tv Cuomo Primetime CNN November 19, 2018 6:00pm-7:00pm PST
to tell if its air marshals were being trained properly. they couldn't even tell. tsa does say that's all fixed now. that's all we can take them at is their word. >> let's hope. drew griffin, thanks for the reporting. hand it over to chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." but her e-mails. what will he say when it's his daughter ivanka using her personal e-mail for government work? plenty of blow back for the president disrespecting a decorated veteran and the hunt for owe sama bin laden. you may think you know the monica lewinsky story. there's so much we don't know. new details and also new
perspective. one question, imagine if it happened today. how big a difference would me too make? we are turkey day minus three. let's get after it. this would be some headline all by itself. a top administration official using a personal e-mail account for official white house business. then you add to that, it's the president's daughter ivanka. what's he going to say about it? nothing. you are not going to hear chants of lock her up at some trump rally about this. what are ivanka's people saying? her private account was used, quote, almost always for logistics and scheduling concerning her family. she only did so until the white house told her it was a no no. let's get after it with two of the biggest names in intelligence, former cia director general michael haden and james clapper. i'm not going to take up too
much time on smaller matters. using a private e-mail to do government business, even after our reporting is she was told that it's a no no. how big a deal, jim clapper? >> well, it's a big deal politically, certainly. there's the obvious inconsistency here about the treatment that hillary clinton got for essentially the same thing. intrinsically, you know, whether classified e-mails passed, i don't know. i just think that the -- i find it incredible after all -- after hillary clinton and using that for passing a government communication that for this to happen is just pretty incredible. as you say, probably unlikely we're going to hear too many chants of lock her up.
>> i don't think we will hear anything about it at all. hypocrisy is nothing new these days. general, let's get into some of the pithier matters here. admiral mcraven, the idea of going after him as a critic because he likes hillary clinton, fine. all is fair in politics. the idea of diminishing what he has to say about saying, would have been nice if they caught bin laden sooner, your reaction? let's play sound first. >> retired admiral, navy seal, 37 years, former head of -- >> hillary clinton fan. >> special operations -- >> excuse me. hillary clinton fan. >> who led the operation, command of the operations that took down ishussein and killed n laden says your sentiment is the greatest threat to democracy in his lifetime. >> he is a hillary clinton backer. an obama backer. frankly -- >> he was a navy seal.
>> wouldn't it have been nice if we got osama bin laden sooner than that. >> he is not a hillary clinton backer. he said it himself. let's put the truth to the side. what bothered you so much about this? >> well, there are two things. number one, i have met no finer officer than bill. to have the president use the power of his office to attempt to didminish someone who i thin by way of virtue is better is the other is the gaping g. ignorance on the part of a president late in the second year of his term as to how cia and special operations forces operate together. his little quote there trying to condemn the lateness, the tardiness of the assault has nothing to do with how these things really happen in the real world. one hopes a president could pick some of that up. >> mr. clapper, it is not -- it's no small irony the
president is talking about they should have gotten bin laden faster. everybody would like to get bad guys who have an existential threat to the america on their mind at all times as soon as you can. that diminishes how difficult it was. i followed it for the better part of 15 years. went to pakistan four times about this. wasn't an easy task. the pakistanis weren't making it easier. the irony that the head of isis is out there, we don't know where he is and the president didn't seem concerned about that. >> actually, mike pointed this out in his tweet today about what about the head of al qaeda? they are are still out uncaptured. the irony is terrible. i couldn't agree more with mike about bill as a friend and a national hero for this country. really, what the president's criticism directed towards
admiral is a shot at the intelligence community. if it was up to the intelligence community to find bin laden, which they did. rather than bad mouth it, this was a tremendous testament to the patient, persistence and professionalism of the intelligence community, notably cia, to find him in the first place. i just thought, this is almost pathetic by the president. >> to do it with obl right under the nose of the pakistani military without notice from the isi, the pakistani intelligence, a very capable group, as you know better than i, that was no small feat. we know that. general, we keep hearing that the president loves the veterans. do you believe we have seen ample proof of that? >> no. we have talked previously, chris, about the performance last weekend in france, the failure to go across the river on the 11th of november. the ability of the president,
the tendency of the president to use the armed forces as props as he has done along the southern border. he went to the marine barracks in washington a few days after he didn't go to arlington and used the marines as a background to show his love for the troops. i did a little research. the president's popularity in the armed forces is a bit above the national average. it's split right down the middle, 44% for, 43% against. he has good support among the enlisted force. he is well underwater with women, minorities and the officer corps. >> hasn't gone to visit them abroad. it's interesting the difference between the talk and the walk. jim clapper, let me ask you something. the idea of the president -- he once said, i can't wait to speak to mueller. want to do it under onlath. now he says, we're done with
this. they're not answering questions about obstruction in writing. what do you make of the shift? what's the relevance to the probe? >> i think as, you know -- assuming special counsel mueller is nearing the end of his investigation, and i think the reality of what is could c connote, the implications for president trump -- i believe he has gotten cold feet now that we're getting close to the time where i think some action with the president is going to ensue. i'm sure his lawyers have told him about his potential vulnerability here. i just think he has realized that. he would love, i know, to cut it off right now. that would be a nice luxury for anybody under investigation to
have. >> quick question before i let you guys go. interpol, the idea of putting a russian in charge of interpol, what's your take? >> very disappointing and quite dangerous for russian dissidents living elsewhere in the world. the russians can turn the mechanisms of this organization to their own political purposes. >> if it's so obvious, why is it happening? >> beyond my ability to understand, the previous head was chinese. we had some of the same issues there as well. maybe it's part of america pulling back and not being actively involved in these international organizations. >> look at that screen. talk about turkey in the middle. it's great to have you two men. thank you for helping this show. the best of thanksgiving. i'm thankful for you both. >> thank you. democrats picked up more seats over the weekend. the president is trying to blow
off the idea of a blue wave. he is facing a lot of problems, not just now but on what will happen in 2020 potentially because of what just happened now. i will take you through it next. the new iphone xr! t and it's incredible camera this weekend join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr, on us! i can bearly contain myself this weekend join t-mobile, get the iphone xr on us. your new brother-in-law. you like him. he's one of those guys who always smells good. his 5 o'clock shadow is always at 5 o'clock. you like him. your mom says he's done really well for himself. he has stocks and bonds your dad wants to go fishing with him. your dad doesn't even like fishing. you like your brother-in-law. but you'd like him better if you made more money than he does. don't get mad at your brother-in-law. get e*trade
you ok there, kurt? we're about to move. karate helps... relieve some of the house-buying... stress. at least you don't have to worry about homeowners insurance. call geico. geico... helps with... homeowners insurance? been doing it for years. i'm calling geico right now. good idea! get to know geico. and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be.
>> if you can't carry -- you didn't carry it two weeks ago -- michigan, wisconsin and pennsylvania, you are not going to get re-elected. >> i didn't run. i wasn't running. my name wasn't on the ballot. >> he told people so many times, go and vote like i'm on the ballot. i'm not there but i'm there. go and vote. go and vote. just because he says it, doesn't make it true. not now, not then, not ever. here is what we do know. two out of three voters had trump on their mind. most had bad thoughts. as a result, the democrats picked some seats up. they put some bricks down in the blue wall, as they call it, across the midwest, especially with the governor wins. why? because governors help lay the base for electoral outcomes. those state legislatures are the ones that draw up districts. that's where the organizing is done, especially in the center of the country.
republicans have dominated governor offices and legislatures, especially in the midwest, for most of the last decade. that's why democrats picking up seven governor seats in this election, republicans only getting one, that matters. the governor wins by the democrats can make a difference for visiting would-be 2020 candidates who want to make a splash. it makes for better campaign optics. the whole sauce of it. trump sounds like he is in denial or spinning as hard as he can. take a listen. >> this is a historically big defeat in the house. you lost 36, maybe 40 seats. some would argue that it was a thumping. >> i won the senate. and that's historic, too. because if you welcome at presidents in the white house, it's almost never happened where you won a seat. we won. we now have 53 as opposed to 51. we have 53 great senators in the
u.s. senate. we won. that's a tremendous victory. >> you can keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true. he already had the senate. remember this. the map they had in the senate, they came up short. they should have had five seats, maybe six. they only got two. right? they had democrats but in ruby red states and they still lost. they lost in arizona. they lost in montana. they lost in west virginia. if it weren't for trump being such a mixed bag for so many republicans, who knows what would have happened. second, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. we know that. trump is sounding like a repeater. the question becomes, what does this portend for 2020? on the senate side, the democrats have a much easier size. the states in play are different. better for democrats than this time in the midterms. while the foundation, those senate and house seats that could turn blue in 2020, that looks a little favorable.
the real questions for democrats is who they have to take on trump, assuming he runs. their field may look like the gop redux in 2016. everybody and anybody may be running. you got senators booker, warren, sanders, gillibrand, harris, representative o'rourke who got beat in texas. democrats are high on him for one reason or another. they are talking about him running in 2020. didn't give back all the money he raised. he could use that for 2020. political reports that bernie sanders is lining up progressive activists from across the country for a three-day gathering in burlington next week. senator cory booker is setting his sites on the key state of new hampshire, making his second visit there in less than two months. you know what? a year is so far away. the president's biggest opponent at that time could be the economy or one of a dozen new names, including outsiders that
you have never heard of who believe they can exploit the vacuum of quality talent. you know who did that and won? the president of the united states. we will see what happens. one of the biggest takeaways is that you should never use your personal e-mail for government business. why did ivanka, of all people, not get the memo? big news to take up in our great debate next. ♪ bum-bum-bum-bum-bum t-mobile believes it's better to give than to receive.
so i could've taken the bus? yeah. bring your phone. switch your carrier. save hundreds a year with xfinity mobile. call, click or visit a store today. ivanka trump under fire for, wait for it, using her personal e-mail for government business while serving in the administration. you cannot make it up. i feel like i say that every week. every week i'm right. hundreds of e-mails last year to aides, wonder what her dad thinks. fair to compare it to hillary clinton? let's ask our great debaters. what do you say? >> crooked ivanka. these things are things we heard about throughout the entire campaign. right now, it's hypocrisy showing its ugly head. republicans didn't care about
hillary clinton's e-mails. they wanted to persecute her, chanting lock her up, lock her up. it was good and red meat for the base. they didn't care. now you have ivanka doing the same thing. we will hear silence. she's a high ranking -- although his daughter, a high ranking official who has a security clearance. if we're going to have an fbi investigation for hillary clinton, we need an investigation for ivanka trump. the saying is was good for the goose is good for the gander. i am tired of the hypocrisy. the american people are tired of the hypocrisy. even we chant lock her up and investigate her from here until the cows come home or we just say that we were hypocritical and hillary clinton's matter was not that serious. >> i hope nobody chants that. it showed a disrespect for the process. what about the hypocrisy here? >> to sort of ignore the obvious differences here is, i think, a
little hypocritical. hillary clinton went out and established her own server in full knowledge that what she was doing was wrong. number one. number two, she -- this was a political person who had political aspirations, who was doing things in her own interest as a political figure as opposed to ivanka, who is the daughter of the president. she was not the secretary of state dealing with a variety of classified information, even sensitive from the standpoint of dealing with our allies and foes. ivanka is focused on parental leave policy. there's a big difference between what hillary clinton, secretary of state, was doing and what ivanka trump is accused of. >> she's a senior adviser. hillary didn't set up the server. it was set up by her husband before. comey had to say the problem wasn't she was trafficking in classified information but your
point stands. apples to oranges, hillary clinton was a big-shot, wanted to be president. this is different. >> no, it's not different. what's the difference between whether -- if hillary clinton was using her own server versus ivanka using yahoo or g-mail, we need to figure out if she was compromised. she was communicating with cabinet officials. my friends on the right, whenever something happens with donald trump junior or eric trump or ivanka, they say, my god, they're just children. let them be. now they have security cleara e clearances. they are high ranking officials. they are in violation of the law. to say ivanka doesn't know or is ignorant of policy, the perfect exmrample of hillary clinton. her father was chanting lock her up. her father ran a campaign -- you could use #butheremail. to say she's not aware is
dishonest. >> i didn't say that. i didn't say she was blameless. i think what she did was wrong. what she did was really not -- sort ofinexcusable. i don't think it rises to the level of hillary clinton. what ivanka did, i'm disappointed that she did it. i'm sure she feels very bad about having done that. it was careless. it was not a good thing to do. it doesn't rise to the level of what mrs. clinton did. >> the problem is, none of it -- >> should there be an investigation? >> do you think there should be an investigation or no? >> unless there's some evidence here that she was dealing with a lot of information as mrs. clinton was of a sensitive nature and that was part of the discussion, again, from what the articles i read is that the majority of the discussions were about scheduling and her children and family and things like that, which i know that's what hillary clinton said, but it didn't turn out to be that
way. >> it turned out to be closer than that than what you were making of it. that's the problem. put it all out there. i don't care about what these guys are using -- if you get caught, you got a problem. if you get caught by somebody else, not the u.s. government, but they catch you and they get information from you because you did this, now you have a big problem on your hands. during the campaign, let's be honest, this was blown out of control because it was hillary clinton, republicans ran wild with it. that's where the chants came from. if you ask i.t. experts, what is safer, they will tell you to set up your own server every time over those things. it was never about the truth. it was never about what e-mails she had. it was a way to go after hillary clinton. that's the irony now being his own daughter. fair point? >> i mean, i think that's a fair point. in fact, i don't necessarily want ivanka investigated. i'm like you, i could care less that she was using her private e-mail account.
i don't think she should have security access. i think nepotism is running rampant. she shouldn't be there. with all that being said, i think we are making these points to highlight something that breeds distrust amongst our viewers and the american public, which is the hypocrisy. >> i think that's where it comes up. we see it on different levels. another topic i wanted to get at with you guys about is what he said to john kelly yesterday. that was a great interview by chris wallace. we don't celebrate each other enough in this business. i'm biased. i came up under chris wallace at abc news. he was the senior investigative reporter. he did a nice job yesterday and got to a lot of things. had the president on his heels a lot. i think that's important when you test power. i saw that in a subtle way that wasn't celebrated much. when he was talking about john kelly, do we have sound of that? i want you to hear the president talking about john kelly, the chief of staff. listen.
>> back in july, you said that chief of staff john kelly will be here through 2020. can you still say that? >> i wouldn't -- look, we get along well. there are certain things i love what he does and there are certain things that i don't like that he does. that aren't his strengths. john at some point is going to want to move on. john will move on. >> 2020 is no longer written in stone? >> it could be. it could be. let's see what happens. >> it's like reality is so day to day in this administration. there is no loyalty, rick. there's no permanency. by all accounts, general john kelly is giving heart, soul, blood and brain to this administration on a daily basis. that's the way he gets talked about? >> i didn't see that as being critical. he said i love some of what he does. >> he won't guarantee he is here throughout the year. what it did you say about your
chief of staff? >> that may be john kelly's decision. >> you have been in the business. you were at a high level. nobody talks like that about their own people. nobody exposes them to scrutiny. >> he has given john kelly high praise on multiple occasions. there might be something going on. maybe general kelly wants to go. we heard that for a long, long time. >> is anybody safe from scrutiny from this man? >> it's a reality -- this is a reality tv show. this is "the apprentice" on steroids. they love chaos. i think this is just who he is. i think that there's people that are waiting in the background. one of the individuals i have served with here in south carolina is waiting in the background, who has a demeanor that's more like donald trump than john kelly. >> why would you want it? if they came to you and said, come on into the white house, we need you, you are great with cuomo, would you consider it? >> i love this show so much.
i could never leave here. i can't -- i'm going to do this until i'm gray. >> it's me and my sweater. >> i walk in without a tie on. that's when -- >> that's a different level. rick, you and i may be italian, but we need more to dress like that. i can't tell you how many guys say to me, you know -- even anthony scaramucci has been truthful. the idea everybody wants to work in the white house, it's not true. they have a hard time in general under normal circumstances, it's hard to get people to take time off of their work, worry about their livelihood, cut their money and go in. in this white house, i don't know how much they talked to you about it rick, but they have a hard time getting talent. you just heard why. >> there are a lot of really good, talented people in the white house. some used to work for me. they are good people. i would agree with you that a lot of levels, they have had trouble --
>> still have tons of openings. >> they have. they haven't done a good job filling a lot of those openings. that's a problem in trying to get policy penetrating through the department. it has been a problem. i'm not sure it's fair to say the white house is necessarily the place they are having the hardest time recruiting. they have recruited top-notch people that are coming in the next few days. i think it's a little harder once you get out farther away from the president. i think they have top-notch people in the white house. >> gentlemen, it's great to have you on the show. i appreciate it. i'm thankful for you guys. >> happy thanksgiving. >> thank you for helping us build something here. you are a big part of it. god bless and be well. >> you too. monica lewinsky is back in the news and for good reason. i have toll yo tell you this documentary series will take people by surprise. you know the story but not really and not from her
perspecti perspective. what happened with the president, how it changed her, how she was dealt with, it's all so different than you may acknowledge. then there's the big question, imagine if it happened today. i have people who covered it then, as did i. we will discuss about what we learned in this documentary series and what would happen if it happened today. it's a provocative decision and a good one to have next. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
the lewinsky scandal, never the bill clinton scandal. it struck me as odd because she was an intern. he was the most powerful man in the world. it's been 20 years. can you imagine that? monica lewinsky is now speaking out about what was done to her by that entire system of scrutiny. it will be fnew for many of you. here is a clip of the new documentary. >> he, you know, paid a lot of attention to me. he spent time sort of standing there and held my hand longer than he should have. gave what others have described as the full bill clinton. it feels as if you are the only person standing there.
the next day, we had a surprise party for bill on the south lawn that the staff was having. i did this really silly thing. i ran home at lunchtime and i put back on the sage green suit i had been wearing before when he paid attention to me. maybe he will notice me again. and notice me he did. >> bizarre. what a wild ride so many years ago. so much implications. such change to our political culture and o. let's discuss with two pros. i was kind of moved by a lot of what i have heard here. even though i read it in her book. i have known monica lewinsky over the years. i have heard her talk about
this. there's something for me, frank, in hearing her discuss it that put it through the lens of whafwhat was done to her in a way i never processed it before. >> a degree i agree. she was a very, very young woman at the time. it got lost at the time i think in retrospect we understand. but she was 22 i think whether this began. bill clinton was 49 or 50. as it went on, he is in his early 50s, she's in her early 20s. the age difference was profound. the level of power, the difference in power between them was profound. monica lewinsky was nonetheless put through the wringer, through the grinder, like very few people i have seen in my lifetime. about this -- i know her a ving- little bit, too. i have gotten to know her in the last couple years. to see her talking about this with poise, to see her healthy and vibrant after all she went through and all the hard work she had to do to patch herself
together and move on, i feel enormous respect for her. >> i remember back then, julie, one of the interesting things was my wife came to know monica lewinsky. i'm hard bitten. i was born this way. my wife has always been heart and head and a beautiful combination. i remember her back then being like, what is being done to her? what did she do? what is going on here? it was interesting how whether intentional or unintentional, conscious, sub conscioukon shsu about getting her. it was chasing her down. hillary clinton, you would think that she was stormy daniels or something like that. in terms of someone who knew what she was doing and was engineering, trying to get into it. why the difference between how we dealt with it then and how we would now? >> well, i mean, you are right about that. as you pointed out, it's known as the lewinsky scandal, not the bill clinton scandal.
the lens was so much less the predicament she was in and what she was experiencing as a young woman in this extraordinary situation, really the lens -- i was getting to washington at the time and starting out as a political reporter. we were all obsessed with what this would mean for bill clinton and the presidency and the remarkable nature of what we were seeing unfold. it's true she was sort of hunted by news photographers. >> she's done in by her own friend. >> people were leaking right and left. yet there was an appetite for all of the revelations, because nobody had ever seen anything like this before. the change of perspective now as what we are seeing -- i think it's a very healthy process -- is when these things come to light, when these incidents have happened more recently in the last couple of years, the focus really is on the women and what is -- what the women are experiencing, how they were put in situations and put themselves
in situations in some cases, where the power dynamic was really unequal and they suffered consequences for it. there's much less tolerance, much less understanding for whatever the man in power may have been going through. there's really much more of a focus, as there should be, on how this could have been allowed to happen. i think to see monica lewinsky living through this now, now that the lens has shifted, has been fascinating. >> she's really done amazing things with her life despite that period. i want to play a little something more. i want to get into what you were talking about the then and now dynamic. listen to this though. >> i kept asking, could i call my mom? they kept saying no. sa he said, you are 24. you don't need to call your mommy. you need to make a decision about what to do. i said, you should know i'm leaning towards not cooperating. he said, well, you should know that we're also planning on
prosecuting your mom for the things that you said she did on the tape. and i basically stood my ground and said if they would not let me call someone, call my mom, i couldn't make this decision without talking to her. so eventually, they said okay. >> two things i want -- i want to button this with a different piece of sound. one is, she didn't come forward and try to rat on bill clinton. that was a big -- that's been something that's been out there. she came out. no, she did not. to have feds talking to you as a 20 something-year-old saying we will come at your mother if you don't talk to us, she was some part of a mob organization. the other piece that wasn't really appreciated at the time -- i hope people get it now, where she was in her life and what this would be like if it happened to you. listen to this. >> it's not as if it didn't register with me that he was the president.
obviously, it did. i think in one way, the moment we were actually in the back office for the first time, the truth is that i think it meant more to me that someone who other people desired desired me. >> that really puts it right. someone who desire -- so many desired desired me. i had always felt like that. how could she do that with the president? how could she not? not to be immoral or amoral about it. you put yourself in her position. what are those perspectives? >> the president of the united states was laser focused on her. she's a young woman in her early 20s. that's gotta be dazzling. that has to be something -- if any one of us was in a situation like that, whatever the gender reversal would be or whatever, think about what that would be like. as you said, really important here, she didn't run tattling to the authorities. in fact, she was secretly
recorded by her supposed friend linda tripp. when you re-visit all that happened and what she went through, i just have to repeat, it's amazing she's standing here in one piece right now. the thing that has enraged me is if you go back and you look at the coverage, she was presented as much or more villain than victim, when both things are at play. she was more victim than villain. and she sort of -- at least in the years immediately afterwards, paid a heavier price for this than adults who were her senior. >> he won. >> yeah. >> he won after that. she was gone. i remember her trying to make it many new york city. she had a create receive sense, she wanted to do land bags. scarlet letter doesn't begin to describe. >> how does she get past the outrage and injustice?
she is suffering the greatest damage. i don't know how you put that away. you put the injustice of that away and move on with as much composure as she is showing. >> she wound up talking about victimization and bullying online. she has done a lot with her life. here is the big question for both of you before i let you go. julie, i will start with you. if it happened today, what do you think -- what would be the play? do you think a president would survive? i'm not talking about impeachment. i'm talking about court of public opinion. what do you think would be different? >> i think it would be a much, much different debate. i think it would start with the fact that as i said before, we're in an era appropriately where women are believed and their experiences are front and center, particularly where there's a power dynamic, which there certainly was here. it's not just about her feeling desired. he was the president of the
united states. she was an intern in her 20s. i also think we have to acknowledge the fact that the current sitting president has been accused of harassing and actually assaulting women. >> what would happen though -- i hear you about that. you make all the right points. frank, if you factor in something that was ignored at the time -- i'm not saying it's right or wrong. i want to put it out there. the consensual nature. she never -- there's a huge power imbalance. you could argue, could she consent? she was in her 20s. she wasn't 15, 16. the idea of for her to come out, this was completely consensual, do you think it would be survivable? yes, he was impeached. it didn't make it through the senate. >> first of all, she could legally consent. i don't think that makes her l equally responsible. it's really hard to say what would happen today. we have come a long way in terms of believing women. we have come a long way in terms of understanding the power that men have over women below them.
we have -- we are partisan. you look at trump. he puts the truth into dispute and says those facts are wrong. would we have taped? the narrative is so -- people do such partisan battle over the narrative now that that partisan battle might eclipse the great social progress we made. >> it's intriguing. if one president could survive it, it would be the one we have right now. he has proven teflon in a way that bill clinton wishes he was at that time. frank, thank you so much. julie, this was great. it was great to have you both. >> great to be here. >> be well. happy thanksgiving. >> you too. it would be nice if this president could go a day without lobbing insults. that's not who he is. that's not how he treats opposition. even if we are talking about heroes who have put their lives on the line to protect him and the rest of us. i'm talking about veterans. you shouldn't ever talk smack about veterans. you have no right, neither does
the president. shouldn't they have a leader who honors them at every turn, not only when convenient? i have a closing argument that goes to this next. in here. take your razor, yup. alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select. alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see.
they work togetherf doing important stuff. the hitch? like you, your cells get hungry. feed them... with centrum micronutrients. restoring your awesome, daily. centrum. feed your cells. so the president went after admiral mcraven and the obl hunt for two reasons, osama bin laden. and both reasons, i would argue, are bad. the first, he attacked not because he has some deep seated feeling or understanding of the
war on terror or what opportunities were missed in getting osama bin laden. quite the opposite. he had a jellyfish-type reaction to someone opposing him. here's how it worked. the admiral called out his threatening hour free press. he heard it. it's criticism, so he attacks. listen. >> bill mcraven, retired at mirl, navy s.e.a.l., 37 years, former head of u.s. special operations. >> hillary clinton fan. >> special operations. >> excuse me. hillary clinton fan. >> who led the operations, commanded the operations that took down saddam hussein and killed osama bin laden said that your sentiment is the greatest threat to democracy in his lifeti lifetime. >> he's a hillary clinton backer and an obama backer. >> he was a navy s.e.a.l. >> wouldn't it have been nice if we had gotten osama bin laden a lot sooner than that. >> can you imagine that's where we are? our commander in chief
denigrates the efforts to get osama bin laden, to go after the admiral who was responsible for taking down sa zaum hussein. why? because the president doesn't like what he said about him. and by the way, what he just told you is a lie. the admiral is not a hillary clinton supporter. how do we know? he said as much. he never even endorsed her. this is not about the truth. it's ham-fisted deflection. you hit me, i hit you. but he attacked a decorated veteran who's a hero, and he maligned one of the greatest takedowns of an opponent in modern history. the man who represented the 9/11 threat is now gone. thanks should be the order of the day always to the s.e.a.l.s, their admiral, their commander, all the intelligence people and the support troops who made their efforts possible. the years of work before those
magic moments in that night. some are surprised that the president would attack the osama bin laden effort or admiral mcraven because trump loves the veterans so much. says who? trump? we only know what we can show. he gave them a race, true. so have others. he's left 15,000 active troops in afghanistan after saying he'd bring them home. he sent others to the border for no good reason during the holidays. in fact, the same day last week when trump was patting himself on the back, saying, i've done so much for vets, i could leave right now, congress was dealing with the appalling failure of the trump administration to deliver g.i. payments to thousands. they've been waiting weeks, months, for money we promised them in trade for their lives. where's the love? his words? where were they when he was in france, when rain kept him from the world war i ceremony, on veterans day when arlington was skipped because of phone calls.
please. then there's a second reason. this is a distraction. the president has a genius quality when it comes to knowing what the media will pick up on, what opponents will be triggered by. he gets it, and he is right almost every time. so what happens? well, what's happening right now. instead of pointing out how his lies about the caravan were exposed as just that, how the great deal maker has nothing working with congress, how he went bad on how pumped he was to talk to mueller. remember that if i'll talk to him. i'll talk to him under oath. yes, guaranteed to john carl at abc. now he won't even let his lawyers prep answers about obstruction. talk about a hoax. that's a hoax. you'll talk to him under oath. now you won't even answer questions inni writing that you lawyers put together. and of course how the white house tried and failed again to suppress the press in the white
house. that's what the mcraven thing was all about in the beginning. mcraven saying you threatening the press is the biggest threat to democracy. it resonates because this man fights terror. that's what he did. rules that the white house said they're going to have by agreement when there's no agreement. you can't ask follows. more than 20 journalists did that in the last press conference. they're all going to be gone? trump saying they'll just throw someone out if they violate the rule. that's not due process. what's going on in his counsel's office? do they have lawyers in there or bouncers? so as we say, don't be a sucker. don't be played. what the president says is not always true. if you want to know how he thinks about vets, don't measure the words. look at the actions. all right? and any insight that he has into this search for bin laden or any profound motivation to help veterans, he gives us every reason to think twice before we
follow him down the hole of empty insults and attacks. here's my closing. the less you obsess on the president's empty words and threats, the more you can focus on the ones that matter. me too. thank you very much for watching us. another hour, a big interview ahead. you all know stacey abrams, right? she just ended her bid for governor in georgia after a bitter, ugly battle against the secretary of state, now governor-elect brian kemp. but she's not done fighting, and she wants to tell you why, next.
you ok there, kurt? we're about to move. karate helps... relieve some of the house-buying... stress. at least you don't have to worry about homeowners insurance. call geico. geico... helps with... homeowners insurance? been doing it for years. i'm calling geico right now. good idea! get to know geico. and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be. ♪ bum-bum-bum-bum-bum t-mobile believes it's better to give than to receive. some may disagree. (scream) no! others won't believe it. no! no! and some just won't have the words. (laugh) join t-mobile and get the samsung galaxy s9 free. we look forward to your reactions. (scream) ♪ bum-bum-bum-bum-bum
Uploaded by TV Archive on