tv CNN Newsroom With Fredricka Whitfield CNN September 30, 2018 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
bloating? pain? you may have ibs. ask your doctor about nonprescription ibgard for the daily dietary management of ibs. ibgard - daily gut-health gard hello again and thank you very much for joining me this sunday. i'm fredricka whitfield. another high stakes week on capitol hill. the back ground investigation into u.s. supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh is becoming the latest political pressure point dividing this city. the big question, what is the scope of the investigation intoed the sexual assault and misconduct allegations against kavanaugh? sources tell cnn don mcgahn is working behind the scenes with republican leaders to narrow the scope of the investigation as much as possible. president trump and his team
invest that they are hands off in the process, saying the fbi has free reign. let's start first with boris sanchez at the white house and boris, what's the president saying right now? >> reporter: it appears that line about the fbi having free reign was hyperbole from president trump because it's the white house with input from senate republicans that is guiding the parameters of this fbi allegations into allegations against brett kavanaugh who was replacing anthony kennedy. there are complaints about democrats on twitter. he
wrote wow, just starting to hear the democrats who are only thinking obstruct and delay are starting to put out word that the time and scope of fbi alonging into judge kavanaugh and witnesses is not enough. hello! for them, it will never be enough. stay tuned and watch.
fred, as i previously mentioned, some are openly saying that the scope of this investigation is a narrow one. kellyanne conway was on state of the union with jake tapper and said they didn't want this to be a fishing expedition, a source close to the investigation confirmed that ultimately the white house with input from senate republicans is going to be deciding the handful of interviews that the fbi is going to conduct. we know they will take those results they come up with and they will not draw their own conclusions and they will hand over the information to the white house. notably, the fbi is not going to be looking into subjects relevant to the accusations against kavanaugh, namely his drinking habits in high school, something he was grilled on on thursday. amy klobuchar continuously asked him if he felt he drank too much in his high school career f. there were instances or moments that he could not recall.
klobuchar was on state of the union with jake tapper and asked about whether she worried that the white house may have too much input into this fbi investigation. listen to what she said. >> it will be limited in scope. it's meant to the last for a week, i believe beginning last friday. the fbi is not tasked with doing that here. the president very much respects the independence of the fbi and feels they should be looking at anything they think is credible within this limited scope. >> that's obviously not amy klobuchar, but she was concerned and that it is something she had not seen before at the white house. may try to guide this in a favorable way. press secretary sarah sanders was on a sunday morning talk show and the white house does not want to micromanage the fbi, but openly said she doesn't know
if don mcgahn had given a list dictating who they could and could not sbruf. >> lots of different messages. thank you so much. democratic congresswoman jackie spear from california, good to see you. what do you interpret from all of these variations of messages about how the fbi probe will be under way. who is giving the directive and whether don mcgahn is involved or not. free reign or limited. >> i think this investigation is turning into nothing more than a fig leaf so that the republicans can move forward on what they intended to do all along, which is ram this nomination through. senator flake was very clear about wanting to make sure that these credible allegations were, in fact, investigated. if one of the principals who has alleged these allegations is not even being interview and that's the news that we are hearing
from news reports, how credible is this investigation? furthermore, let's go back to why this all happened. this happened because a woman who wanted to remain anonymous got outed and then she came to washington to have the onslaught of questions and daggars sent her way and all she came with was the truth. she has taken a lie detector test. has judge kavanaugh agreed to submit to one? no. he has a judicial temperament that is very volatile. that's not something we want on the supreme court. he also appears to have an inbred bias. that's not something we want on the court. we want impartiality. there are over 20 names that list the conservative jurists in the country developed. he was not on that list.
go back to the list and pick someone who is going to have the right judicial temperament and will have a level of impartiality so we can move forward. >> if it's your view that there might be senators who are willing to overlook this bias. do you need a drink of water? are you okay? >> i do. >> i will make it a long question so you can drink. if senators are willing to overlook the bias or even this temperament, do you believe some of same senators are willing to overlook an fbi probe or the findings that don't move the ball on these allegations, if this probe is in your view, that fig that you mentioned that you upper worried it might result in. >> the only way this nomination will be stopped is if there is at least one u.s. senator who stands up against a great deal
of pressure, political pressure, and wants to make sure that this is an independent investigation. that credible allegations are being pursued. i don't think that's what we are hearing from the white house. if one person, the president said free reign and you have a narrowing of it by both the general counsel and senate republicans, this is not intended to be what we all thought it was going to be. >> this is what your colleague jerry nadler had to say this morning on abc. >> i would hope senator flake and others make clear their votes will not be for the nominee unless they have a free hand for proper investigation of these very serious allegations of sexual assaults. we can't have a justice on the supreme court for the next several decades who will decide life, liberty and death for the
entire american people who has been credibly accuse kd of sexual assaults and various other and i hope the senate will do so if he is on the supreme court and the senate has not investigated. the house will have to. >> here we are, congresswoman, in the midst of this me too movement which has elevated so many women to speak about their experiences and demand real justice. is it your view that senators are being mindful of these women, of this electorate and how their confirmation will be sending a strong message to women during this me too movement. >> i would say that the me too
movement is stalled right now. i'm very concerned about it, particularly in the u.s. senate where the house passed a very strong me too congress act bill to protect victims who serve in congress of the united states and the senate is dragging its feet on it a& even pursuing thi allegation by dr. blasey ford who even the president of the united states said is credible. last time i thought about the word credible, it indicates they are being truthful. that means she is truthful and someone is lying and it appears it's not her. >> this is close to home to you as a sexual assault survivor, you led the charge to clean up in congress. what kind of message is being sent to congress, being sent from the senate from this
confirmation process? >> 80% is made up of male members and if you look at the vitriol and you look at how rachel mitchell who was supposed to be the questioner was shut down very quickly, it suggests that their respect for women is quite limited. >> meaning she did not conduct the interview and the questions to the nominee, but she was used instrumentally in interviewing dr. ford. >> that's right. i think lindsey graham took it away from her. >> what was your interpretation when lindsey graham talked about this scam not long after hearing the testimony from dr. ford? you mentioned the issue of credibility and people believe she is credible. are you saying she is not
credible when you use the word scam? >> i think that lindsey graham underscored what is wrong in the u.s. senate today and what we should all be fearful of. the senate is on trial as far as i'm concerned. democracy is on trial. what's happening is our institutions are devolving. the senate has always been a collegial, deliberative, consensus-building institution. when you require at least 60 votes to confirm a supreme court justice, you found compromise and members coming together. when you only need 50 plus the vice president of the united states, then you are no longer looking for consensus. i personally think even if the democrats were to regain power in the senate, we should return to a 60-vote requirement. the supreme court shouldn't be another political football. >> jackie spear, thank you very much for being with us.
so many questions about how the probe into kavanaugh's path is being handled and why it's taken so long for the allegations to come to light. our panel breaks it all down. coming up. how do you win at business? stay at laquinta. where we're changing with contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. the riskiest job. the consequences underwater can escalate quickly. the next thing i know, she swam off with the camera. it's like, hey, thats mine! i want to keep doing what i love. that's the retirement plan.
back now with more details about the fbi investigation into sexual assault and misconduct allegation against supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. the focus moved to how the probe is being handled. sources say republicans are working with the white house to limit the scope and that has democrats concerned about getting to the facts. here's what minnesota senator amy klobuchar told jake tapper earlier. >> first first of all, i want to
make clear this is not a criminal trial. i agree on that. this is a job interview. so many of us have already decided because of this nominee's expansive view of presidential power that he doesn't belong on this court to be happened picked by a president who has continually undermined the fbi and said he wants to fire everyone from the attorney general to the deputy attorney general. we have issues with putting someone on the bench with those views and a number of us said we will vote against him. what this was about is the dignity of the court, the dignity of the senate that we get to the bottom of faxes. i have not looked at the evidence because i have not been able to interview the witnesses that are there. she seemed very compelling and answered the question with grace and dignity and all we want to do is make a courageous move and
say i can't stomach this anymore. this is the beneath the dignity of the country. this is dividing the country. let's at least have an impartial fact finder and i believe they can be. the fbi follow the evidence. >> a lot to discuss with me. a senior correspondent for bloomberg news. cnn commentator, matt lewis and callen. good to see all of you. already a tweet moments ago saying this. wow, just starting to hear the democrats who are only thinking obstruct and delay are putting out the word that the time and scope looking into judge kavanaugh is not enough. hello! for them it will never be enough. >> does this underscore that politics and influence have come together in this fbi investigation or can this investigation, the fixtubi prob
unbiassed. >> hopefully it will shed light on this. the fbi considers the work they do impartial, but by design, because they are doing a background check at the white house's request, they have say over the scope. senate republicans involved to draw the boundaries along with the white house and the democrats not so much. both sides looked to politicize this as a sought to get to the bottom of the matter. >> the presidential adviser kellyanne conway saying no, the white house does not have its hand in it and counsel don mcgahn is offering guidance and giving instruction to the fbi, who would be interview and what the limitations are. etc. what is the expectation on how involved the white house would be? >> look, i have to operate under the assumption they will have in
setting the scope. senator jeff flake said he supported this investigation where the scope and the amount of time was limited. that was the assumption from day one that the cope and the amount of time would be limited. i feel like democrats have been moving the bar going back to a few days ago. all we want is the investigation. it only two three days for clarence thomas. is that asking too much? that's not ridiculous to ask for one week. how can you deny us that. as soon as republicans agreed, it's not enough. it's never going to be enough. as critical as i have been of donald trump, he is sort of right. there is never going to be enough. a three-week investigation is never going to be enough. this is a difficult situation and i agree with senator
klobuchar that it is tearing the country apart. >> when you hear limited in scope, what does that entail to you. we are also hearing jim acosta they learned from sources that christine blasey ford's people said she has not been contacted by the fbi. what does limited in scope mean to you with the more obvious characters being part of the investigation like blasey ford? >> the fbi has been instructed to do a one-week investigation. limited in scope mean how many important witnesses can we speak to in a week. as they are looking at this, they know kavanaugh's position and they heard blasey ford's testimony under oath as to what happened. they haven't spoken to mark judge. judge is a critical witness. the second critical witness is i think who drove her from the party home. if it was a close friend,
wouldn't she have said something to the close friend about this assault, if it occurred? i would be all over that. where is this witness and why hasn't that witness been named? the witnesses downstairs probably were not in a position to see or know anything. i think the critical witness is mark judge and whoever drove her home. let's see what the fbi came up with in those regards. >> already so many opinions about where the investigation is going. what it could possibly result or that it wouldn't be impactful enough. here's senator lindsey graham earlier today. >> i have a call for an investigation of what happened in this committee. who betrayed dr. ford's trust and who in feinstein's office recommended katz as a lawyer and why did they not know they were willing to go to california and
who released the anonymous letter by cory gardner. we will do a full-scale investigation of what i think was a despicable process to deter from happening again. >> do you accept dianne feinstein's denial? >> yes. to her, but only to her. >> his focus is who revealed the name and how is it the identity of blasey ford came to be as opposed to the focus being getting to the bottom of the allegations. does that already cesend a message? >> we can walk and chew gum at the same time. we can investigate what happened 36 years ago with dr. ford and brett kavanaugh and investigate why is it that we had hearing two or three weeks ago and this never came occupy and ever it was over, an opportune
time for democrats, this came forward. somebody leaked the name. it shouldn't overshadow the actual question of what happened 36 years ago. >> is it overshadowing? >> one seems like an after action report and one is the heart of the matter this week. the question for the actual fbi investigation is whether or not judge kavanaugh's drinking or college behavior is relevant and going to be looked at as a matter of course. the reporting suggests it is not part of the mandate for that investigation which only increases pressure for the course of the next week on everyone else who knew him in college. >> so paul, last word on that. the relevancy of his alcohol consumption, why is that not part of the investigation? >> traditionally when you do a
background check for someone on a hearing, you are not asking about their drinking habits in high school. maybe the goal post has been move and we will have to look at middle or elementary school eventually. i don't know. this is a novel idea that you have to look at somebody's drinking history. they will start at looking at the incident itself and the witnesses who were there and only if his level of intoxication if he was there is relevant will they go beyond that scope. looking at his college career or high school career to see if he drank too much would be quite an invasion of privacy for somebody. >> wouldn't an investigator believe that is potentially a link between causation when it pertains to accusations like this? >> it's a big leap to say that anybody who has a history of drinking too much is a potential rapist.
yeah, somebody who blacks out, they can commit an armed robbery or beat somebody up or rain somebody, but lots of people drink too much on a particular occasion and are not rapists. i think to link the two so directly is making quite a leap. >> this is drunk shaming is what i call it. >> it's true, yep. >> all right. thanks so much. still ahead, a deadly disaster unfolding in part of indonesia. over 800 people dead after an earthquake and tsunami. recovery efforts of coming up. hi, kids! i'm carl and i'm a broker. do you offer $4.95 online equity trades? great question. see, for a full service brokerage like ours, that's tough to do. schwab does it. next question. do you offer a satisfaction guarantee? a what now? a satisfaction guarantee. like schwab does. man: (scoffing)
what are you teaching these kids? ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs, backed by a satisfaction guarantee. if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. if you don't like their answer, you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed?m let's get someone to say it with a really low voice. carl? lowest price guaranteed. what about the world's lowest limbo stick? how low can you go? nice one, carl. hey i've got an idea. just say, badda book. badda boom.
so far more than 830 people died after an earthquake and tsunami struck parts of indonesia. many buildings have been crumbled to the ground there and dozens of people may still be trapped in the trouble of a hotel. matt rivers is live for us in indonesia where the search for survivors is ongoing. what's the latest? >> fred, we are about 500 miles south of where this earthquake happened. we have been trying to get to that area for well over 12 hours now. we have been forced to overand access to this zone where the tsunami hit and we have been trying to fly or drive and you know the people who are more important than us. the charity workers and people who can bring the aid to those
affected by the earthquake and tsunami. they are having trouble getting in, too. that's the biggest challenge facing them and getting the right equipment and food and water and the medicine that everybody needs physically getting it into a location. hopefully it will get easier as the sunrises and they can clear away the landslides and open up the roads and hopefully the airport will take flights. that's how we will try getting in there. really, that's the task for rescuers outside. inside, the limited people that are there are trying to get people out from under that trouble and provide urgent medical care. as they get more access to the people, we are expecting the death toll and the number of injuried to rise. this is an ongoing situation, but by the looks of it, things are only going to get worse.
>> the clock is ticking on the fbi investigation and the three women accusing brett kavanaugh are coming forward to tell their stories. more from them, coming up. people confuse nice and kind. but they're different. it's nice to remove artificial ingredients. kind never had to. we choose real ingredients like almonds, peanuts and a drizzle of dark chocolate. find your favorite and give kind® a try. that last place was pretty nice. i don't like this whole thing. i think we can do better. change is hard. try to keep an open mind. come on, dad. this is for me, son? principal. we can help you plan for that.
the a...is stolen.es... hijacked from dreams. pulled from decades of obsession. taken from the souls of artists. we confess. we stole everything we could. from everything we've ever mastered. and put it here. the all-new lexus es. every curve. every innovation. every feeling. a product of mastery. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.
oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk?
♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.
you're in the business of helping people. we're in the business of helping you. business funding to help make a difference. another way we have your back. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. howdoing great dad!r does this thing got? looking good babe! are you filming. at booking.com, we can't guarantee you'll be any good at that water jet thingy... but we can guarantee the best price on a hotel, like this one. or any home, boat, treehouse, yurt, whatever. get the best price on homes, hotels and so much more. booking.com, booking.yeah president trump said the fbi has free reign during its investigation into brett kavanaugh, but sources tell cnn
republicans are working with white house counsel don mcgahn who is trying to make the scope as narrow as possible. three women have openly made sexual misconduct allegations. whether the fbi will talk to all of them is up in the air. now with more on the accusers and their claims and where we are in all of this. >> frederick a you know a lot of them and their attorneys are talking about this limited scope and what it mean fist the white house is indeed involved as the sources say they are, trying to limit the scope and giving the information to the fbi through the senate. according to our sources. that's not exactly how president trump put it when he was asked how limited the scope might be. >> the newly ordered background investigation has begun into supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. after questions over its scope, the president responding with
this. >> the fbi i believe is doing a great job. they have been all over. they have free reign and do whatever it is they do. they will be doing things we never even thought of. >> it appears fbi agents are focusing on the accusations of two women deborah ramirez and christine blasey ford who met kavanaugh in high school. the senate judiciary committee and the country heard the emotional testimony from blasey ford who as a teen kavanaugh held her down and she thought he was going to rain her. >> indelible in the hippo campus is the uproarious laughter between the two and their having fun at my expense. >> brett kavanaugh tearfully and angrily denied the accusations.
>> my family and my name have been totally and permanently destroyed by vicious and false accusations. >> they have not heard a full account from the two other accusers. deborah said the details are fuzzy, but they played a drinking game in a dorm room where she became inebriated. she said brett was laughing and i can see his face and his hips coming forward like he was pulling up his pants. so far julie swetnick, the third woman to come forward heard nothing from investigators. >> if he is going to have that seat legitimately, all of these things should be investigated. from what i experienced firsthand, i don't think he
belongs on the supreme court. >> she is the only one of the three to have sent a sworn declaration under penalty of perjury to the senate judiciary committee. she said she witnessed kavanaugh being abusive towards girls and attempting to shift or move their clothes to expose body parts. she witnessed brett kavanaugh and mark judge caused girls to be inebriated so they can be gang raped. she didn't say she saw kavanaugh actually taking part. she said she stopped going to the parties after she herself was gang raped. kavanaugh was asked about it. >> the allegations by dr. ford, ms. ramirez and ms. swetnick are wrong. >> that is emphatically what i'm saying. >> swetnick's attorney, michael avenatti, said she has not been
contacted by the fbi and the clock is ticking. >> michael avenatti talking to me and going on twitter saying it would be outrageous if she is not contacted and if the white house is meddling in this investigation by the fbi. we should also note that dr. ford has not yet been contacted by the fbi, but we saw her sworn testimony and there was a lot to go on for the fbi there. >> thank you so much for that. let's talk about this fbi investigation now into the kavanaugh allegations. with me now is analyst and former federal prosecutor and robert mueller's special assistant at the department of justice. let's talk about they is skwens of events. the white house gives the green light to the fbi probe. is it now the white house who gives the direction to how the probe goes? how extensive the fbi will search or how limited in scope it will be?
>> it seems to be coordinated between the senate judiciary committee and the white house counsel's office. the president has said free reign, but the reporting is don mcgahn, white house counsel working with the senate judiciary committee are trying to set parameters for the investigation. that's not are inially bad if the parameters are brought enough to allow the investigation to proceed from step know to step two. you can't know where the investigation is going to take you. you have to have the authority to follow leads as they evolve. we will see if they have free reign or whether it's cirque um scribe and not legitimate. >> kellyanne conway said earlier it will unbiassed. listen. >> the white house is not getting involved in the fbi investigation in that way. the president very much respects the independence of the fbi and feels as he said last night they should be looking at anything they think is credible within
this limited scope. >> what does that mean? >> that's up to the fbi. i'm not involved in the conversations. >> you can interview these witnesses and not these witnesses? >> i don't think don mcgahn would do that. it's also senator flake and other who is said please go forward with this fbi investigation. >> she said there will be no interference from the white house and if there was the case like testimony from dr. ford or a written statement from one of the other accusers, does that mean the fbi doesn't need to go back and revisit and talk to the accusers and instead take another path and talk to other people? >> you have a complain. dr. ford, ramirez and swetnick. those are the complain ants. you start with that as the piece
of evidence. then you move out as to how to corroborate this. the word credible means convincing. you need nothing further. a sin him in is capable of being proved. they are doing the plausible route. is this capable of being confirmed? they will start with the core and move out. the question is, do they have the authority to continue to move out when witnesses say, you know what, you ought to talk to this person. they may know something, too. do you have the authority or you have to go back and say witness one told us to speak to witness two, do we have the authority to speak to them. in a normal investigation, they always end the inquiry by saying is there anybody else who has relevant knowledge? as long as they have that prerogative and the reigns to
investigate whoever arises, if not, it's lip service and there will be political problems for that. >> there is a week in which this will end. we will find out. good to see you. thank you so much. developing right now, the white house said it could be a while before we learn if deputy attorney general rod rosenstein will keep his job. a meeting with president trump may be delayed for a second time. rosenstein appeared to be on his way out after reports of wearing a wire to record president trump and then also recruit cabinet members to invoke the 25th amendment to remove the president from office. here's what sarah sanders said about the timing of the meeting. >> i'm not going to get ahead of the president's conversation with the deputy attorney general. a date has not been set. it could be this week. i can see it pushing back another week given the other
things going on with the supreme court. we will see and we look to keep the press updated on this. >> rosenstein who oversees the mueller investigation denied the reports about wearing a wire and the discussions about invoking the 25th amendment and rosenstein agreed to speak with house republicans about the reports. straight ahead -- >> you know what is interesting? when i did it and i was really being tough and so was he. we go back and forth and then we nell in love. really. he wrote me beautiful letters. they are great letters. we fell in love. >> we will talk about what the president means by all of that as nuclear tensions remain on the korean peninsula went to ancestry, i put in the names of my grandparents first. i got a leaf right away. a leaf is a hint that is connected to each person
president trump raising a few eyebrows with comments me about north korea during a rally in west virginia last night. here's what the president said about taking a hard line in his first meeting with kim jung-un. >> you know what is interesting, when i did it, and i was really being tough, so was he, we would go back and forth. and then we love in love. okay? no, really. he wrote me beautiful letters. and theyletters. we fell in love. >> both countries still appear to be at odds over what it means for north korea to denuclearize.
julia is joining us. and what is your better than tags of wh -- interpretation of when the president says we fell in love? >> i've heard some of his supporters say it was just a joke, but regardless, it is just proof again that for donald trump, there is only trump interests. family interests. money interests. there is no united states interests. so i don't care if kim is sending him flowers every day, serenading him with luther vandross songs, i don't know, but it is irrelevant. there is a united states interest. north korea knows that. north korea has their interests. they haven't strayed from their interests. >> might it be the tactic of negotiations for this president where he has said in the past, you know, he can look at somebody in the first 15 minutes, essentially read them and maybe this is his way of flattering his nemesis, if you will, so as to get an advantage when if potentially they meet
again? >> well, it is not working. maybe i grant you that. donald trump has been president for almost two years, so this whole trying new things, i think we can start to judge the various tactics. north korea has said this weekend that there is no way that they are deare beindenucle unless the president gives similar concessions. so they are strong in this account. and the second is it is not just north korea, there are other nations, other tots running for office in various countries who look to what donald trump is saying about north korea and think, you know, i'm going to have an ally, i can do whatever i want once i get in. so it is not just about north korea. but north korea is winning this negotiation. they have a firm line. whatever flirtation trump is
doing, they are not buying it. >> so the president is still disputing that, he addressed that criticism that the u.s. has given up more than the north koreans have in negotiations so far. this is what he had to say. >> i got the hostages back for nothing. obama paid $1.8 billion, you know. i got them back for nothing, right? we got the remains of our great heros back for many, many years. you don't have anymore nuclear testing. in fact they are closing up a lot of the sites. you don't have rockets going up. you don't have missiles going up. and you have people -- i like him, he likes me. i guess that is okay. am i allowed to say that? >> julia, does he have a point? >> so some of those aren't factually correct in terms of denuclearization. and a few experts including our own intelligence community question that fact.
i think what is more important, i think that it is really interesting and we can get into the psychology of dud, we did give something. maybe president obama gave a couple million dollars. we gave our presidency for the concessions. we met with -- donald trump met with kim. he had a one-on-one with the biggest -- the most horrible human being on earth conceivably. that is something. and to give that away for -- and i don't mean to denigrate it, but for a few hostages and the remains, that was a concession. so maybe obama was better to give money, but not us, not the presidency. donald trump gave away the sanctity of the presidency for these concessions. so weird that donald trump doesn't see that, doesn't see his own role as a concession. >> okay. thank you so much. more straight ahead after this.
thank you clients? well jd power did just rank them highest in investor satisfaction with full service brokerage firms...again. and online equity trades are only $4.95... i mean you can't have low cost and be full service. it's impossible. it's like having your cake and eating it too. ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs. how am i going to explain this? if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management.
this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.