tv Meet the Press NBC January 21, 2019 2:30am-3:31am EST
this sunday, shutdown stalemate. president trump offers temporary protection for some undocumented immigrants but sticks to his principle demand. >> the plan includes $5.7 billion for a strategic deployment of physical barriers si a wall. >> the prent says the senate will vote on his plan this week, but house speaker nancy pelosi rejects the offer, calling it a nonstarter. plus, moving the goalposts on collusionith russia. >> i never said there was no collusion between the campaign or between people in the campaign. >> how significant is rudy giuliani's new position on possible collusion? my guests this morning are the president's lawyer, rudy giuliani, democratic senator
mark warner of virginia, and republican congresswoman liz cheney of wyoming>> > also, not accurate. >> now to thisew -mbshell repo >> explosive new report. >> bombshell new report about the president.pe >> theal counsel's office shoots down a story claiming president trump ordered michael cohen to lie to congress about the moscow/trump tower project. >> i think that th buzzfeed piece was disgrace to our country. >> were journalists to willing to report a story they cannot confirm? joining me for insighted and analyst, joshua johnson, host o 1a on nprr pe baker, from the united states. and nbc news national political record. e to sunday. it's "meet the press." >> announcer: from nbc news in washinngon, the longest r show in television history, this esis "meet the with chuck todd. >> good sunday morning.
believe it or not, it was two years ago today that donald trump took the oath offfice. solemn solemnly swearing to preserve, protect, and defend the cotitution of the united states. ultimately, the president's fate will be decided by the voters next year, or perhaps by congress if house democrats do move on impeachment. the government utdown is now in its 30th day. the spread between mr. trump's approval and disapproval ratings has grown noticeably since the start of this shutdown. he went from ten points under water to 15, according to 538.com's polling average. perhapnwith that mind, president trump yesterday made a new offer, extend somp tary protection from deportation for some undocumented immigrants in exchange for that $5.7 billion that he wants for a permanent border wall. house speaker nancy pelosi rejected the offer, even before the president sptse. but democ are also getting a bit nervous, and they're offering a billion dollars more in border security. they just don't want any of that money for a wall.
at the same time, special counsel robert mueller's russia report remaining a potentially mortal threat to the trump presidency. still, the more immediate crisis facing this country and the president is the shutdown. the best we canth say,e is at least the two sides aren't fartherapart. president trump with a deal to end the government shutdown that top democrats are calling a nonstarter and hostage taking. >> $5.7 billion for a strategic deploynt of physicalbarriers, or a wall. three years of legislative relief for 700,000 daca recipients. >> the temporary protections for so-called dreamers would not inude a pathway to permanent legal status, and major dreamer groups and democratic leaders are pa iing with the shutdown dragging on and his poll numbers sagging, this week mr. trump told his acting chief of staff, nick
mulvaney, we're getting crushed, according to "ths.new york ti >> i've never seen the situation that america is in now, and a lot of it has to do with trust. i don't trust a lot of our politicians anymore. >> and hanging over the nation and mr. trump's presidency, "the new york times" report that the fbi opened an inquiry in 2017 into whether or not mr. trump was working a a russian agent as president. "the washington post" report that president trump has gone to extraordinary lngths to conceal his conversations with russian president vladimir putin. the acknowledgment by the president's lawyer that someone on his campaign may haco uded with russia. >> i never said there was no collusn between the campaign or between people in the campaign. >> yav, you he. >> i have no idea. >> and then there's the upcoming testimony of mr. trump's fmer long-time lawyer, michael to congress. >> now to this new bombshell report. >> after a buzzfeed story claimed the special counsel has evidence that mr. trump directed cohen to lie to congress last
summer about plans for a trump tower in moscow, special c mnsel robeller issued a rare statement on friday night refuting the story. quote, buzzfeed's description of sp tific statements to special counsel's office and charactentzation of docu and testimony obtained by this office regarding michael cohen's congressional testimony are not accurate. the statement appeared to put the brakes on the grong number democrats in congress who said that the allegations, if true, would be grounds for beginning impeachment proceedings immediately. >> if the president directed michael cohen to lie to congress, then that's a clear case of participating in perjury and obstruction of justice. >> it's a total phony story, and i appreciate the special counsel coming out with a statement last night. >> and joining me now is president trump's personal attorney, rudy giuliani. mr. giuliani, welcome back to "meet the press," sir.d
>> grning, chuck. how are you? >> i'm okay. let's start with the big kerfuffle over the last 48 hours with buzzfeed. there were a lot of questions n about what happened betw michael cohen and donald trump, the special ounsel's office viously pushed back on the buzzfeed story. so let's clear it up. on the record, once and for all, percent hundred confident that the president never once asked michael cohen to do anything but telltr the h to congress? >> 100% certain of that. and also, i suld add the buzzfeed story was a story that the esident had counseled him or told him to lie and that there were tapes and texts and federal law enforcement sources, two of them,ited for it. i spent a great deal of the day on saturday with that because ie knew from th beginning it wasn't true. but i mean, to their credit, tha justice ment and the special counsel's office said that the story was inaccurate. the inaccuracy is there's no
evidence that the president told him to liens then tor your question, categorically i can tell you h counsel to michael cohen throughout that entire period was we thought he was telling the truth. i still believe he may have been telling truth when he testifiedr before cs. in any event, his lawyers thought that. our lawyers thought that. and the president thought that, >> can you share -- >> now i don't know what to believe about him. >> can you share what communication the president had with michael cohen about trump tower scow, and can y share the last time they talked about trump towermoscow? >> probably can't do that for two reasons. i wasn't his lawyer at the time. i just came into it in april, which now seems like two years ago, but it's less thajn a year. >> fair enough. >> second, a lot of that would be privilege. however, before the investigation, during the period they're looking at, they did have conversations about it. the conversations lasted throughout parts of 2016. the president is not sure exactly when they ended.
i would say michael cohen would have a much better recollection of it than the president. it was much more important to him. that was his solmission. e president was running for president of the united states. so you got to expect it's not going to be a great deal of concentration on a projectr tha ne went anywhere. there was one letter of intent that was nonbinding. that's the whole thing. i don't know f you call it a project even. >> you said the president is not sure when talksnded. i'mguessing you had to answer this question in written form by muelle so it's your understanding it ended when, in january, asch l cohen incorrectly testified>> to? well, it's our understanding that they went on throughout 2016 -- there weren't a lot of them, but there were conversations. can't be sure the exact dates, but the president can remember having conversations with him about it. >> throughout 2016? >> yeah, probably up to -- could
be up to as far as october, november. any time during that period they could have talked about it. but the president's recollection of it is that the thing had petered out they sent a letter of intent in. they didn't even know where to send it. they knew so little about it. they finally it straightened out. then they abandoned the project. that's about as much as he can remember of it because, remember, 2015, 26, he's running against 16 people for president of the united states. and i know that. i was with him for like five months. trall his concion was 100% on running for president. >> is it fair this was more of a project for michael cohen? did it also involve donald trump jr ivanka trump, and eric trump? >> i don't know that. except for knowledge of it -- i mean, if michael is at all h, telling the tr he would have to acknowledge he was the key guy on this project. so he'd the one -- i mean, if
things were normal and we weren't worried he's lying, he'd be the guy you'd go to and say, tell us what happened. you ran this thing. >> why do you think he decided, then -- so you're saying he decided onn his tell congress that talks with trump tower moscow stopped in january 16? >> he did it in consultation with his lawyers. >> according to bob mueller, he did it in consultation with some of the predent's lawyers as well. >> now, that could be true also. john dowd, jay sekulow, y co were the lawyers then. it would not uncommon since it was a joint defense agreement. i don't know if they participate in the eparation, but they'd certainly be told about it, just like he would be told about what r people are doing that's what a joint defense agreement is all about. >> just to clarify, talks of late tower moscow went as as october or november of 2016, some form. >> could be.
the president's recollection is i talked about it with him in 20152016, can tell you the exact sequence, can't tell you the exact dates. we talked about project. we talked about the fact he was going to send in a nbinding letter of intent. at some point, he came to me and informed me that it didn't anywhere. >> do you know why it didn't g anywhere? >> i don't, actually. i don't know why it didnno go anywheredoes the president really know exactly why. there are a lot of these tatngs happened. you send in a letter of intent, and maybe one hrt of , one out of four turns out to be a project. it's like a very early stage proposal. >> but this -- as far as the president was concerned, an active project to at least october or november f2016, an active, potential deal. >> yeah, i would say an active proposal. it's like my busess. i make proposals to do security work. probably got six of them out right now. if you were to ask me what
countries am i going business in, i'd tell youhe two'm doing business in, not the other six, because i may never do business there. >> let me ask you about what you said on cnn earlier thi week about the issue of collusion. let me play first your statement to mr. cuomo and go from theou. >>ust misstated my position. i never said there was no collusion between the campaign or between people in the campaign. >> yes, you have. >> i have not.e i said president of the united states. se i'm going to play for you a collection of your and the president on this issue of collusion. take a listen and i'll get you to respond. >> there's no collusion between me and my campaign and the russians. there was no collusionween us and russia. there was no collusion on my side. i can tell you that. everybody knew it. there's en no collusion tween us and the russians. but there has been no collusion. they won't find any collusion. it esn't exist. >> i know from having been on the campaign there was no contact with russians, n discussion with russians.
>> all right. you have said you are w creating a specific -- that it's just the president there was no collusion for. it does se like aange. you said it is not. why shouldn't we view this as a change? >> i'll tell you, because each time i said that back then and each time the president said it -- i shouldn't say each time. most of the times said it back then, i qualified it with, to my knowledge, which is ofulourse all i know. so if i'm sayings ther collusion on the campaign, of course i don't know everyone on the campaign. to my knowledge, there's no collusiononhe campaign. i probably didn't qualify it every time i said it. in the case of chris, he asked me to qualify it. he asked me a question before that about, well, how would you know? i made it clear that i wouldn't know everything that happened. i represent the president. i know his knowledge, directlg talk him. i'm in a strange position of having been intimately involved in a largerart of the campaign. i know what i know from that, no russian collusion. but how doso i know ifbody -- i mean, like when papadopoulos
came along, the was a big furor about how he might have been colluding with the russians. turned out he wasn't. at the time that came up, i wouldn't have known if hes wi wr he wn't. >> some people could watch you on this and say, you know, you've had to sort of change the context of w you're describing that story, to your knowledge, that you keep -- as you get more knowledge, you tel us more of the story. 10e you confident your client is being truthful to you? >> yes,onbsolutely. i tell you more of the story. in the first month or two, i k didnw it. i had to learn it. obably since may i haven't learned any new facts except a few things have come along. if you ask me a general question, i'll give you a general answer. if you ask me a specific question, i'll give you a specific answer. then i have the problem of being a lawyer, where i have to qualify. like, i'll say, you know, the
conversation between mueller and the president, where the esident said go easy on flynn. now, thaconversation did not take place as far as the president is concerned. he doe't remember any such conversation. then i'll say, even if it took place, there's nothing illegal about it. yhat confuses people. when you even if it took place, it's not illegal, people think you're admitting the conversation took place. it's a complexity that happcas e i guess of the difficulty of this subject. >> final estion, mr. barr, who during his confirmation hearing to be attorney general, explicitly stated that a sitting president could obstruct that's been in dispute with analysis from your legal team. you have heard mr. barr's claim that, yes, a sitting president can obstruct justice. do you accept his definition of that or do you still disagree? >> no, no, i agree but i don't phrase it quite that way, that he can obstruct justice. a president firng somebody w
works for him if he does no other corrupt act other than just firehim, it can obstruct justice because that's what c article 2 of tstitution gives to him solely. not congress, not anybody else. if, for exame, a president said, leave office or i'm going to, you know, have your kids kidnapped or i'moing to brea your legs -- i prosecute a lot of obstruction cases. i'll give you example. when the president said, please go easy on flynn, i know of no obstruction case that bins with the word please. it goes something like this, if you don't go easyfln nn, i'll break your kneecaps. an obstruction case has to invoe some degree of corrupt act other than just making a request or justsi exer a legal function. barr is a unique lawyer. he's a superior lawyer. wy i wouldn't -- if i were one of these ls arguing about this on television, i wouldn't go against bill barr. >> fair enrugh. giuliani, i'm going to end
it there. i appreciate the time and appreciate you coming on. >> thank you. >> you got if.in jome now is the top democrat on the secete intelligommittee, senator mark warner of virginia. welcome back to "meet the press." >> morning. >> obviously as a vi senator, the shutdown is first and foremost on your mind. i get it. it's part of the reason why we wanted you on this morning. but mr. jougiuliani seemed to m news this morning about the trump tower moscow deal. he i now sayingwas an active, potential proposal, at least thugh october or november. is that news to the senate intelligence committee? >> that's news to me. that is big news. why two years after the fact are we just learning this fact now when there's been this much inquiry? i got to tell you, chuck, i would thk most voters, democrat, independent, republican, you name ihe knowing thatepublican nominee was actively trying to do business
in moscow that the republican nominee at least at oneoint had offered if he built this building, vladimir putin, a free penthouse apartment. and if thosenegotiations were ongoing while upntil the election, i think that's a relevant fact for voters to know. i think it's remarkable the weo years after the fact and just discovering it today. >> what doesan this m to you? he throughout the campaign said i have no deals with russia, i have no business with russia. i think reasonable people would disagres that i have no bus with russia and an active potential deal does sound like you want business with russia. maybsehe's got to p the sentence here. what does that say to you about his -- does that -- does that question whether he should be in office? >> well, it treinforces the f that we have to finish our investigation, the senate investigation, which is s the only bipartisan one left. we need to have mueller finis and what we've seen is -- and i
don't often feel bad for rudy giuliani, this morning just seeing that interview, i almost feel bad for him. his eps having to readjust stories as more facts come out. so we now know that mr. trump, or his operation, was still trying to do business with moscow up untilis election. we now know that his campaign chairman, paul manafort, gave confidential information to a russian agent. we don't 2340e whknow what that agent did with that.of onhe questions i'm still trying to get answered is that frankly embarrassing meeting between trump andut where on the world stage the president of the united states kowtowed to the russia president i still don't know. they don't have to tell me, but i still don't know whether yone in the trump administration at the most senior levels ever got a read out. that raises a whole host of questions that the american people needs an answer to and the congress needs an answer to. >> you sai earlier this week you expect to have michael cohen
n front of your committe in february as well. we know about his public testimony that he's agreed to give tthe house oversight committee. have you gotten -- has he agreed to this yet? >> we're still in. conversatio chairman burr and i have azbreed f -- agreed for some time we wanted to bring cohen back. he's also agreed to testify publicly. i know the house intel committee is bringing him back as well. we particularly want him back because it was his original lies to our committee that got him into trouble. those lies were saying there was no activities on the trump tower after january of 2017. do you have evidence that somehow the president instructed mr. cohen to lie? >> wnt to get mr. cohen to come before our committee andte givetimony. >> do you have any evidence -- >> i'm not going to go into any of theaterials that we have. i do know it is one of the reasons where i think part of this information may reside, thin the mueller investigation. again, one of the critical reasons why we need assurances
that that investigation will be le to be finished. >> it soundsik -- it sounds like a lot of democrats think you guys need to start pushing your investigation faster because mr. mueller iss.aking too lo where are you at on that? >> i want to get this done as fast as s can. i have much frustration as anyone, but we have to do it in a thorough way. there are a number of keydu indis who we've either not seen or need to come back. and we're in those conversations right now. >> was it news to you when "the new york times" reported that a counterintelligence investigation was opened on the president? >> again, i'm not going to comment on that story from "the ne iyork times." that something, though, that if one had beenat opened it would be information that would be shared with a select group of people? >> i'm not going to comment on what goes onthe intelligence committee. >> all right. let me move to the shutdown. i know the democrats have rejected the deal. i know democrats are working on their own counterproposal here. what are we to take away? what's the public to take away from the fact the president went
out and offered something, you may not like it, but he offered something. democrats ar little something. it's not going to be anything for a barrier. isss that prog >> let me first of all step back and say let's make sure we all know what's at stake here. we have 800,000 workers that are either working or furloughed, not getting paid. we have hundreds of thousands of contractors. we think about the smithsonian here, all the folks who clean the toilets and serve the food aren't
>> i would start witing the government. >> but can you get them paid whileis you still have ight? >> we try to have some discussions. at least getting them paid would make some sense. let me make clear that what the president proposed yesterday, ng increaorder security, looking at tps, looking at the dreamers, i'll use that as a starting point, but you've got to start by opening the government. what we cannot do -- and i've had republicans as well recognize this -- is that we cannot reward the kind of behavior of hostage taking. if the president can arbitrarily shut down the government now, again.o it time and >> you do know, though, that already the hit to gdp is greater than the amounmo ofy he's asked for. we've already had a $7 billion hit to our economy. at what point is it not worth it?n, >> lisgoing into negotiations, i'm all for it. increasing border security, i'm all for it. >> some fencing? you've voted for it before. >> start with opening the government. the one thing i'd like to ask,
chuck, you and the lks here at the studio, i don't think we give our federal employees fiough benefit. weeks now without pay. they're still showing up to work. they're working overtime. how many folks in this studio would come to work this morning if they'd gone five weeks without pay? >> it's a vry fairquestion, and i think you would have a very emptyo. stu senator mark warner, democrat from virginia, thank you for coming> n. en we come back, the shutdown, russia, and cal ♪ ignition sequence starts. 10... 9... guidance is internal. 6... 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... ♪
that strip mall sushi, well,t i'm a bit unpredictable. let's redecorate. whatsyamatter tanya, i thought you loved being spontaneous? i do. and if you've got the wrong home insurance coverage, i might break the bank too. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem, like me. itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge 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. quit smoking "slow turkey." talk to your doctor about chantix. welcome back. the panel is here. joshua johnson, host of 1a on npr, danielle of the american enterprise institute, nbc news national political correspondent, and peter baker of "the new york times." there's two ways to look at
these shutdown proposals. one isit's going nowhere. the other is md rk warner s there, okay, i'm willing to accept the president as the starting point. he made an inch towards the democrats. democrats made an inch. it's not half full, but there's condensation. >> for 29 days, all we had was give me the money or don't give me the money. it was one thing on the table. neither side was budging. now we're putting other things on the table. we're expanding the problem so there, in fact, can be multiple aspects to give each side something they can live with. you can see the makings of a deal here. you're right. at the moment, it doesn't seem like it's likely to happen in the next 24, 48 hours. they're still stuck on i'm not going to negotiate on that, i'm not going to negotiate on th t. president wanted a deal, i'm not sure coming out on television to make the first proposal is the way to do it. i'm not sure rejecting it before it was made is the way to do it. you can see the beginnings of negotiations. we're now in a place where people are beginning to move. >> soers what happened. basically, jared kushner and mike pence were up on the hill this week. they met with mitch mcconnell
they left, mitch mcconnell picked up the phone and called the president and said, president, nancy pelosi is not going to be.c you've got to do something to shake this up. olst put something on the table. this is w a proposal from the white house. that is the problem. even thoh we saw some movement in terms of the wall itself, the president conceding for the first time this is not a contiguous wall, also giving a little bit on t daca, not anywhere close to what the democrats would want in terms of the money being directed towards the infrastructure neededpo at ds o por ports of entry, drones, more people at the border. there is stuff in there on er increased boecurity that's not wall, but they're still far apart on the specifict here's the mmportant thing. you heard mark warner say this. according to the democrats i've talked to, they really are going stay unitedhen it comes to the principle of this negotiation taking placehen the government is open and not
closed. >> interesting. well, close, no? you don't see progress? >> don't look at me. and let's be clear. no one in this room knows when the shutdown is going to end. let's knock that right out. there's no clear path.in i part of the reason is because this is no longer purely pragmatic or practical politics. this is a moral sue. i think the shutdown is kind of ing larger.f some the wall is a campaign promise the president made to play on something very deeply held that his politi.l base fee if you want to look for an image that speaks to this, it's probably those were on the steps of the lincoln memorial, the native american man beating thedru nathan phillips, and those kids and the make america great agn hats that were kind of smirking at him and looking down their nose. at h that's the real emblem of this. this is about xenophobia. for many americans, this is about race. this is about rhetoric that's t reached a pohere it's
ground the government to a halt. nancy pelosi said a wall is an immorality. how do you make a political solution to a moral quandary? it seems like the entire political establishment has painted itself into a place where the practical nature of politics could solve this. for many american, for many people of color, for the alexandria ocasio-cortezs in this country, they're tired of these solutions. brought up perhaps the box democrats have painted themselves in, the morality. then you have the "a" word when it comes to the right, which is amnesty. an little protection for anybody that's not here is somehow amnesty. the president tweeted this, this nemorning. no, y is not part of my offer. it is a three-year extension of daca. amnesty will be used only on a much w bigger deal,ther on immigration or something else. likewise, there will be no big push to remove the 11 million plus people here illegally.
but be careful, nancy. the am necessary sornesty word splinter the right. >> there's a lot of history behind these immigration problet . it's not jmething that came up between donald trump and nancy pelosi. this goes back to 1986 and the original deal that was struck with the reagan administration, which most people don't even remember. that w the amnesty question. you know, i think what we've seen is that while dona trump had painted himself into a corner, the reality is we may not like it. rewe may not awith him, but me has moved. and it is a mistake on the part of the speaker to come out of the box and not accept th idea that we like the idea of a three-year extension. sure, we want to do better. we cld accept a 700-mile or so border, a fence. the rats, every sitting democrat in the senate, voted for just a su thing a mere five years ago. the problem that you have is when you start suggesting that anyone who wants a wall -- or
no, not anyone. i don't want to be unfairo you. many who want this are racist, it causes a real hardeningn the other side. there are plenty of people, including 35-plus democtic senators, who wanted a wall, signed up to a wall, and who i don't think are racist >> bottom line, if you take the emotion out of this debate, it's solved tomorrow. >> exactly right. i think josh's point is exactly right. what used to be a relatively pragmatic discussion about a little of th, little of that, in2016, many democrats voted for fencing. today it has become a moral rente on both sides in dif ways. very hard to meet in the middle. >> there are experts who doe believe the certain kind of barriers in certain parts of the border that make perfe sense. we interviewed a border patrol expert on our program who said especially in urban areas where there are places for smugglers to duck and dive, physical s rriers can make a real difference in te securing the border. saying it's inherently immoral
y be true in some people's hearts, but there are pragmatic ways in which certain kinds of barriers the border have helped. >> there's a deal to be had. it's not going to be had according to democrat when is the government is closed. just this week you saw other conservative base groups say let's have a shutdown over planned parenthood funding. this really isde for ocrats, about the principle. >> if this cntinues to go on, which party is more vulnerable to seeing moreplintering off here? i feel like you've got those trump house dmocrats. you've got those senate republicans in blue states. seems like they're both wobbly here. >> think right now nancy pelosi is at more risk because she's facing exactly what two republican speakersto faced up which is her own version of the freedom caucus, her own version oinghe tea party who are to turn on her like vipers. >> i think mitch mcconnell's move here with gets trump make this proposal was also meant to move this to the senate. so i would look to thoseenate
democrats, those moderate mocrats, which is why i reached out to joe manchin last night. he gave a very kind of nebulous statement, but it did stay let's open the government, which brings me back to the same point i keep making. >> and as y heard mark warner there, maybe we can pay them. you can tell there's some ve nt. all right. let's pause it there. comingp, as he enters his i third ye office, president trump is counting on continued support from congrsional publicans on a number of issues. will he get it? a top (clo ticking) (bell ringing) it's time. time for a new kind of cloud. the ibm cloud. the cloud that proactively protects your business from threats, instead of just reacting to them. that lets you modernize and move more of your apps without re-writing. that unlocks insights from all your data and puts it to work with ai. get a faster, more secure journey to the cloud. the ibm cloud. the cloud for smarter business. ♪ ♪
hey, darryl! hey, thomas. if you were choosing a network, would you want the one the experts at rootmetrics say n ber one in the nation? sure, they probably know what they're talking about. or the one that j.d. power says is highest in network quality by people who use it every day? this is a tough one. well, not really, because verizon won both. so you don't even have to choose. why didn't you just lead with that? it's like a fun thg. (vo) chosen by experts. chosen by you. and now get apple music included, on us. it's the unlimit plan you need on the network you deserve. buy one of our best phones and get one on us. but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissionet whher you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.
who transition out of the u.s. formilitary every year...ers ...one of the toughest parts is the search for a jobat akes advantage of the skills you've gained while serving. yocan now search with therase' directly on google... ...and then enter your military' occupational specialty code. google bring ftogether job openingsrom across the web that match the skills you .ined in your military ro just click to apply and use your experience to guide your future. welcome be k. as the deber immigration and the shutdown continues, neither want to give anything to
the other side. one group that may have a lot of impact on mr. trump's fate on everything from the shutdown to mueller 20 are house republicans. and joining me this morning is the chair of the house republican conference, that's the number three position in leadership on the republican side, liz cheney or wyoming. welcome t "me press." >> thank you very much, chuck. great to be with you. >> let me start with the shutdown. wyoming, as folks are going to see, is one of the most impacted states by this shutinwn. i one of the five most impacted outside of the regi here. the president's proposal seemed tos nch. democre talking about more money for border security but no barrier. are we closer or is this rhetoric? >> it's certainly more than rhetoric on our side. i think what you saw doe presidenesterday was one more time put a proposal on the table. it's very difficult to understand when you've got the president's proposal that obviously includes money for the border wall, also includes an extension for the daca fks, also includes an extension for tps. those are issues, daca in
particular, that speaker pelosi commer comman the floor of the house on particularly this issue, on helping to ensurop tht who are here, the so-called dreamers, are not deported. so for her n to just simply reject out of hand when the president actually has said, okay, let's look ate waysn come closer, you know, it shows you they're just not interested in negotiating. >> why should the democrats accept something temporary in exchange for something permanent? >> well, look -- >> in fairness to>> them. hat we're talking about is we have to secure the border and get the government open. as your last panel talked about, the democrats in the senate, including senator warner, have voted for 700 miles, actually, of a border barrier, ba in 2013. so we really want to come to an agreement the president really wants to come to an agreement leer. he's put offeron the table. the responsible thing for the democrats to do is put a counteroffer on the table if you don't like this one. >> senator warner seemed to suggest maybe there's a way to pay people, pay some of these
workers now, even if you don't open up the government. would you support some sort of temporary solution like that this week just to keep things going? >> the house republicans voted to do just that, a the democrats voted against it. we had a handful of democrats who joined us on one of our motions to recommit that would do exactl that. >> pay people even if the gott stays closed? >> we think it's very important that people get paid. i think it's very hard to defend the notion that we'rele asking peo come to work and not be paid. but at the end of the day, there is a sution here. the democrats, you know, the rhoric here has really gotten above and beyond. when the predent's offer is rejected before he stands up to give his speech, that tells you something about what their approach is here. >> did what the president offer, is that how you would define amnesty? some on the right are saying the president's offers are amnesty. >> no, it's not amnesty. what he said is, look, let's have an extension for three years of thes twoprograms, and let's do that so we can come to the table to talk about what's necessary for broader
immigration reform. it isn't amnesty. frankly, it is a really important step forward, but again, i come back to the fact that speaker pelosi has said she will be a champion of the dreamers. so when she's willing to play games, when she's willing to pull political stunts, but she's not actually willing to come up with solutions, that makes it very difficult to come to anag ement here. >> finding a permanent solution for the dreamers with a path to citizenship, any form of that, whs that become amnesty in your mind? >> well, look, swrooel we'll hae what happens. we have to get the government open. we have to focus on what comes next. >> but what i described is not -- you don't think that's amnesty. >> what the president has put forward is not amnesty. p what tsident has done is say, absolutely, our first and most important obligation is to secure the border. and theact that the democrats are talking about let's have open borders, let's apolibolish i.c., they say they're for
border security on ome level, but they're not willing to provide $1 forit for it's a purely partisan game. >> let me move to some foreign policy issues. here was the president yesterday talking about the potential withdrawal of troops in syria. ke a listen. >> in two years, we've, i guess, reduced it to about 99% of the territorial caliphate. we're killing isis for russia, for iran, for syria, for iraq, for a lot of other places. at some point you wa our people back home. >> i know you've been to the white house to talk about your concer about too quick of a pullout there. does that make you feel better, or ds that sound like a president that still wants to move a little faster on this ullout than you do? >> look,think what's very important to recognize is that we have to make sure that we fini the job. if you look at the -- >> so 99% in your mind is note finishing b? >> it's not.
if you look at the mistakes barack obama made when he pulled out of iraq precipitously, when he declared the war ended -- and the war certainly was ut ended. we e with chaos in the aftermath. in a place like syria, what our special operations forces are doing there is crucially important. in order to be able t provi air support, some artillery support, we've got to ensure that isis is destroyed. because if you walk away before they're destroyed, then they have the ability to create safe havens to launch attacks against us again. >> some will say there's always an isis, there's always an al qaeda. they're just going toei change name. so it means we're always going to be there. what do you say to folks that think -- that your definition means we're always going to have troops in the middle east. >> we have to fight them there so they don't fight us here. the definition of victory in the middle east, the definition of victory in afghanistan, in syria is that we don't haanother 9/11. so we've got to recognize that the kind of enemy we'reacing can, with very little territory, very little resources, have bases from which they can plot and plan and launch attacks. we have an obligation to make
sure they don't do that. >> before i letou go, congressman steve king has basically decided you're the reason why he's being maybe shoved out of office, shoved out i got to play something he said about you earlier this week. take a >> you can't put her in the category of ever being a conservative again. she's called for me resignation. she's been here two years. and you know, what would give her the moral authority or the intellectu judgment to do mething like that? >> i'll just give you a chance to resp>>d. think i was pretty clear, and our entire house leadership was very clear last wes. comments were abhorrent. they were racist. under the guidance of leader mccarthy, we stripped him of his committee assignments, and i think there's simply no place for that language i any of our -- >>exensure >> as i said last wee i think i h
he ought to find another line of work. >> liz cheney, thank you. when we come back, you know when we come back, you know that 800, hey, darryl! hey, thomas. if you were choosing a network, would you want the one the experts at rootmetrics say is number one in the nation? sure, they probably know what they're talking about. or the one that j.d. power says is highest in network quality by people who use it eve day? this is a tough one. well, not really, because verizon won both. so you dse't even have to choo why didn't you just lead with that? it's like a fun thing. (vo) chosyo by experts. chosen b and now get apple music included, on us. ited the unlimited plan you on the network you deserve. buy one of our best phones and get one on u (man) don't ...go...down...oh, no! aaaaballooned your car. call meeeee! (burke) a fly-by ballooning. seen it, covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two.
♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ ♪ the kenya tea development agency is an organization that is owned by tea farmers. every week we sell this tea, we get paid in multiple accounts. we were looking for a bank to provide a safe and efficient technology platform to pay our farmers. citi was the only one that was able to ensure that this was done seamlessly. and today, at the touch of a button, all the farmers are able to get their money, pay school fees and improve their standard of living. with citi, we see a bright ture for our farmers and their families. ♪
welcome back. data download time. we are one month into this shutdown, and americans across the country are feeling the impact beyond just the capital beltway. outside of washington, d.c., maryland, and delaware, the states with the highest proportion of federal impacted by the shutdown are south dakota, mtontana, wyoming new mexico, and alaska. federal employees in these mastates ply work for interior, agricultural, and health and human services. and it's folks like these across the country who've already gone more than a month without a paycheck, who could start to have a tough time making ends meet. fact, according to the real estate site zillow, this month alone, unpaid federal workers owe $438 millionag in mor and
rent payments. and of the workers impaed, most 111,000 make less than $50,000 peryear, according to "the washington post." now, this shutdown has cast a spotlighon just how many americans are one missed paycheck away from a personal financial crisis. in fact,ccording to a survey by bank rate, less than half of americans, jt 40%, could cover an unexpected $1,000 e, like a car repair or emergency room visit, from savingsot rs said they would need to pay with a credit card, borrow from family or friends, or simply take out a personal loan. the broader impact on the economy is starting to become apparent as well. bloomberg estimates federal contractors could be wlmulosing as $200 million a day in lost or delayed revenue. delta airlines says it's already lost $25 million in revenue due to lost governmenth flights. a moin, this shutdown is having a real impact both inside
and outside thd. washington, , area. and we don't yet know the ripple effect on everything from spots and coffee shots to uber drivers. but we do know it's causing real pain for real pd ple. e question for policymakers may be, when is it sioo much? when we come back, we're going to talk about that buzzfeed story about michael cohen and whether journalists were too quick to report a story that they could not confirm. coming up, end ga and postgame, brought to you by boeing, continuing our the fact is, americans move more than anyone else in the world. on average, we'll live in eleven homes. and every time we move, things change. apartments become houses, cars become mini vans. as we upgrade and downsize, an allstate agent will do the same for our protection. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands?
believable decision by the special prosecutor's office to actually say, no, a story is wrong. t lot of people now know the story. put the special counsel's statement up one more time from peter carr.'s buzzfeescription of specific statements to the special counsel's office and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office recording michael cohen's congressionatestimony are not accurate. saturday, buzzfeed is still sticking by their story. here's their statement. as we've reconfirmed our reporting, we've seen no indicationhat any specific aspect of our story is inaccurate. a remain confident in what we've reported will share more as we are able to. peter baker and heidi, you both deal a lot with the special counsel's office in various ways. just explain h unprecedented this was. >> absolutely unprecedented. there's been thousands of stories that have gone o on russia, and the special counsel's office has said
nothing. the fact it felt compelled to answer to this was rlly significant. i think on the hill, there was also a pressure coming because you omd members, and i want to say that tady were not ship and they were not the committee chairs, but you had some democrats starting to us the "i" word and starting to say, mueller, if you've got this evidence, you have to bring it rward now. so there were those two confluences of events happening that i think ced him to say something. we don't know, though i don't think we should get ahead of our skis on this story, because we don't know everything that was wronin the story. it is notable that buzzfeed continues to stand by it. so i think there's more iterations of is to come. >> peter, though, i think the bigger thing is the entire media world. we could all say we did the if trues, and we said we could not confirm. th 's alltrue. it was something the entire media world was tellin the public, this is probably true. by the way, we covered this. now look. >> buzzfeed has got an lot of things right. let's not forget that.
they have had a number of important scoops on this. i think there was some credibility, it seemed lnte, on the fnd to what they were saying, but our people weren't able to confirm it the way it rt was re. i think that gave us obviously a lot of pause, and it should. the problem is, in the old ys, you know, when one media organization's competitor got something wrong, you wou sit back and say, ha-ha. now unfortunately, it's blowback on a of us. we all own all of the media in effect. anybody gets anything wrong, it's used as a weapon against all of us and against all of the other thousands of stories heidi just mentioned. i think e fact the special counsel chose to correct this one says that they weren't troubled by the vast majority of those thousands of other stories and a lot of the reporting has been, in fact, pretty right. >> that's, by the way, the danger of the special counsel's office deciding to speak o one story. does it do that, confirm every other? >> can we just be clear on two things? one, the american public by and large do not trust the folks inside the beltway or in the press. and two, the american people
nt this to be over. we're tired. this is like the slowest, loest, most drawn-out drama. and whatever story is going to make tks end, i thin lot of people are kind of eager for. the buzzfeed story kind of has that patina. it's the smoke fromhe smoking gun. and if, indeed, it leads to the gun from whence the smoke ori n or inated, boom, we can sta this story and time to start "game of thrones" in april and only have o drama to deal with. first of all, it's a good thing the larger media establishment was able to talk about this. we all read our own differentom papers ur own political silos. there never would have been a correction. it would have ended up in the paper that spoke to your point of view. no one else would have seen it. we never would have gotten the facts right. this is where thea of the internet helps. overall, i feel like this is another part of this dramae tha erican people and folks inside the beltway are saying, can we wrap this up, please snmpk. > the problem is the fake news
proble any time that somebody gets something so spectacularly wrong and everybody piles on, it furthers the t narrativet this is yet another american institution that the people of our country can't trust. that's the problem with the buzzfeed story. >> no, is. and we got to remind people, though there are people that want to exploithis, they want to see us be put this way, and they're doing it for ex so let's not give them the ammunition. thank you, all, for today. thank you for watching and trusting us. have a happy and safe martin luther king jr. holiday iekend. get yo skates out here in washington. we'll be back next week, because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." you can see more end game "meet theme on t press" twitter account.
y339by y16fy dangerously cold temperatures, large areas well below zero, with the wind. power out for many, heavy snow, sleet, and icy conditions ahead nsr mill the dreamers are drawn into the shutdown showdown by donald trump as we begin day 31 of closed government. sobut could tuesday deliveme progress? > the national cathedral is a community. because dad sai thene institution that must keep the flame of hope burning and alive is the church. >> on this 33rd national observance of martin luther king jr. day, we'll look at the events of the day and the state of our nation. to a frini