment insurance tax records which nearly all employers are required to file. so we take it from a sample set into ultimate real data. the final update which will include the rest of this year is going to be released in february of 2020. now some of the largest adjustments were from consumer-oriented businesses. retailers created 146,000 fewer thousand jobs than first reported. hotels, restaurants, and entertainment companies created 175,000 fewer jobs. the professional and business services, manufacturing, construction, mining, logging industries, they all created
fewer jobs. however, transportation and warehousing companies created nearly 79,000 more jobs than first reported thanks to a boom in online shopping. same thing that hurts retail workers. the information and financial industries along with government agencies also created more jobs than initially reported. so, how does the government get the number of jobs created which it usually reveals on the first friday of every month? that's jobs day we like to call it. around the middle of the previous month, the bureau of labor statistics is part of the department of labor surveys about 142,000 industries covering 689,000 individual work sites. they get detailed information about employment, hours worked and wages. so this is an estimate that will be revised as the bureau gets new, harder data. joining us now to take a closer look at this is cnbc editor-at-large john harwodd. half a million jobs lower than
we thought. we don't talk about this a lot because the revisions tend to be much smaller year to year. the last time the revision was this large was, you know, right after a recession or it was actually reflecting a time that was still in recession in the united states. what do you make of this? >> well, as you just indicated, the reports of jobs created is based on a survey of businesses. and survey have certain assumptions built into them. and when you're in the middle of a positive cycle economically, the assumptions you build into that survey are going to be more favorable and produce a better result. and if you find out retrospectively that actually you are in a not so favorable situation, then those assumptions are disproven and you adjust your data. it's kind of like you take an exit poll in an election and then you later try to match that up with actual vote totals. when they go state by state and figure out what happened with these jobs, that's when you have
a revision. and if you have a turn in the economy, it may not indicate a recession, but it may indicate an inflexion point in terms of the growth that we are experiencing. that's when you get a big revision of this kind. >> let's talk about these inflexion points. the data that guys like you and me look at that do not a recession make or not a strong economy make, they're kind of there and you have to take them into stock. august we had manufacturing purchasing managers index it's called. it's some sense of what manufacturing purchasing managers buy. the index was at 49.9 in august. it was down from 50.4 in july. 50 is considered neutral on this measure. this is just an initial reading for august. we don't know how it'll be revived. but when you look at things like that, what do you tell people who ask you, john, are we going to have a recession, are we not? >> i don't think it's determinative of whether or not we're going to have a recession.
but what it tells us is that the economy is slowing. we also saw that when we saw business investment go negative in the second quarter of this year. we had a relatively strong year in 2018, although those numbers were revised down not long ago on an annual basis it was a 2.9% growth year. that's pretty good in this economy. the long-term potential of our economy is only about 2% when you consider the size of the labor force and rates of productivity. but from that acceleration in 2009, we are clearly in a lower phase now. economists think we're going to be, give or take, 2%, 2.1, 2.2% for this year, another slow year in 2020. could we fall into recession? yes. the trade war's relevant to that. and the impact of the global slowdown is relevant for that as well. but unquestionably this economy is slowing, and it's not as the president has portrayed the greatest economy in american
history. >> but your analysis of this is wrong, john. donald trump has tweeted about what the problem really is. he said the economy's doing really well. the federal reserve can easily make it record setting. the question is being asked, why are we paying much more in interest than germ dismaechl certain other countries. be early for a change, not late. let america win big rather than just win. the narrative the president had is that it's all good, but for the federal reserve, not cutting rates as much as the president would like them to do. if they did, not good, not great, record-setting. >> right. he needs a scape goat for this deceleration in the economy. the fed cut rates in july. they may cut again in september. but given how rates low already there, the extent to which monetary policy can goose this economy, and how fast it can
goose this economy is very much in doubt. the tariffs are probably having, and he continues to apply tariffs, if he does not indefinitely delay the tariffs he's already pushed until december, that can have a greater and more immediate effect than changes in monetary policy. but it can be argued and some argue on both the left and right that the fed erred in raising late last year. but that's not why the economy slowed down. we already knew that before that decision was taking. >> i'm back to thinking your analysis is correct. john harwood, thank you. he is cnbc's editor-at-large. all right. up next, 2020 presidential candidate senator bernie sanders rolls out his $16.3 trillion plan to fight climate change packed with policies aimed at helping the u.s. transition to 100% renewable energy by 2030 and achieve full decarb nization by 2050. we will dive into the details after the break. ter the break.s.
worry free. boom! ha.ha. boom! now save $249 on this lenovo ideapad, plus total tech solution at office depot officemax or officedepot.com. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. ...depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, with trusted protection for all out confidence... beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®. going back to the doctor just for a shot.
with neulasta onpro... ...patients get their day back... ...to be with... ... family... ...or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study... ...neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17%... ...to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver... ...neulasta the day after chemo... ...and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome... ...have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing... ... or allergic reactions to your doctor right away in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes... ...fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect... is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor... ...about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.rkey.
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. 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.
basically wiped out last november by the camp fire, the most destructive wildfire in california history, the fire which was ignited by powerlines killed 85 people and raised new questions about the impact of climate change on wildfires. let's take a closer look at some of the ambitious goals in sanders' plan. it calls for 100% renewable energy by 2030 and full decarbonization by 2050. this is remarkable. we are such a carbon-dependent economy. the idea is that we will not be carbon-dependent by 2050. he says it'll create 20 million jobs across industries to decarbonize the economy. but this is where his plan differs from many other climate proposals. he puts a price tag on it and he lays out a cost it. >> would cost $16.3 trillion. now, on one hand that makes it the most expensive climate plan from the democratic contenders. on the other hand, we have to
look at the cost of not doing anything. the investment in renewable energy would cost $1.5 trillion, $850 billion to build energy storage capacity, 526 billion for a smart grid, an electric grid, $2 trillion in grants to weatherize and retrofit homes and businesses. the plan would include $2 trillion in electric vehicle grants, a $300 billion transportation investment, and a $607 billion regional high-speed rail to get people out of their cars into trains. it envisions a role for farmers with $160 billion for soil health improvements and carbon sequestration getting carbon out of the soil and out of the air. let's remember this. according to the fourth national climate assessment with no action on climate change, if we did nothing by 2019 we can expect up to 9300 more deaths per year and $506 billion in
economic damage per year. but with actions to mitigate and adapt, a report by two scientists with the environmental protection agency found the u.s. could benefit about $10 trillion in savings by the year 2100. nbc news political reporter shaquille brewster joins us now with more on that. what's the main message that sanders is trying to send with this plan? >> reporter: well, sanders is traveling to lead the pack, essential as governor jay inslee drops out of the race. he's trying to lead the pack on the issue of climate change. and you laid it out there. this is an extensive plan that goes on for about 12,000 words. i am told that the campaign worked on it for several months to put this together. and what's similar to other candidates is that it recommits and he promises to recommit the united states to the paris climate agreement which means they want to hit that target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050. what's a little bit different as you laid out is the 20 million
jobs that he says he needs to create in order to achieve that goal. he wants to have union jobs. he wants to completely restructure the system to a clean energy economy. and he believes that by doing this and enacting this plan, he can do that. now how does he pay for this? you mentioned some of the things, and he goes through in this plan he details different ways to pay for it including ways, including increasing taxes on the wealthy, including energy proposals. but one of the ways that's really interesting is that he goes and he proposes going after the fossil fuel industry. that's something that he talks about regularly on the campaign trail. but he says not only will he take away those fossil fuel subsidies that they get, but he'll go after them in court, both civilly and criminally. listen to how sanders who is speaking right now in chico, california, listen to how he set up this proposal at that townhall. >> right now on this planet, the countries of the world are spending about a trillion and a
half dollars every single year on weapons of destruction designed to kill each other. now wouldn't it be extraordinary if we used that money to come together and instead of killing each other maybe we use that money against our common enemy, which is climate change. [ cheers and applause ] >> reporter: and sanders made climate change and combating climate change an idea central to his 2016 campaign. you remember he was somewhat mocked when he described climate change as the national security threat, the biggest national security threat facing the united states at that time. this proposal this time around is much significant, much more aggressive than what he proposed even back then. ali? >> all right, shaquille, good to see you as always. joining us now to take a closer look at senator sanders' plan is co-founder of the environmental news website our daily planet. mira, good to see you. thank you for joining you. i want to get into the nitty-gritty because that's what you guys do. you specialize at this stuff. there is a report from "the
washington post" on sanders' plan, and it says the high cost of sanders' plan is due in part to eschewing partnerships to hit his goal of 100% renewable energy in the power sector by 2030. instead, sanders wants to establish a new federal electric utility to provide power to northeast and midwestern states while expanding the four existing power administrations that cover most of the rest of the lower 48. i'm intrigued by this only because one of the things we are trying to figure out is something that's going to cost 10 million or 15 trillion or $20 trillion to redo our economy, our carbon-based economy, do we do this hand in hand with business? should government be taking that big a role in this whole thing? how do you look at this and how do you recommend that these candidates move forward on their suggestions? >> reporter: sure. well, i think one of the things to note is that in senator
sanders' plan, he's willing to declare climate change a national emergency. so right off the bat, that gives the president of the united states specific executive powers that he can use for things like eminent domain. because in order to build out this modernized grid, in order to expand renewable energy, they're going to have to be new transmission lines built. and those transmission lines will have to run through a lot of privately owned land. so i think first and foremost, that's how we have to think of senator sanders' plan is that he is along to el late climate change to the highest level and use his power ass accordingly. what does decarbonized mean to you? >> so decarbonization in so many sectors in transportation and housing certainly in how we generate energy as you mentioned before on your program, it's
very heavily reliant on fossil fuels. and furthermore, our economy is based on function on the reliance of fossil fuels. so separating our economy from this reliance is going to be a big challenge. and i think in senator sanders' proposal, he lays out a pretty good groundwork for how we might do that, and the various sectors that we have to consider such as transportation which is heavily emphasized in his plan because right now transportation is the number one source of greenhouse gas emissions in the united states. so i think that him and his staff have really thought through these sectors and how we separate them from reliance on fossil fuels. >> so the distinction here between being carbon-neutral by a certain date and decarbonization is significant. we're talking about -- he's talking about by 2050 having no use for fossil fuels. >> that's right, yes. and so i think that also eliminates things like carbon offsets.
so if industries are going to buy offsets, you know, someone somewhere in the world isn't emitting carbon while we get to do so, that phases that out. so that's how you get back to address carbon neutrality. >> is that reasonable? is decarbonization something that we should be talking about all the time? is that a reasonable expectation? >> i think so. i think more than anything we should focus on the opportunities that exist in decarbonization. and senator sanders' plan certainly does that through the creation of jobs, through ensuring that front line communities and communities of color, especially have the resources to participate in this new vision for the future. and that it's not just wealthy americans that get to profit off of this new economy and are also able to pick up and leave if, you know, if their homes burn down or if sea levels rise and eliminate where they live. >> miro, good to talk to you.
she is the co-founder of our daily planet. and a reminder, msnbc is teaming up on climate change with georgetown and our daily planet september 19th and 20th. chris hayes and i will host and moderate a two-day climate forum with the 2020 presidential candidates. up next, we all get them and i think it's safe to say we all hate them. now telephone companies are agreeing to implement new technology to block annoying robo calls. one of the architects of the plan north carolina attorney general josh stein joins me after the break. you are watching msnbc.
all right. every united states attorney general is pledged to take action today on an issue that is posed major frustration to millions of americans including yours truly, robo calls. in 2018 alone, there were almost 48 billion robo calls to u.s. phone numbers. i think i got a billion of them. they are not just annoying, as people have been harassed or scammed out of thousands of dollars, they're more than that. the attorney generals are joining with 12 of the phone companies, cell phone companies, that have agreed to use call-blocking technology at no cost to consumers. they will also monitor their networks for robo call traffic and work with law enforcement to trace the source of illegal robo calls. we should note our parent company comcast has signed onto this agreement. joining me now is north carolina attorney general josh stein. he led the effort to bring together this coalition of companies and attorney generals. attorney general, i mean, i don't have anything to do with north carolina, but i am tempted
to just move there now to just vote for you if you make this happen. what are you going to do for us? >> well, fortunately you don't need to do that because this is going to be national in scope. you know, this issue about robo calls, you've hit the problem. it's the number one complaint i hear when i'm out traveling across my state. and it's an annoyance, but it's also a source of incredible scams. one woman lost over $200,000 from a sweepstakes generated robo call. so it is imperative that we take action. and as state attorneys general whose job it is to protect the people of our state, we decided we couldn't wait on washington. we are pleased that congress is moving. we are pleased the fcc is moving. but we wanted to engage the phone companies directly and urge them to deploy technologies to help screen out these unwanted calls and then also to work with us, partner with us so that we can trace back to the origin who these robo callers
are and hold them accountable. >> talk to me about the technology. does it exist? can these companies figure out what a robo call is or where it's originating from? >> yes. it's imperfect as ever -- it's ever-emerging, it's ever-improving. but they can deploy network-level technology that applies before the call comes in and you the consumer don't have to do anything. there is no cost, no action required on your part. and they will screen out a large number of these illegal robo calls. and then they're going to make additionally available technology to either call-block or call-label additional calls at the will or the wish of the consumer. they also are going to deploy call authentication technology so that when you get that caller id and it looks like it's, you know, it's your area code. >> which is what most of the ones i get look like a real number. >> those are called spoofed.
they are fake. they are going to be able to ensure that the number that displays on that screen is actually the number that's calling you. >> are more -- i see you got 35 companies here. but some of them are not there. what's the plan here? do you think more companies will join? >> i absolutely believe more companies will join. we've been negotiating this up until the last minute. we had 12 companies that joined today. 50 states including the district of columbia, this is a nonpartisan issue. we all agree this is a scourge, it's an annoyance, but it's a harm to our people. >> this might be the thing that brings americans together. [ laughter ] there is nobody in this country who makes a case for more robo calls. when will consumers see a measurable difference? >> well, i really wish that i could tell you that tomorrow you're not going to get any more robo calls. that's just not going to be the case. it's going to take time.
some of it is deploying the technology. some of the companies are further along at doing this than other companies. what we want for us to succeed all companies have to deploy all strategies. so some of them will take a little more time. and then some of it is just going to require gumshoo investigation where we trace back the calls to the point of origin so we can identify the illegal robo callers and hold them accountable. that requires going to court. so what we hope is over time we will see a substantial diminishment of these calls. and we also know that these principles are not the be all end all. the criminals are smart, creative, and exceptionally greedy. and they will try to do end runs around them and come up with new ways to scam us. and we're going to commit to work with these phone companies to continue to engage and identify new ways that we can fight back. >> sir, thank you for joining me. i appreciate it.
i'm glad to know i don't have to move to north carolina, but i was getting a little bit excited by the thought. >> hey, north carolina is beautiful. you're most welcome, ali. >> josh stein is the attorney general of north carolina. the pentagon is warning that isis is gaining strength across iraq and syria. what we need to know about the growing threat of terror in the middle east ahead of a possible troop withdrawal. that's next. to open an account. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero 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 let's get down to business. the business of atlanta on monday...
o♪ ozempic®! ♪ oh! oh! (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 7 and maintained it. oh! under 7? (announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? (announcer) 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®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®.
the trump administration is working on a plan to completely withdraw u.s. forces from afghanistan, as peace talks with the taliban move forward. but the president's previous claim isis, which decimated portions of that region, has been completely wiped out seems to contradict what we heard from his own secretary of state. >> there are certainly places isis is more powerful today than they were three or four years ago. but the caliphate is gone and their capacity to conduct external attacks has been made much more difficult. we've taken down a significant risk, not all of it, but a significant amount. we're very pleased with the work we've done. >> pompeo's concession comes after an inspector general's report from the pentagon back in june revealed the terrorist
group's insurgent capabilities are on the rise. joining me now is our msnbc contributor and "the new york times" foreign correspondent who covered organizations like isis and al qaeda extensively over the years. there's always been tension and argument between people who say a group is on the rise. the issue is talking about pulling out of afghanistan, which a lot of americans would support because there's a lot of fatigue over this war and no clear understanding of what success actually looks like. at the same time the last time before we went into afghanistan, it had basically become a haven for terrorists because the taliban had invited al qaeda in. what's to say that's not going to happen again? >> i think it is happening right now. according to the foundation of the defense of democracies, 50% of afghanistan is still contested or controlled by the taliban. that's an enormous swath of territory. what they have done is embedded
themselves in the rural areas around major population centers and the fear is if americans pull out, those population centers are going to be overrun. if the afghani taliban has always been a haven for al qaeda, never backed away for this and not just al qaeda but a number of other groups, like the one behind the mumbai attack and pakistani taliban, which claimed an attempted attack in times square a couple of years ago. >> at the same time you spent time recently in syria. >> yes. >> and there's talk about isis being resurgent in of this sm z places. how do we describe it? pompeo said they don't control land, the caliphate. there may be fancy footwork going on there. what do we need to know about terrorist groups, isis in particular, in iraq and syria? >> it was clear when i was there in february and first days of march that isis had never been defeated. this was a group that still had
thousands of members. the inspector general's report puts the number between 14,000 and 18,000 members just in iraq and syria. that's a huge cohort of potential fighters that they have. what happened is they no longer control territory and that territory was a haeven through which they had their cyber cafes through which they were remote controlling attacks like berlin and paris, et cetera. that capability clearly has been degraded. we have not seen the types of attacks we saw in 2015, 2016. that's good. but the fact they have so many members that are basically in nature, at wild, is not a good omen. and already we're seeing signs of them regrouping. >> you and i had a discussion earlier today about why a government, including our own, might want to project a particular image around this. it's not necessarily specific to the trump administration, administrations like to convey we're on this, we're defeating them, it's good. nobody wants to hear the other
message but there may be some danger in not fully representing the darpger isis and groups like that continue to provide. >> sure. the word isis is one of the most contentious of our age and no politician can look weak on terror. admitting isis has grown under your watch is not something any administration can do and succeed in another election. so time and again we see what is happening is an attempt to exaggerate the gains, an attempt to point to the fact the physical afa physicalical afate is gone, though the virtual remains in fact. looking at the gas half full when the half empty side is quite worrying. >> good to see you, as always, our msnbc contributor and "the new york times" foreign correspondent, expert in these matters. we will be right back after this quick break. you're watching msnbc. 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, 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. (announcer) important message for women and men ages 50 to 85. right now, in areas like yours, people have already called about life insurance through the colonial penn program and received their free beneficiary planner.
have you received your free planner? if not, i encourage you to pick up the phone and take advantage of this free offer. in addition to your free beneficiary planner, you'll also receive free information on affordable whole life insurance that has a lifetime rate lock that guarantees your rate can never increase for any reason. if you did not receive your free beneficiary planner, call this number now. please stand by to learn more. i'm alex trebek, here to tell you about a popular life insurance plan with a rate lock that locks in your rate for life so it can never increase. did you get your free information kit? if not, please call this number now. this affordable plan through the colonial penn program has coverage options for just $9.95 a month. your rate is locked in and can never go up, and your acceptance is guaranteed with no health questions. see how much coverage you can get for just $9.95 a month. call now for your free information kit.
how you watch it does too. tv just keeps getting better. this is xfinity x1. featuring the emmy award-winning voice remote. streaming services without changing passwords and input. live sports - with real-time stats and scores. access to the most 4k content. and your movies and shows to go. the best tv experience is the best tv value. xfinity x1. simple. easy. awesome. xfinity. the future of awesome.
right now. i want to tell you more than you ever needed to know about the federal reserve. the president, as you know, wants the fed to cut rates. he didn't think janet yellen, the head of the fed doing a perfectly good job, would take his orders so he put his own guy in, jerome powell and pressuring him to cut rates. when the fed cuts rates, it's a vote. they have a board. today the head of the kansas city fed, there are about six different heads all over the country, she said she doesn't believe they should have cut rates last month when they did. the head of the philadelphia said he sees no more need to cut
rates, it's not the right time to do it. we have a little tension. the people who would vote on the rate cut are not in agreement certainly with the president of the united states about the fact it should happen. that's why the president was trying to load up the fed with his own appointees, if you remember. stephen moore was one of them, herman cain another. that didn't work. but it's not enough to have appointed your own fed chief. the president needs to control the fed and they don't believe that there needs to be a rit cut. that's where you're seeing this up and down. dow is .2% higher. that wraps up this hour for me. i promised more information on the fed than you ever needed to know. thank you for watching. "deadline: white house" starts right now. hi, everyone, it's 4:00 in new york. i'm john heilemann in for nicolle wallace. a few 24 hours after a sustained presidential performance that even by donald trump's standard qualified as unhinged and