Skip to main content

tv   Deadline White House  MSNBC  November 16, 2021 1:00pm-3:00pm PST

1:00 pm
to be a republican in 2021 means showing loyally to the one-term ex-president. nothing more, but nothing less. for proof, in wyoming, the state republican party has excommunicated liz cheney, voting to no longer recognize her as a republican because of her post january 6th criticism of donald trump. cheney, whose record is as
1:01 pm
conservative as they come, fired back. her spokesman say it is -- her spokesman say it is -- sadly, a portion of the wyoming gop leadership has abandoned that principle and instead allowed themselves to be held hostage to the lies of a dangerous and irrational man. loyalty to that dangerous man also means that republicans are forced to abandon any and all pretense out of governing for fear that president trump will be mad. it's why a handful of those who voted for the infrastructure bill are facing threats of violence and calls to strip them of their calls as punishment. listen to rob portman touting the bill yesterday as key to the
1:02 pm
fight against inflation, which is top of mind for voters these days. listen to him lay out the simple logic. not all too rare in the gop of trying to do right by your constituents. >> economists say this bill is counterinflationary, which is so important right now. because american families are facing higher prices on everything from gas to groceries. the american people want us to see us coming together. they know that despite our differences, we should be able to figure it out. and work together to solve big problems. we can start by recognizing that finding common ground to advance the interests of the american people should be rewarded, not attacked. >> but attacked it is. so while democrats are engaged in the admittedly messy business of trying to govern all but themselves, republicans are busy playing defense for the insurrectionists. they're going to bat for steve
1:03 pm
bannon who defied a subpoena or republicans are trying to turn the page after paul gosar posted a video. as eugene robinson puts it -- el some kind of unstoppable. a group of hostage takers not guilty knowing our caring why. the post is awol. on their oath is where we start this hour. jackie is here, "washington post" correspondent and author
1:04 pm
of the early 202 newsletter. bazel, and daniel goldman is onset with us, which is exciting. as well as an assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and just in morning on "morning joe," he announced he's a candidate for new york attorney general. we start with this, i remember, i think it was around the same time we learned that matt gates was under investigation for allegedly violating child sex trafficking laws. to really troll liz cheney and to stir up this animosity against her and her home state. this seems to be the bookend of it. the wyoming republican party stripping her of her affiliation with the party. talk about what sort of repercussions that has, if any, on capitol hill.
1:05 pm
>> they're greater for people like her. this is a party where it has been increasingly clear over the last year, since january 6th, that people who are under investigation for sex trafficking and people who tweet antisemitic conspiracy theories and tweets threatening to kill fellow congresswoman are going to face less punishment than those who betray the former president and who go against parties of leadership and some of the most extreme players in the republican party. that has been driven home time and time again based on minority leader, kevin mccarthy's lack of actions here. we just found out on the house floor, i'm sitting in the house booth right now. not a prison cell, i promise you. that the house is going to hold a vote to censure paul gosar tomorrow. that's, you know, it's unclear how many republicans are ultimately going to vote for
1:06 pm
that. they're going -- house democrats going to try to strip him of his assignment. i just grabbed a handful of republicans. they were reticent to criticize him. i talked today a few rank and file republicans who are more chatty and willing to criticize someone like him, but i just talked to congressman ken buck who said he didn't have an opinion on the matter and again, haven't heard any republican yet other than adam kinsinger and liz cheney, the normal republicans we always hear from, who seem to be willing to hold paul gosar accountable for his actions. >> it's so bizarre. i'm wondering if steve scalise has any opinions, being the victim. >> i didn't have time to find him today, but there seems to be a willingness here with at least
1:07 pm
in house leadership to turn a blind eye to these people like marjorie taylor greene and paul gosar. the motivations have not been explicitly stated by house leadership, but at the end of the day, if your looking at this at least, you know, from an objective perspective, these are the people who are most aligned with the former president trump's agenda and a series of loyalty tests are playing out before our very eyes. >> if you want to know how good and popular the infrastructure bill is and if you want to be reassured that even paul gosar and kevin mccarthy, but kevin mccarthy knows it. i think jackie just perfectly described the republican party today. despite that, the hostage taking that eugene writes about, 19
1:08 pm
republican senators voted for the infrastructure package. 13 republicans who know the only way to get in trouble is not to hunt their democratic colleagues in the halls of congress. is not to taunt their colleagues. is not to disseminate kill videos. it is dare to tell the truth about january 6th and it is to dare to govern. that's how dangerous this infrastructure bill is to these republicans. i wonder what you make of the democrats sort of ability to exploit that reality? >> i think we should exploit the reality in unprecedented ways because this is unprecedented times. now, let me say this. you know, there are too many republicans and if we talk about sort of where the party is, there are too many republicans that play fast and loosely white supremacy. that's a problem, right?
1:09 pm
and we should recognize that as a problem. the issue is not too many of them recognize it as an issue today. and i want to be fair because democrats, particularly the african-american, democrats weren't always on the side of justice. there were a lot of them that voted against the civil rights act in 1964, for example, so people are the same. it's the labels that tend to change from time to time. but this republican party, this modern republican party is not the party of jack kemp. not even the party of george pataki, the governor for 12 years in new york. it's not the party of larry hogan in maryland. it is a party that has perpetuated white supremacy for years. and seems to refuse to do anything different. it is intent upon aber gaiting
1:10 pm
people particularly at the voting booth and i don't necessarily see a situation where any one or a few of the republicans that i talk to and work with and enjoy engaging with. it's a burden, it's such a huge burden for them to put all of this on their shoulders to try to change the party from within. the beauty of what happened with the infrastructure bill is that we were able, i think, to give those republicans cover. and the sad part of the bill passing, the sad part would be if we as democrats don't give them some cover, but understanding that we still actually also need to elect democrats, but that said, we should be able to go back to their districts and say we've gotten this for you. if they can't do that or if the voices on the far right are not allowing them to do that, i don't really see from a democratic standpoint, how many victims we can eke out.
1:11 pm
it's a fight we have to fight everywhere for every seat, every level of government in every state. >> i saw the portman comments as like an inoculation for any charges about spending. next time someone attacks this white house over inflation, and anyone that's worked in the white house knows that presidents have less to do with the success and failure of the economy than presidents claim when the economy's good or that presidents deserve blame for when they're not so good, but the truth doesn't seep into many of our debates so we'll put that aside. but rob portman, who ran the budget office for george w. bush saying this bill is a weapon against inflation, that should be put into an ad. that's the best argument for joe biden. how do democrats make sure to use the republican support to boost biden's approval ratings? >> well, we elected biden
1:12 pm
because he could speak to republicans. he could speak to moderates. so he's got to do that. from his voice in the communities where we felt we were weak in all of those blue collar communities, inflation is a kitchen table issue. the ability of a family to be able to go out and buy christmas gifts or a thanksgiving turkey is a kitchen table issue. he has to go out and start talking about that. going to congressional districts across the country and say guess what, this infrastructure bill is adding these jobs, this salary, these benefits in your community. we have to go out and get that much on the ground. if we don't do that, the fear is that we will be, we will be, the republicans are going to talk about us like they talked about jimmy carter and we're not going to be able to get out from under that. so he's got to proactively start it now. just go out to districts across the country and start selling
1:13 pm
this. >> he's doing that right now. in new hampshire where it's snowing. i want to talk to you about something congressman raskin said. if ron klain ever participates in a violent insurrection, i hope they would bring him in. what you have is a former friend of the president -- it is absurd and i would hope our gop colleagues understand there's no legal basis for what steve bannon is saying. so this is where i want to ask you if we're heading. do you believe we're heading toward another contempt referral for mark meadows? >> i think that case is a lot more complicated because meadows was a white house employee at the time of the election, the insurrection. steve bannon was not. so there's no claim of executive privilege no matter whether donald trump wants to assert it
1:14 pm
or not. mark meadows is more complicated, but that's why if i were the january 6 committee, i would focus solely on his testimony because he may have executive privilege claims that over documents in particular or the president may have them, that meadows is not in a position to adjudicate whether or not the privilege applies, but the law is very clear and was recently affirmed in the mcgahn case in the district court in 2019 that regardless of whether you have executive privileges, you do not have absolute immunity and you must show up for testimony and then you can exert whatever executive privilege you have. meadows did not do that. and there's no bases for him to do that. whereas bannon got both counts, i think they would be smart to
1:15 pm
move forward with the testimony from meadows. >> there's more of a fulsome picture coming into view. john carl has new reporting about now aggressively meadows pressured mike pence to overturn the result of the 2020 election ahead of and on january 6th. mark meadows is represented, at least as of yesterday, by george -- he's a real lawyer. not one of these lunatics trump seems to attract. i don't understand in what jamie describes as if ron klain ever participates in a violent insurrection against the union. mark meadows orchestrated a violent insurrection against the union. you sort of dealt with all of the witnesses in the first impeachment trial. do you think there starts to be attention around these witnesses as the picture fills in and the
1:16 pm
people who have been through that committee start to tell their stories and we know more and more and more and what these folks have done? >> what we found during impeachment is oddly enough the lower level career government officials or even lower level appointed government officials were much more willing and eager to abide by their legal duty under a subpoena to come testify than the senior officials were. that was one of the things that was so frustrating about bolton when he didn't come in and yet you had alexander vinman coming in and bolton has a long illustrious career that he can lean on. vinman's career was blown up by this. yet vinman was the one who went in. am i surprised that mark meadows or kash patel went in? no. they're trump associates through and through, but when you start
1:17 pm
to go down the line and people farther away from trump, they're worried about their careers an are worried about the rule of law. why this bannon indictment is so important is because it's the first step to get back to the rule of law that we've known in this country for 250 years. it's an essential step. meadows is another. you brought up a different issue, which is that the department of justice in order to reinstate the rule of law really needs to look into what transpired and around the white house and with that campaign from november 3rd all the way through january 6th because what we have learned, you and i have talked about this, is what was going on behind the scenes to try to overturn the election is in many ways far worse than what donald trump at least did on january 6th. and the department of justice needs to be investigating
1:18 pm
whether there was a conspiracy to violate federal laws by interfering with the lawful execution of an election. that would be the way, no matter what they would say on the right and they will just like bannon has claimed, it's political. >> doesn't matter what you do. >> exactly. you have to adhere to the rule of law and get us back into a price where rule of law trumps. >> i think i understand what you're saying, i just want to press on this. i mean, then acting attorney general rosen and his deputy, mr. donahue, have already testified to what based on their notes, which read like transcripts from a call with donald trump, amount to the architecture of a conspiracy. donald trump said declare it corrupt, me and my r buddies will do the rest. so i mean, what else do you need to open a criminal investigation that goes to the white house?
1:19 pm
>> that's the thing. there's so much more than that. there's the call. there's donald trump summoning the michigan state legislators to try to get them to overturn it. >> got the voice mail now. what else do you need to open a criminal investigation as to whether there was a conspiracy? >> i don't think you need anything more. >> do you think there is a criminal investigation? >> it's possible. we don't know. it is supposed to be kept confidential. but i was in d.c. long enough to know that usually these things get out and it wouldn't necessarily be a leak from the department of justice, but defense lawyers talk. witnesses talk. i tend to think we would have heard if there is an investigation. >> to be continued and you're sticking around. jackie, thank you so much for
1:20 pm
starting us off today. stay with us. when we come back, chris christie. i know. i know. but listen. he says it's time for his party and donald trump to renounce conspiracy theories. it's not new for the ex-president. so how did chris christie find himself throwing his weight behind him early in the republican primary in the first place? one of the many questions we'll put to him, next. plus, the final days of the last administration are the subject of a congressional select committee and also several books. we'll talk to jonathan carl who adds his stunning reporting to the record of this perilous time for democracy. all that and more after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. more a break. don't go anywhere today. .. the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ a mountain of toys to fulfill many wishes must be carried across all roads and all bridges.
1:21 pm
it's not magic that makes more holiday deliveries to homes in the us than anyone else, it's the hardworking people of the united states postal service. ♪ ♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪ ♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪
1:22 pm
you're never responsible for unauthorized to unveil them to the world. purchases on your discover card.
1:23 pm
1:24 pm
donald trump is here tonight. i know he's taken flak lately, but no one is prouder to put this birth certificate matter to rest than the donald. and that's because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter. like, did we fake the moon landing? what really happened in roswell? and where are biggie and tupac? >> whether you were there or not, we all remember that night in 2011 and what sprung from it. our next guest writes about it. it's reportedly the moment that
1:25 pm
made donald trump so mad he decided to run for president four years later, but the most important thing to remember about trump from president obama is that it makes clear that the whole world knew who he was, who he always was. a bald faced liar, an obsessed conspiracy theorists who had the fabrication that president obama was not a citizen of this country. when you remember that, it should come as no surprise that that's the man, disgraced ex-president, who claims that the election, one that was called the most secure in our country's history by a lifelong republican, chris krebs, was stolen from him. in a new book, former new jersey governor and presidential candidate, chris christie, writes about the birther conspiracy. quote, it paved the way for wave
1:26 pm
after wave of other conspiracies to come, wild fantasies, bizarre allegations and outright lies. it showed that personal falsehoods even when plainly disproven can still do political damage. lies, even discredited lie, never really go away. it cheapened the truth, hurt our political and policy credibility. we are still paying the price and for no good reason. joining us now is former new jersey governor, chris christie, the author of that new book, republican rescue, saving the party from truth deniers, conspiracy theoristings and the dangerous policies of joe biden. we'll talk about the title in a second, but i pulled that speech because you write about it and you write about how angry donald trump got. but you knew before you endorsed him that he was someone hostage to delusions. did that weigh on you when you threw your support behind him? >> well, i think it's extreme to
1:27 pm
say i knew he was totally hostage to delusions. >> did. >> well, obama was having fun that night. let's remember the context of that speech and i think president obama was right in what he did that night. he felt like trump had raked him over the coals, over the birth certificate issue and once he decided to put out his long form birth certificate, he felt it was time to hit back and that dinner that night, which he had every right to do, he did it. i was there that night. i was watching it. i spoke to donald trump afterwards and i know how angry he was at being made a source of ridicule when he had no ability to reply. so look, i knew all those things, but as i explained to the british ambassador when he was asking me about our electoral system, he said i don't understand your electoral system. i said we often don't get to vote for who we want to. we get to vote for who's left. and so for me, the 2016 election after i dropped out, because i
1:28 pm
was my first choice for president, not donald trump, was between donald trump and hillary clinton and to me, i could not support hillary clinton for president of the united states so i tried to make donald trump as i said in the book and in previous times, a better candidate and if you want a better president and that was everything i was trying to do over the course of this four-year period. >> talk about your decision to write about the danger of truth deniers and conspiracy theorists? i assume you're talking about donald trump. >> as you know from having read it in the middle of the book, we go through birtherism, qanon, pizza gate and the stuff surrounding the 2020 election and we talk about it in the context of what reagan and buckley did in the '60s to stand up to the john birch society. our party has had this problem before and that we stood up to it. leaders stood up to it. that's why i thought it was so important to do it. where he need as a party to be a
1:29 pm
viable, winning, second party in this country. we need to be back to the truth and putting these things in the correct context. and that's why like a prosecutor, i tried to go through each one of those chapters, here are the allegations, the real facts and here's what i conclude and you conclude what you want from reading it to the reader. >> i mean, i concluded that you as a sort of post 9/11 prosecutor with all this experience about terrorism think this is really dangerous. is that fair? >> oh, yeah. it's bad for our party. but more importantly, it's bad for our country. >> do you agree with christopher wray? >> i don't know if chris still thinks that. >> he testified to that in september. >> he did. >> and again in february. >> i don't know -- >> and again i think in may. three times. >> i don't know -- i haven't spoken to chris. i don't know if he still think that is, but what i think is it's definitely a big threat to the country. >> what could be bigger?
1:30 pm
>> look, i think that what's happening in afghanistan now and what the results of that could be could become an even bigger threat and we'll see. i don't know whether chris after the disaster of afghanistan, whether chris' opinion is still the same because that's pretty fresh, but there's no doubt that violence inside, we saw this happen not only surrounding the election of 2020 on january 6th but we saw it in places like portland and seattle, new york, chicago, philadelphia. and other places. >> so chris' testimony, i want to be clear what he's testified to. it was, i believe the quote is, it is the greatest threat to the homeland and within that bucket, by far the largest group is white supremacy. so white supremacists did not threaten portland and new york. are you saying that -- >> i'm expanding on what chris said.
1:31 pm
>> do you agree or not that white supremacist -- is the greatest threat? >> i don't know if i agree it's a greatest, but i agree it is a threat. there are other threats we need to be concerned about as well. i think when we label something the greatest threat, when you do that, you exclude looking or minimize looking at the other ones. that's not good for the safety and security of the american people either. >> would you disavow any support from white supremacist aligned militia groups? if you run, you would disavow their support? >> absolutely. and five seconds afterwards because i believe as i wrote in the book, like reagan did with the john birch society, he said they may support me, but i don't support them. and reagan made it very clear that he didn't stand for that. i think that's the way we have to deal with any of these extremist groups on the right and the left. >> who are the extremist groups
1:32 pm
on the left? >> antifa, clearly. >> they're not an organization. >> well, look, i disagree with chris on that. and i think there are extremist groups on the left and right in this country and any serious political candidate for national office, if supported by an extremist group that advocates violence, whether it's going back to the ku klux klan or any of the groups we have today, they need to be rejected. >> so donald trump didn't do that. did you talk to him about that? >> going back to 2016 -- >> david duke. >> right. i was, if not the first one on the phone with him, i was the one urged as i wrote in my last book, by reince priebus to get him to reject that. he ultimately did. not as quickly as i might have liked. >> so you want me to disavow, fine, jake, i disavow. >> he also put out another statement. >> but david duke didn't hear it
1:33 pm
that way. >> i don't know how he heard it and neither do you. neither one of us are inside his head. >> he spoke publicly. >> i'm more than happy to look at it and give you my opinion. >> i'm happy to know you don't want any of this, but my question is if you can identify domestic violent extremism at least alongside perhaps other threats you're aware of that christopher hasn't testified to yet publicly and you believe conspiracy theories are dangerous, how is it you arrive at supporting donald trump again if he runs in 2024? >> what i've said in answer to the question over the last three days that gets asked all the time, i'll see what happens in 2024 as to who's the nominee is and who's run and if i decide to run and what the party is doing at that time. i think to pre-judge that stuff way in advance is something that is irresponsible to do. >> donald trump right now i
1:34 pm
think has the support of 67% of respondents in the most recent poll. i know iowa polling shows something different and i hope you're right, but if he's the nominee, are you going to vote for him? >> what i'm about in this book and going forward in trying to do is to give our party a different pathway. right now, the only pathway is donald trump is showing us is grievance about the 2020 election and vendettas towards other republicans rather than providing a contrast to what joe biden and kamala harris are proposing for the country. that's the most effective way for the republicans to be able to make their case to the american people and what i've said over the last couple of days and in that book is that the only pathway for republicans to be winners again is to be talking about the future and to dismiss what happened in 2020 because in my view, from election night forward, i said the election was not stolen, but there was never any evidence
1:35 pm
presented to back that up and therefore, donald trump could have said that on election night without the evidence was irresponsible and to continue to have said it is what caused what happened on january 6th. >> and he says it to this day. i want to ask you about the infrastructure vote because you talked about and rob portman talked about it. they're there to govern, not to be attacked. if you were still the governor, would you have urged your delegation to support the package? >> yes. >> if you were a senator? >> i would never be a senator. >> would you have voted for it? >> i if would have told the other people to support it, it would be hypocritical for me not to. >> what do you think about mark meadows -- zpl this is what the book argues against is that all of this stuff that has republican on republican attacks, all of these things that sets up vendettas and vengeance and grievance is not the path forward for the
1:36 pm
republican party for us to be winning again. there are lot of things democrats are trying to do right now that republicans principally disagree with. if that's the case, let's make the case. let's not talk about all this other stuff. there are people who disagree with the infrastructure bill. my position on the bill is i don't support everything in the bill. but there's more good than bad in the bill and that's what compromise is. compromise isn't that you get everything you want. it's, okay, i'm bound. there's more there that i think is good for the country than bad therefore i would be supportive of it and it doesn't mean that i love every bit of it, but what it means is you should support something like that because it's the product of divided government and a compromise. >> we're going to take a break. stick around. when we come back, we'll ask the governor how it feels to potentially in 2024, support somebody who almost killed him. that's next. 024, support somebody who almost killed him that's next. with vicks sinex s.
1:37 pm
for fast drug free relief vicks sinex. instantly clear everyday congestion. and try vicks sinex children's saline. safe and gentle relief for children's noses. ♪ i see trees of green ♪ ♪ red roses too ♪ ♪ i see them bloom ♪ ♪ for me and you ♪ ♪ and i think to myself ♪ ♪ what a wonderful world ♪ a rich life is about more than just money. that's why at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner so you can build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner. ♪ my songs know what you did in the dark ♪ ♪ so light 'em up, up, up light 'em up, up, up ♪ ♪ light 'em up, up, up ♪ ♪ i'm on fire ♪ ♪ so light 'em up, up, up light 'em... ♪
1:38 pm
it's another day. ♪ i'm on fire ♪ and anything could happen. it could be the day you welcome 1,200 guests and all their devices. or it could be the day there's a cyberthreat. only comcast business' secure network solutions give you the power of sd-wan and advanced security integrated on our activecore platform so you can control your network from anywhere, anytime. it's network management redefined. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. comcast business powering possibilities. if you smell gas, you're too close.
1:39 pm
leave the structure, call 911, keep people away, and call pg&e right after so we can both respond out and keep the public safe. [crowd cheering] i'm not a coach, but i invested in invesco qqq. which gives me access to next-gen statistical analysis software. become an agent of innovation with invesco qqq. one of the most important things you can do is to make sure you call 811 before you dig. calling 811 to get your lines marked: it's free, it's easy, we come out and mark your lines, we provide you the information so you will dig safely.
1:40 pm
we're back with chris christie, author of the new book, republican rescue. we're going to have to agree to disagree that republicans are worth rescuing. but i want to ask you, did donald trump give yuko you covid? >> i have no idea. six of the seven of us including donald trump got covid. the only one who didn't is jason
1:41 pm
miller and so someone patient zero in that room. i don't know who it was because when all of us get it, you have to figure that someone gave it to someone and it got passed again. the map room on the first floor of the white house is a relatively small room. we were sitting, not close together, trump and i were probably about 5 feet apart across the table, like a double table together, but we were in heated debate prep. there were times he yelled at me. i was playing joe biden, i yelled back at him. >> were you tested every day when you went in the white house? >> i did. >> was that the protocol for staff? >> i believe it was. so all the staff would have been tested. >> i assume so. me, steppian, kelley ann, i know the three of us got tested. i don't know about hope, steven miller, jason miller, who were
1:42 pm
in the building every da. i don't know what the protocol was. but those of us who came from outside the build, before we could go to the west wing, they took us to the eisenhower building, got tested, waited, it was a rapid test. in about 15, 20 minutes, they gave you the green light if you were clear. >> when you ended up in the hospital with covid, trump called you. how do you think you got i, he asked me. i don't know, there was the pause, i thought the call had dropped. are you going to say you got it from me, the president asked? i know that i got it from you, sir, so i would not say that, no. he was very relieved to hear that. that was the last call in the hospital i got from donald trump. >> was he worried about you? >> the beginning of the call started with him asking how i was feeling and how i was doing so i do think there was a concern on his part about me, but then he quickly moved to that part of the conversation in great contrast to his wife, who called me every day or called me
1:43 pm
or texted me every day when i was in the hospital and spoke to mary pat every day as well, checking on how i was doing and if we needed anything. >> you were in the book about donald trump wanting you to be involved in the covid response. mike pence got the job. do you think he did a good job? >> i think the president did the worst job because he set to tone. that's what i wrote in the book about my visit to him in march to say look, you have to take this more seriously. you have to talk to the american people in a serious way about this. can't keep saying it's just going to go away because it's probably not. and you need to be on top of that in that way. we spent probably an hour and 45 minutes, just the two of us. mike pence came in once. but we were in there for most of the time alone. >> if you run in a primary against mike pence and donald trump, are you going to attack
1:44 pm
them for having blood on their hands? >> i'll talk about how i would have done things differently. i'm not sure pence is making the decisions. >> if you thought the decisions were leading to disease and death -- >> i don't know if you resign vice presidency. i think your job is to go in there and fight to change the policies. i don't know what mike did or didn't do to do that, but what i would say is that in the end, i think that was the biggest, that's the thing that the biggest political damage to the trump pence ticket was that the public's perception of their handling of covid. and what i tried to convince him was that the way i handled sandy was a much better model for doing it and like you said, he did mention me taking that job. i went to check with my wife to make sure she was okay with it. she was. so i was going to accept it if i came back to the office and it was offered and when he called me back, he said i decided to
1:45 pm
give it to pence. he said it's too small and temporary for you. i have other things in mind. >> you mentioned bill steppian. he's been subpoenaed by the 1/6 committee. did you talk to him on election night? >> i did not. i don't think we spoke after the election. until probably around christmas time. >> did you have a sense that he had any misgivings? he ordered a fact check of all the crazy things that powell and rudy giuliani were saying. he knew they were untrue. would you counsel him to participate with the 1/6 committee? >> as i have always counseled bill, to follow the law. i think that the executive privilege claim for people who
1:46 pm
were not employed in the government is a very, very difficult claim to make. especially when the current executive is saying that he wouldn't uphold privilege. i think with meadows and the people inside the white house, it's a closer more nuanced call but i think for people like bannon or steppian and others who were outside of government, i think it's hard to support that. >> were you of the impression that steppian wasn't comfortable with things he was asked to do? >> as i said, i didn't really speak to him until around christmas time when he came back to new jersey, so i don't know. i don't know what bill thought or didn't feel about what was happening in the post election period, but i assume that if you know, he winds up testifying, we'll find out. >> have you offered to share your conversations with folks in the white house with the 1/6 committee. >> no one's asked me? >> what were your conversations?
1:47 pm
>> almost no one. i didn't really have a lot of relationships left in the white house at that time. they were angry with me about what i said on election night that the president hadn't presented any evidence and if you don't have evidence, you can't say the election was stolen. so it wasn't like i was having a lot of conversations with anybody there, except for the president himself. >> when did you last talk to the president? >> it was like, it was before christmas. mid to late december. you can tie it to if you go back and look at whenever i said on abc that his legal team was a national embarrassment, he called me on that sunday after that to argue with me after that and that was the last time we've spoken. >> i got the impression, i've been watching your appearances on abc news, that trump knew he had lost. is that your sense? >> what i felt was that during the run up to the election that he was very concerned he was going to lose. and that you know, our
1:48 pm
conversations during that time and i wrote him a memo. i think i put it in the book. 131 days out. i said you're losing and if you don't change, you're going to lose, so i was trying to prepare him for the fact that this is not going well. so i believe he was not concerned about it. do i know that he thinks he lost? i don't know that for sure because he certainly argued with me when i spoke to him in the post election period that he hadn't lost. but it seems to me that when you look at the facts here as i lay out in the book, that it's very hard to conclude anything else, both with the political atmospherics that were going on at the time and the facts of how the votes were cast, counted and you look at pennsylvania for instance really quickly. in the four collar counties outside philly that i don't know you're familiar with, he lost to biden by 104,000 more votes than he lost to hillary. he lost the state by 80. if you want to know why you lost
1:49 pm
pennsylvania, you lost those suburban voters and that's why you lost pennsylvania and that's why i'm writing the book in part to other republicans to say that look, look at that as an option lesson. we need to do something different. >> you take on the media and i'm in the media. the book is called, it's about conspiracies and lies and you really don't take on fox news. why not? >> because the book -- no, i don't watch it -- >> are you aware of what he does? >> not really. >> it's a book with truth denier, conspiracy theorists on the cover and you attack cnn, "new york times" and msnbc. >> i talk about bias. >> is bias more dangerous to the country than conspiracy theorists? >> no but that's the third section of the book where i talk about the movement forward. in the center portion, we talk about the conspiracy theories and truth denying that went on
1:50 pm
with things like qanon, pizza gate, the election situation. john birch society. that's what i talk about. these two sections of the book. i'm sure you're conflating them. >> i don't think it's an honest conspiracy theory taking on fox news. >> listen, you can write that in your book. >> i'm not trying to rescue the republican party. >> you can write about that. >> what's your relationship with fox news going to be if you were president? >> first of all, i didn't say i was running for president. you've said that. >> a lot of people said it and you haven't corrected them. you should correct the record. >> i said i will think about it. i won't make any decision for at least another year, so. >> do you think fox news in prime time is good for the country or bad? >> listen, there are shows i like in fox news and shows i don't like. like there are shows i like here -- >> are you afraid to question the purveyors of conspiracy theories. >> that's your opinion.
1:51 pm
you are welcome to your opinion like everybody else. i don't consider people like sean hannity or laura ingram purveyors. >> i didn't say any names correspondent other than tucker carlson. the 8:00 p.m. hour. >> i told you, i don't watch the show. i don't know what tucker does from night to night. if i watch anything at night in news, most of the time i'm watching sports, anything in news, i'm usually watching either sean or laura. >> so you may or may not support donald trump in 2024. may or may fought run for president a. book about conspiracy theorists doesn't have anything to say about fox news? >> the book talks about. you continue to conflate it. >> i don't know how you talk about common pier is race theorists without talking about fox news, i think they've done more damage to the party then anything else. >> i'm sure you do. i think there are liars and conspiracy theorists on masnbc and cnn also. that's not what the book is
1:52 pm
about. in that section of the book, i'm talking to republicans about the way we need to deal with media to be most effective for winning. the conspiracy theorists and truth deniers, which nobody else on either side of the aisle is writing about right now other than me. no one else is writing about that. >> but you want to solve thoorks you want to stall the conspiracy theories without dealing with fox news, it's like solving terrorism without dealing with the terrorists. >> that's your opinion p. i disagree with your opinion. i think it's irresponsible, my comb to analogize fox news to terrorists. and, by the way. >> i was talking about root problems. you read about being a prosecutor. i want to understand what your solution is to the title of the book, it's about truth deny years and oh how do we purge the truth deniers. >> from our party, it's by telling the truth to our voters. >> where? where do you do that? >> right in my book it's on sale today. >> do you do it in speakers?
1:53 pm
>> i did it at the range coalition, and the jewish coalition this past week. every other place that i go, i will be talking about the fact that the republican party must once again be the party of truth. and if we do that, then we have a chance to be winning party again. if we don't, then we're going to be consigned to what happened to our party in the '30s when herbert hoover lost the house, the senate and the white house. the only other time it's happened in the republican party history. then we were out of the st white house 28 of the next 36 years. i don't want to see that happen in our country. that's why i'm speaking out. i can't be responsible for everybody else, i can be responsible for myself. that's what i'm doing by coming out, talking to you about it even in a place. >> i appreciate it. i think are you a straight shooter. i just think if you care about the party, liz cheney cares about the party. i think you have to deal with the places that echo the
1:54 pm
mistruths and the conspiracy theorists. i'm not judging you for not. i'm asking you if that the a part of the solution or could be. >> what i'm saying is the battles that i want to pick are the once i picked in that book. there is no one else picking those battles. if there is more to take on to make sure the party is the party of truth and the party of solutions for citizens in this country, i'll take those on, too, because you know i've never hesitated to do that. >> is there anything to ask you about that you wanted to say, or get off your chest? >> no, i don't think so. you covered the waterfront i think pretty much. what i really am trying to do is to chart a new path for the party and whether i personally become a part of that path or not is less important to me than to chart a new path for the party. i worked for george w. bush as you did. i'm proud to have worked for him. and i want to give people the opportunity to be proud to stand up for the truth again and to win again and that's, to me, the important things that we have to
1:55 pm
do and -- >> do you think liz cheney has charted a path that you could follow her down? >> i like liz a lot. i think she's a strong, smart, conservative. >> answer my request i. >> i'm not following liz. i don't know liz wants me to follow her. i'm setting my own path here. we'll see who follows me. >> do you share liz's belief about the truth? i mean, she's also pending the truth and her opinion in the game. >> i share liz's belief and putting my skin in the game. i share liz's belief that the election of 2020 was not stolen. >> donald trump is responsible for eroding people's faith in our elections. do you agree with her? >> i agree everything he did from election night forward. >> and before that he was out there before. >> i know but you ask ne what i think, not what you think. what i think is. >> i'm putting out a fact. he was so in doubt of the election. in north carolina, he told voters to vote twice, which is a federal crime. >> you are saying what you
1:56 pm
think. i will answer what i think. everything he did from election night forward was destructive to people's confidence in the results of an election and someone who is standing behind the seal of the president in the east room of the white house on election night shouldn't do that i said that at 2:30 a.m. on the morning after the election on abc and i'm sitting here now a year later and saying the same thing and you know why? because it's what i believe is the truth. that's what i'm always going to do. sometimes that will be to my political advantage. sometimes it will be to my detriment. but for me, it's the only way i can do it. >> the new book is "republican rescue" former new jersey governor chris christie, i do appreciate you being here. we have talked about and fought about donald trump for five years now. things never change, thank you, thank you for your time. >> thank you for having me. we will be back after a short break. don't go anywhere. k after a short break. don't go anywhere. your mom doesn't have a restaurant.
1:57 pm
if she did, it would be impossible to get in. she'd become famous overnight. she'd get talked into franchising everything. and at that point, they wouldn't really taste like your mom's short ribs. no one can deliver your mom's homemade short ribs. that's why instacart helps deliver the ingredients. wayfair's black friday sale is on now! score unbelievable savings with our biggest sale ever! like ge appliances up to 40% off rugs up to 80% off and lighting up to 65% off. plus get bonus savings with a wayfair credit card and free shipping on thousands of products. don't miss our black friday happening now through november 27th. only at wayfair.com.
1:58 pm
♪ baby got back by sir mix-a-lot ♪ unlimited cashback match... only from discover.
1:59 pm
2:00 pm
. >> if mcconnell and mccarthy fought hoarder, mccolllock, you could have a republican president right now. and now they don't have anything. >> it's one of those days, guys, hi, everyone, it's 5:00 in new york. it's the kind of thing a few years ago you'd have to hear it to believe it. the disgraced ex-president blaming his loss on republicans who refused to carry out his coup at the end of his campaign, concerted campaign to do so. that painful revealing interview is from some exquisite new reporting by acc's john carl,
2:01 pm
betrayal. he outlines the months long pressure campaigns for the lame duck president to show you how close we came to losing. the centerpiece of our democracy, the peaceful transfer of power. carl details the effort to strongarm vice president mike pence to get him to invalidate president joe biden's win. it's time for the chief of staff mark meadows, it is now likely meadows is the next person to be referred for criminal contempt by the committee investigating january 6th. meadows sent a details outline prior to pence's senior staff written by jenna ellis that framed overturning a free and fair election as pence's quote duty. they noted there had been challenges to the election results in six days and argued when each of those six days came up for account on january 6th,
2:02 pm
pence could declare the electoral votes were in dispute. the vice president should require a response from each state legislature no later than 7:00 p.m. january 15th, ellis wrote, if any state legislature fails to provide a timely response, no electoral votes can be count fareed that state. if enough of biden's votes were not opened and counted, the president, according to constitution, would be chosen by congress under a system where each state delegation casts a single vote. john carl also writes about those around the ex-president who knew better, might refuse to cross him. no matter the stakes in our country, our democracy. like this plea from pence's chief of staff to one jared kushner to tell his father-in-law pence had zero capacity to overturn the election result. kushner had privately been telling friends he knew the election was over. he clearly knew there was nothing mike pence could do to change it. please talk to the president, mark short asked kushner. he listens to you.
2:03 pm
explain to him that the vice president's role in counting electoral votes is entirely ceremony yam. he has no power whatsoever to reject any state's electoral votes. you know, nah, i'm really focused on the middle east right now, kushner responded. i haven't been involved in the election stuff since rudy guiliani came in. but this is a big problem, short said, the president is being misled. plead talk to him. i really don't want to get involved, kushner responded. as the house committee works to get to the bottom of our deadly attack on the capitol, the ring leader carl says feels no responsibility for his words that insurrectionists, themselves, said described as a call to action. they say that's why they were there. meanwhile, the threat from trump to democratic traditions was actually so severe on january 6th that members of his cabinet discussed removing him that day. john carl reports, according to a source familiar with the conversations, then treasury
2:04 pm
secretary steve mnuchin talked to other members of the cabinet by attempting to remove members from the office by invoking the 25th amendment, among the members mnuchin spoke to that night is secretary of state mike pompeo. carl says mnuchin refuses to answer whether that's true and the spokesman denies a conversation ever happens, senate majority leader mcconnell steps in at a fear he'd do more damage to the peaceful transition of power before he could do so, trump tweeted, he didn't want to go anyway. the cold, hard truth, how close we came to losing our democracy during the final weeks, this hour with the aforementioned jonathan karl, correspondent and author in the book betrayal, the final act of the trump show. you were last year with your last book, you covered politicians i worked for. this is so intricate and so jarring and i wonder if you
2:05 pm
could just sort of describe the portrait that emerges? >> well, nicole, i spent from january on of this year, i went through and tried to systematically look through at the events that i had covered as a white house correspondent, but i really couldn't get my head around, how did this hoop? how did the disaster that culminated on january 6th take place? what was really happening behind closed doors. the portrait that emerges is of a president who spent the entirety of 2020 and you were exactly right in your proof interview to point out in this happened far before the election. he started sowing the ground work in the beginning of 2020, a systematic effort to use all means necessary to retain power even as he realized be every the election that he was likely to lose. he was sowing the ground to contest the election and throw out the results and to dispute
2:06 pm
and to overturn joe biden's victory. >> you know, it's something, i was asking chris christie about that we paid a lot of attention to it. donald trump was accusing democrats of committing election fraud before the election had tlans transpired. i think he was in north carolina and asked the voters to vote twice, which would be criminal voter fraud. bill bar was a part of that effort. in an interview on cnn he talked about voter fraud. what is fascinating in your reporting is you make abundantly clear everyone say for the sick cofants got religion. i want to read this scene and white house counsel and mark meadows, you write on to have 23rd, barr met with meadows, cipollone and a couple other senior advisers close do the president. barr later said, this is getting serious. this is complicating the transition. barr told me, meadows trump is
2:07 pm
sensitive to the needs of the transition and he'd be changing his tone and laying the ground for a graceful exit. that never happened. did they have any remorse about sort of the franken stein that they've enabled to take shape around this absolute phony issue of voter fraud, of election fraud? >> there were so many people around donald trump who believed that by staying close to him they could keep him from doing more damage. they could restrain his more destructive tendencies and so, you hear very little regret, very little regret from any of them and some of them, my comb, you know, may have taken steps to prevent this from being much worse than it could have, than there could have been. you know, barr's decision to come out, whatever barr's fault, whatever he did before and there are many things to criticize
2:08 pm
barr for, specifically on the issue of voter fraud as well, when he came out and declared the department of justice saw no evidence of widespread fraud. when he refused donald trump's efforts to get him to use the powers of the justice department to pressure states to overturn their results, to seize voting machines, when he did, that was a critical moment. if he had taken the actions of the real full on sycofants, who tried to become the attorney general in january and agreed to follow his orders, this could have been a much bigger disaster than it was. >> you as you say since january have functioned as an investigator and you have learned so much new and exclusive content. i wonder if you have a sense from investigating these characters how much is available to the january 6th committee? how much is noticeable? >> i think there is a lot. i think one way to look at this is look at the preparation that
2:09 pm
the house managers made in the impeachment trial. it was power. it was searing. it clearly had an impact on those that watched it on the senate floor. they played that video showing minute by minute what happened on january 6th. the january 6th committee has much more than the impeachment managers could ever hope to have. they have testimony. if they win this battle over executive privilege, they will have detailed, documents from the whoums. they will have the call logs. they will have the e-mails. they will be able to see who was in touch with donald trump. they will have photographic evidence. trump always had a photographer around him in the white house. i want to know what is on that photographer's camera from january 6th. i want to see the outtakes of the video he released that evening where he said, we love you, to the people that had just stormed the capitol. that was the acceptable version. what was on the unacceptable versions? so i think there is a lot that
2:10 pm
this committee will be able to do. i think what they, by the way, i think we are only seeing a bit of their work right now. they've interviewed over 100 witnesses. they're doing this methodically and behind closed doors, building up to public hearings that should happen sometime late summer and a very compelling report. but the fire of executive privilege will determine how effective it is. >> i want to read what you are just talking about, that video message, you were on live tv as i was. it was because in the moment on fox news republicans, after republicans were calming in, asking, calling -- maybe that's something that our viewers aren't always cognizant of. even over on fox news and chris christie was talking about doing this on abc news, republicans were calling on trump to call off the dogs to ask his supporters to stop. they were in what was described in sworn testimony as mid-evil
2:11 pm
hand-to-hand combat with cops, with police officers, chanting hang mike pence. this is what you write about the video message. on trump's video message, go home, we love you. you are very special. that's what he finally says when it was released. if this was deemed an acceptable message, what was in the messages that were rejected? a white house aide that was there, told me in earlier rejected versions, trump called on his supporters to leave the capitol. he compliened about the election. he did not call on them to go home. how do they get anything? i mean, it's been reported in i believe carol leonnig and pat cipollone thought donald trump would be arrested that day. how -- what levers did they press? did they sort of try to impress upon him that he could face criminal exposure? how did they get him to do something acceptable? >> white house counsel pat
2:12 pm
cipollone warned him that if he didn't come out and do this, he faced removal from office, either through impeachment or the 25th amendment, that he had to do this. but, nicole, look at the time of that, release of that video. it's hours after the riot has been under way. it took them hours to get through to him to get him to even do what he did there, which again was entirely inadequate, of praising the rioters, we love you. we love you. so you raise the, what mitch mcconnell did in the hours after the riot. when he determined that he did not want donald trump to be at the inauguration because the riot had been put down but he was worried that trump would have one more chance to disrupt biden's inaugural iraqis. so i looked to this i traced this methodically. that decision by mcconnell to do this got back to the white house
2:13 pm
in two ways. first mcconnell's top aid told meadows about it, informed him that mcconnell was working on this, he was putting together a letter from the other leaders. the other way it got back is of the four leaders that mcconnell wanted to have sign this letter dis-inviting trump, mccarthy was opposed. mccarthy thought, actually argued that it would be a powerful display of unity if donald trump showed up january 20th. they should encourage him to do so. mccarthy made clear he wouldn't be signing any other letters. mccarthy informed the whoufls. so donald trump definitely knew that he was going to be disinvited from biden's inauguration, which is why in that very last tweet that he ever september out january 8th, he said, i'm not going. you know donald trump well enough. you covered him long enough to know he would never say in advance take away all the drama and announce 12 days in advance he wasn't coming, unless he knew he was about to be disinvited.
2:14 pm
the reason mcconnell was disinviting him is very revealing. he believed that trump would have one more chance to disrupt the transition of power. >> it's so interesting to see mccarthy as an outlier from the other leaders and your reporting, i mean, a lot of the time my jaw was on the table. but this section, i want you to do the story-telling about why mccarthy maintains his loyalty to trump. that he saw people who stood up for the country and tried to stand up for the truth as losers, he will never been honored with statues on the mall. talk about that reporting. >> i recounted when mccarthy saw him on the mall january 2nd the day of the raffensberger call in washington. he was out for a walk. i was out. i took a walk almost the entire length of the mall. mccarthy has not announced what he was going to do, join those
2:15 pm
with biden's electoral votes, or nost. i was ask him him. he wouldn't tell me. i said to him, you know, this is a real opportunity for you to make the difference. you are the leader of the house republicans. if you come out and say this is all nonsense, that joe biden won the election and in america what we do is we fight hard in elections and then we congratulate the winners and we concede defeat, if we have lost. you know, if you come out and say that you give that message, it can have a real impact. then to make a dramatic point, i exaggerated. i pointed to you know the monuments on the mall and i said, who knows, if you do the right thing and you do it powerfully enough, maybe there will be a statue of you out here some day. he laughed at me. it's probably laughable as it is, but he said, where's the statue for jeff flake? where in the statue for that guy from tennessee meaning bob corker. the two senator who's really took on trump in the first year
2:16 pm
of the trump presidency and were rewarded in mccarthy's view with irrelevance and were exiled effectively from the republican party. so his point was if he does that, he'll go away just like they did. it won't have an impact. he tried to explain to me by staying close to trump he had been able to control his more destructive instinct. >> which one. there was a deadly insurrection at the capitol on mccarthy's watch. >> well, this is january 2nd to be fair. this is before the insurrection, but he pointed to, i don't know, you remember when trump suddenly around christmas eve said he was going to veto the covid relief bill. he might veto the funding bill. he could have a shutdown in the middle of the pandemic. it would have been a disaster. mccarthy is one who in mccarthy's view, he is probably right about this. effectively talked trump out of those vetos and averted a big disaster over the holidays. but there is a lot else.
2:17 pm
there is a lot else that went down, obviously. >> i want to ask you to tell the story about the 25th amendment. because it also is, there are some echoes of this concern about removal and other reporting, but never this explosive. talk about steve mnuchin and pompeo and the response he got is amazing. a spokesperson is a giant flashing red light. explain. >> oh, of course it is. so what i learned is that mnuchin and pompeo had discussions on the evening of january 6th and mnuchin had conversations with other cabinet members as well about the 25th amendment. and, in fact, pompeo had asked for a legal analysis of this. and they were looking to whether or not donald trump should be removed from office by the cabinet because he was mentally unfit in light of what had just happened and his refusal to stop it. and i went and i reached out to both mnuchin and pompeo and neither man would give me a
2:18 pm
comment, would deny it, would confirm it. not say they had the conversation. this went on for months. no denials whatsoever. the reporting i was 100% confident in. then as i was finishing the book, i called donald trump for one last interview. and in that interview, i told donald trump, well, why is it that, you know, mike pompeo, your great former secretary of state steve mnuchin, why won't they even deny it and he got angry with me, said it was all nonsense. he said he had letters telling him the story was nonsense, that they never you know wanted the 25th amendment. but shortly after that interview, that phone call with donald trump, i got a call from an aide for mike pompeo who had been avoiding me for months, and said, oh, i finally have an answer for you. i got an answer for you. and clearly he had been called from mar-a-lago, he said to me,
2:19 pm
a spokesperson for mike pompeo says he never had any conversations about the 25th amendment, it's all not true. so i said, wait a minute. can i put your name on that? he said, no, no, keep it as a spokesperson. he read the statement, including the words, a spokesperson for mike pompeo. and what i have learned and you know this really well is when a spokesperson is willing to put their name on it, you have a level of confidence. when they're just saying a spokesperson and the further red flags of it just say, you know, somebody close to or an aide, the attribution is very important this person did not want to put his name on that statement. because it's not true. >> because it's not true. right. the time line is incriminating as well. it's post-your call with donald trump, given an order. we're going to ask you to stick around. there is so much more. when we come back as trump tightens his grip on the gop, when some republicans, the party could actually blow it's chances
2:20 pm
over taking the u.s. senate. there is no fewer than three candidates endorsed by donald trump are credibly accused of physically abusing women, that story is next. fresh off a big bipartisan win, president biden hits the road to sell his infrastructure package that eluded his predecessor and blocking abortions and curtailing reproductive rights. new efforts show they suffer for the rest of the country. we will be right back after a quick break. don't go anywhere. back after a quick break. don't go anywhere. you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner.
2:21 pm
an official message from medicare. did you try it yet? comparing plans? oh yeah. they sure can change year to year. i found lower premiums and lower prescription costs. that'll save you money. so uh, mark? on medicare.gov now. open enrollment ends december 7th use the plan finder at medicare.gov to compare medicare health and prescription plans. comparing plans really pays. paid for by the
2:22 pm
u.s. department of health & human services instantly clear everyday congestion paid for by the with vicks sinex saline. for fast drug free relief vicks sinex. instantly clear everyday congestion. and try vicks sinex children's saline. safe and gentle relief for children's noses.
2:23 pm
2:24 pm
president biden's igolf rating slipping in a repeat poll and polls also find registered letters for republicans that are democrats in congressional races by some ten points. the gop looks like it has the potential, it's in a solid position heading into next year's mid-terms. when it comes to the leading candidates for senate, some republican strategists are concerned their party may blow it. quote. tell party's front runner pennsylvania sean parnell is awaiting accusations he denies he choked his estranged wife and hit one of his children. the top polling republican candidate is trying to downplay his resignation from office after allegedly tying up his mistress in the basement of his marital home. and in georgia, the party's likely nominee her shell walker is bracing for a democratic assault about his ex-wife's claims he threatened her with a
2:25 pm
gun. a display of how insane the party is. it would be funny if it wasn't so heinous for these women. the only ticket for admission is to become loyalty to the twice impeached ex-president. the gop did find balance and win the virginia's governor's race earlier this month. they note it's not likely to be replicated every. where here's what he said yesterday. >> glen youngkin for the most part, particularly his television ads ran as romney 2.0. a lot of the republicans are likely to nominate for the house and senate will not be that. they will be trump and steve bannon accolights and who comes down to republican nomination. >> joining our conversation, msnbc analyst donna evers, what do you think of that washington post reporting? >> well, you know, first of all,
2:26 pm
i think that when republicans have had problems in the past, they've nominated people who can win a republican primary but are completely unacceptable to a general electorate. when have you three high profile candidates who are accused of various levels of domestic assault and violence, that is a problem for republicans, but who is surprised when you got a republican party who is a standard bearer has his own storied history with women. >> john carl, this comes up in the book in the context of one of his i don't know if trusted leiutenants is the right word, i don't know if trump trusted anyone, one of his most dutitiful tenants. i want to read about a dhs official thought purged, thought they were going to kill him. a 25-year-old supporter from new hampshire named josh white house. his mood swings were so wild,
2:27 pm
from super friendly to hoot-tempered in a flash. but some on the second floor were worried he could get violent a.dhs official told me, i was legitimately worried he was going to come and kim us. when i asked the white house about this comment. he told me they need help. i can't imagine anyone should be afraid of a person working there, if they're in line with the agenda. you've got some other reporting about the culture and the fear and this fear of violence was real. i just, i worked in government for years. i never seen or heard anything like this. >> i mean, it was astounding. first of all, you have to imagine, nicole. you know what presidential personnel is all about. the ppo, presidential personnel office has about 30 or so employees. it's basically the hr office for the executive branch in terms of the 4,000-plus political appointees, from cabinet
2:28 pm
secretary to ambassadors, to more low-level officials. and johnny mcentee hired his friends to if ill that office. almost all were in their 20s. three of them i know of have not graduated from college yet. they went out systematically over 2020 and started doing interviews of officials high and low asking twes about their level of support and loyalty to donald trump. one official was asked about voting records. i see you voted in a democratic primary in virginia. why did you do that? you know, others were asked about, if they supported the president's policies on afghanistan, even if they worked at the environmental protection agency. on and on and on. but it was, it was designed to intimidate. it was designed to say, if you were not fully on board with all things trump, then you don't belong in the trump administration. >> you know, donna, i know there is sort of this cross pressure about how to move on, how to get
2:29 pm
behind the president's agenda, how to project a forward-looking economic message. and i know that everything is on the democrats, how they've saved democracy, how they've hanged on to power in the mid-terms, which is really hard to do. but i wonder if these flirtations with, embrace of violence isn't a part of what democrats need to be warning voters, especially suburban voters about should trump remain powerful and ascendant? i think one of the strategies for democrats is to sell a positive agenda for the american people. i think they're on track to do that. also the appeal in the mid-terms as it has been in these last couple of cycles is to suburban voters and particularly to suburban women and democrats don't have to, you know, sort of ireland this message through about this pen chant for violence and the idea of
2:30 pm
violence surrounding the former president and the people around him because i think voters are well aware of that. around i don't know that that has to be a message from democrats. but they definitely have to show a contrast, which i think will be ev department for suburban voters who are just turned off by this kind of thing, even the language is a turnoff for these voters. so, in the mid-terms, i think the best thing that democrats can do is focus on forward-looking and forward-thinking. even as the former president is going to be out there offering a contrast that you can't believe and some of these candidates as well, who are so ingraviateing to the former president that they're not going to be able to get out from under him when it comes to a general election. >> carl, you have one more amanyic dote i want to read. chris christie said in the last hour he thinks that the ex-president's response to covid was the thing that weakened him
2:31 pm
the most politically and he didn't say this, but this is indifference to all the suffering happening in the country. what your book deepens our understanding of is donald trump's indifference to the suffering of his own campaign style. this is a trump staffer in tulsa who almost died of covid. the staffer had been worried about the dangers of working on the rally because of pre-existing conditions that made the prospect of being affected especially dangerous. but the president had demanded an indoor rally despite the warnings of public health officials. now the rally was over, the president was back in august complaining bitterly that more people had not shown up. while his campaign worker was stuck in tulsa, lying in a hospital bed thinking his life was about to end. my first question is how is this staffer? and my second is what did his own inner circle feel about donald trump's indifference to the pandemic? >> well, the staff eventually
2:32 pm
recovered and went back to washington and remains a faithful supporter of donald trump. one other thing about that rally in addition to the staffer that was left behind in a hospital, the others that tested positive but were not that sick, they tested positive, had covid, they were told to get rental cars and to drive back to washington and one car at least that i was informed about had three covid positive staffers in a rental car driving the thousand-plus miles back god knows stopping where, gas refills, food, i mean, you are supposed to quarantine. are you supposed to self isolate to keep from spreading the disease to others. but there was a sense for most of the staffs that this was at the very least a political disaster. there is one big exception, though, kelly mcenthen my and
2:33 pm
was presented with numbers in the spring showing that his re-election chances were looking grim primarily because of what was happening with covid. and he said, no, no, no, bring the in kaylee. if kaylee comes in he says, tell them what you were telling me. kelly tells the president of the united states i think you're going to win, sir, i think you're going to win because of covid. and then she explained that the biggest weakness they had in the mid-terms was healthcare and now with covid dominating the news, the democrats wouldn't be able talk so much about healthcare. healthcare would be less of an issue. so, i moon you have to hit your head around this, but she was saying, she's saying that because of the greatest public health crisis of our time, the last century, they wouldn't have to talk so much about healthcare. and, therefore, he was going to win. >> we made an editorial decision
2:34 pm
early in the trump administration never to air whatever it is that happened at the podium. you just gave the best defense i wish i had time. it's typical to defend. thank you for that. the book is really important. it's called betrayal, the final act of the trump show. jonathan carl, congratulations, it's really incredible body of work. thank you for speding so much time with us to talk about it. when we come back, president biden he its the road to sell his newly signed infrastructure law and the promise his administration can and will deliver to the american people. that is next. time with us to talk about it.
2:35 pm
2:36 pm
2:37 pm
that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
2:38 pm
mpblgsz of all the nations in the world, we're the only one, the only nation i can think of that has come out of a crisis stronger than we went into it. in america we've always believed anything is possible, anything is possible. we've got to reestablish that spirit, we got to reestablish that sense of who we have. give americans half a chance, ordinary americans, that i have never, never, ever, let their country down, not once. >> it is day one of the infrastructure road show, the sales job. it's the start what the biden-white house is calling an administration wide effort to travel cross country to promote
2:39 pm
what is now as of yesterday the law of the happened, that impressive landmark legislation aimed at revitalizing our country's crumbling infrastructure. the location of the president's speech this afternoon. predictably without symbolism. that bridge is 82-years-old, it's on the red list means it is structurally deficiency. you know how long it's been there? since 20s 13, since 2013 in america. exactly the type of project that stands to benefit from brand-new federal funding. during our funding, political reporter and msnbc contributor and donna edwards. nick, i played at the top of the last hour senator portman's comments about the infrastructure package. it's not just that i'm sure most cities, most communities have projects and roads and bridges and tunnels that are on this red list. it's just the bill is actually a
2:40 pm
weapon against inflation. to hear that from portman who ran the budget office for george w. bush is a pretty powerful endorsement. not just of the things that will be funded. but the overall effectiveness of this package. where do you put the importance of conveying all that for the democrats? >> i would put it as high as you can possibly put it, my comb. you can't beat something with nothing. now biden had something democrats have something to campaign on instead of talking to him about this bill for months and months. they have finally gotten it. this bill and this funding for this project is something biden can go around the country with to smaller cities and states, swing states like new hampshire there and sell them on the idea that democrats as a do-something party. it's important. but look the uphill climb here is real. we have inflation. we have, you know, all kind of problems, a possible comeback of
2:41 pm
covid and the usual down ballot effective in an off year rails. so this is going to be a huge hill to climb. i'm not surprised they will throw the entire cabinet and half the administration at it. it's their big hope to mitigate the likely losses next year. >> donna ever, two pieces of sound i want to show you. i will start with the president, his speech today. >> the backbone of this nation has been hallowed out. hard work and middle class folks. if i hear one more person tell me how wall street built america, i think i'm going to -- anyway. but seriously, the build class bild built, built, built the countries and they have been left out. trickled down economics does not work to rebuild the economy from the bottom up in the middle south what i wanted to do, of the elicit billionaires in america. you know how much money they've made in the last four years?
2:42 pm
$1 trillion. i'm a capitalist. you want to be a become nair and a million nair. that's great. good for you. but pay your fair share. >> i want to play one more. i promised you two. this is congresswoman spamberger on "morning joe", donna. >> when it really comes down to it, our policies are good. our policies are the ones that are responsive to the problems and the challenges that the american people are facing. but if we're talking past people, we're not listening to those concerns. we can't even make that argument. >> i should play them in order. but it sounds like the president is doing just that, talking about infrastructure bill as a jobs bill. we were talking last night after the show that they think there should be a rule that bills can only be five pages long, it's really hard to communicate a thousand pages of legislation, but just talk about where the focus needs to be, to the congresswoman's concerns, the president's message today, which
2:43 pm
seemed to get right at that and who built america and with this new legislation means in terms of jobs, but just talk about all the pieces of what's in it and what he should be stressing? >> well, i'm so glad you raised that, nicole. when i saw the president walk across that bridge. i saw the steel and know that steel workers who are making american steel are going to have something to say about this bill and the way it's used and i saw the lighting on the bridge. that means an electric am worker has a job. you know from the flag stick to the jack hammer, all across the way, americans are going to have jobs building and rebuilding the infrastructure of this country. i think the more the president and all of the emissaries are able to personalize what is going to happen in this, with this bill, i think the better chance they have of really selling it to the american people. the multiplier effect.
2:44 pm
yesterday, kamala harris, the vice president, talked about individual stories of union workers, who would have different kind of jobs when it came to rebuilding infrastructure. we have to personalize this for the american people. so that people do understand what it means to them. i think we learned lessons from the affordable care act that we can't say it once, we have to be repeated over and over again. so i like those opportunities like the one today in woodstock, new hampshire, to put in real terms what this will make in terms of a difference for the people of new hampshire and for the american people. >> donald trump is aware of how critically potent infrastructure could be. he never got it passed. he talked about it for four years. they launched infrastructure week that resulted in someone from his campaign getting indicted. i want to ask you something you alluded to. there was a lot of pressure to get this messaging right and to
2:45 pm
get it out there? just talk about how long nature takes to see the fruits of? >> well, it does. >> sorry. >> yep. >> i was going to say, i'm not sure how much bridges you can build in 12 months. and that's a problem. back in 2009 with the thing with obama. there was a lot of talk of shovel-ready projection. the idea was to get the shovels in the ground as soon as possible. show progress. and the reason that's important is that this is mostly hard, it's a service economy in some ways. our average worker is a truck driver or hem health aide, ourself image on our mythology is making things and building things. the challenge is to translate this bill into something people can see and use and feel tangibly as soon as possible. so the discussion is not cheaply about the price tag. >> thank you. for spending time with us today. donna is sticking around.
2:46 pm
when we come back, there aren't a lot of issues on which americans agree. but abortion rights happen to be one of them. which makes the republican efforts to take those rights away from women not only cool but really, really, really bad politics. we'll talk about it after a quick break. tics we'll talk about it after a quick break. ow bizarre by omc ♪ no annual fee on any discover card.
2:47 pm
2:48 pm
2:49 pm
instantly clear everyday congestion with vicks sinex saline. for fast drug free relief vicks sinex. instantly clear everyday congestion. and try vicks sinex children's saline. safe and gentle relief for children's noses. >> as the united states supreme court prepares for oral arguments in a case that could
2:50 pm
dramatically curtail abortion access in america. new polling shows how radical and total outside the main stream it is. the attempts by members of the gop to ban abortion in america. to democrats and republicans. a new finds that 60% of americans say the supreme court should uphold roe versus wade and three quarters of all americans say abortion access should be left to women and their doctors. let's bring in joyce vance, former u.s. attorney now law professor at the university of alabama. donna edwards is still here. you know, we have focused on the medical and health crisis that this has ushered in for women in texas and i don't know that we talk enough about the disastrous politics. working in republican politics, it's a loser in any statewide or national election to be so extreme on abortion that your against it in cases of rape or incest and what we maybe skip
2:51 pm
over is just how wildly unpopular that is. i know the supreme court is acutely aware of their falling sort of esteem in the country. is that something they're cognizant of, joyce, as they go into this? >> it's such a hard call and you'll hear people all over the map on whether the supreme court is a political actor or not. on the one hand, it's awfully hard to believe that a court that was explicitly, the conservative majority on this court was sealed by the former president who said he would put no one on the court who wouldn't vote to reverse roe. so it's hard to believe that the course is divorced from the politics of the issue. they have their ideology. many of them have ruled on these issues previously and we know where they are likely to land. on the other hand, you raise this fascinating notion that in a critical election year where everyone expects republicans to do very well in the midterms as they traditionally do, is there
2:52 pm
a possibility that a decision by the court that erodes abortion could for instance activate all of the women who you know, knitted pink pussy hats following trump's election and went out and marched. could they become swing voters in 2022? that's a real possibility on the horizon here. >> i just think campaigns haven't been waged in the climate where overturning roe versus wade has been on the ballot in generations, plural. when i was 18, when i was sort of participating in politics for the first time, a lot of my peers were single issue voters and you know, independent women end up being important for better and for worse and this is an issue where i think the polling is even sort of more in favor of abortion and reproductive rights. >> well, in the key year really is looking at those independents because the numbers are really
2:53 pm
overwhelming in terms of supporting abortion rights. supporting the ability and the right of women to make a decision with themselves and their doctor that one, i think that the supreme court actually, i don't really can afford to be so far afield from where the american public is, but you know, who knows how that's going to be judged. i do think that in politics, that for the first time that we've seen in many, many generations that abortion rights given the timing of these upcoming decisions are going to be at the center of the political fight. we have a circumstance where roe is overturned, that in fact there are about 26 states that are going to see an almost immediate change in their laws and the availability of abortions. so it will be front and center and i believe that women again are going to decide this election because we haven't had
2:54 pm
abortion rights threatened in this kind of way in any other environment in the time that i've been alive. >> we're going to stay on it with your help. donna, joyce, thank you so much for spending some time with us. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. k for us we'll be right back. gold. your strategic advantage. ♪ ♪ cases of anxiety in young adults are rising as experts warn of the effects on well-being caused by the pandemic. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ at vanguard,
2:55 pm
you're more than just an investor, you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner. ♪ ♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪ do you take aspirin? plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. new vazalore is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers than plain aspirin. vazalore is designed to help protect... releasing aspirin after it leaves your stomach...
2:56 pm
where it is absorbed to give you the benefits of life saving aspirin... to help prevent another heart attack or stroke. heart protection with your stomach in mind. try new liquid-filled vazalore. aspirin made amazing! considering the hundreds of thousands of people who attend that event every year. another very welcome milestone
2:57 pm
in our attempt to return to normal. >> we'll be right back. o normal >> we'll be right back come here! i've got big news! now, nurtec odt can not only stop a migraine it can prevent a migraine as well. nurtec is the first and only option proven to treat and prevent migraines with one medication. onederful. one quick dissolve tablet can start fast and last. don't take if allergic to nurtec. the most common side effects were nausea, stomach pain, and indigestion. with nurtec, i treat migraine my way. what's your way? ask your doctor about nurtec to find out!
2:58 pm
ask your doctor about nurtec feel stuck with student loan debt? move to sofi and feel what it's like to get your money right. (phone chimes) ♪ ♪ ♪ i jump up on the stage ♪ ♪ and do my money dance ♪ ♪ i throw some money up ♪ ♪ and watch the money land ♪ ♪ i do my, i do my i do my money dance ♪ move your student loan debt to sofi - you could save with low rates and no fees. earn a $500 bonus when you refi... and get your money right. ♪ i do my money dance ♪ this is elodia. she's a recording artist.
2:59 pm
1 of 10 million people that comcast has connected to affordable internet in the last 10 years. and this is emmanuel, a future recording artist, and one of the millions of students we're connecting throughout the next 10. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students, past... and present, can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.
3:00 pm
thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we are grateful. hi, ari. >> hi, nicolle. thank you so much. we are tracking several big stories including fallout from steve bannon surrendering to the fed. our top story now is president biden on the march. marking the first full day of his massive spending bill. and plenty of misleading warning

79 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on