tv NOW With Alex Wagner MSNBC September 10, 2013 9:00am-10:01am PDT
arsenal. do you believe it? >> i think you have to take it with a grain of salt initially. but between the statements that we saw from the russians, the statement today from the syrians, this represents a potentially positive development. this could potentially be a significant breakthrough. >> hours ago secretary of state john kerry came forward with his own sort of endorsement. >> this cannot be a process of delay. this cannot be a process of avoidance. we're waiting for that proposal. but we're not waiting for long. >> and in the last hour, nbc news has confirmed that president obama has agreed to the united states's discussion on russia's proposal. the dramatic shift began yesterday afternoon when backing of former secretary of state hillary clinton who called it an important step. it subsequently won the support of the chinese who said they welcomed the proposal. this morning the french
government announced it will propose a draft resolution at the u.n. that will call on syria to cede control of its chemical weapons. this morning sir yaz foreign minister said they would accept the russian proposal. while it may -- questions remai whether it's serious or stalling tactic. further whether it's logistically possible to establish international control over chemical weapons stockpile, one of the largest in the world. of course, there is a question of trust. namely, how can the international community trust president bashar al assad to hand over weapons he has yet to acknowledge he has in the first place. >> the president is prepared to strike. perhaps we'll get the authorization of congress or not. the question is would you give up chemical weapons if it would prevent the president from authorizing a strike, if that is
a deal you would accept. >> again, you imply we have chemical weapons. >> i have to because that's the assumption of the president. that is his assumption and he is the one who will order the strike. >> it's his problem, if he has an assumption. for us we'll do anything to prevent the region from another crazy war. >> joining me today "washington post" columnist and msnbc contributor jonathan capehart, anchor of bbc world news america catty kay, former secretary of state p.j. crowley and columnist for bloomberg view margaret carlson. joining us from the white house political editor and white house correspondent at the "huffington post" sam stein. wnl p.j., i want to go to you first. trying to figure out the russian chess game is almost an impossible task but lets try to do it anyway. max fisher wrote in the "washington post." headline, game changer or shrewd bluff. even if russia's proposal is just a bluff, it shows that
president obama's threat has backed moscow into a bit of a corner and has forced russian officials to at least pretend to negotiate seriously for the first time in a long time. what do you make of that? >> well, russia has significant interest in syria. while there are potential gains for everyone, including president obama, avoiding a vote they can lose in the short-term, it does put a responsibility on russia's shoulders. if it's not military action, what is it? this can potentially strengthen the president's hand. it rules out military action in the short-term but not necessarily in the long-term. can we do inspection of the regime, yes. we did it in iraq in 1991, mixed results. we've done it in north korea over time. so there's the understanding of how to do this but syria would have to do a full accounting, allow inspectors in, allow technology in, and then the international community would take over responsibility for
destroying these talks. that puts an onus on syria and russia has to make sure syria abides by obligations. >> a lot who have watched back and forth, it sort of seems like a convenient exit sign has popped up in a dark, dark tunnel. i sort of tend to agree with the reporter who writes in the new republic. two clear winners in slow motion train wreck. they are not obama and kerry, assad and putin, both wanted for their own rons to avert a military strike and a military strike was avert. putin insisted on a diplomatic solution while doing everything to make diplomatic solution impossible. now he gets his phony, unenforceable solution. assad wanted to go on killing his opposition and he will continue to do so. >> it depends how this plays out and whether after allowing syrians an amount of time and the secretary said on capitol hill the time would be limited, america decides with u.n.
backing, if there is u.n. resolution, it can then decide to strike anyway and may decide to strike anyway. i think p.j. is quite right. it doesn't mean there will not be an american strike against syria. i still think that's a possibility. they will do so with a slightly stronger position because they would have the international community. remember, the reason president obama decided to go to congress in the first place was because the brits decided not to back this and they had no foreign friends effectively. if they can now say we went to u.n., got a backing for the resolution, it is syrians didn't play ball, they have not cooperateed with inspectors we're actually going to strike anyway. that's a better position for the americans to be in. this isn't necessarily a clear win for russians and assad. >> the president will make this 9:00 p.m. address tonight. i think everyone had an idea what the address would be yesterday. i think the contents of that address have changed in the last 24 hours.
what is the thinking now? we know the president is about to arrive on capitol hill where he will get ideas for the senate as far as their proposals? >> you've got to feel for the team of white house speechwriters, i guess. they have probably burned through about a dozen drafts at this point and probably will have a dozen more to go. from the white house's vantage point, you had a difficult political climb ahead of you now. it looked clear the vote for military force was going to fail in the house and increasingly clear it would have trouble clearing a 60 odd threshold in the senate. with this late gambit, you're essentially given more time. the white house is working with a group of bipartisan senators to come up with an amendment to the resolution that would essentially allow the u.n. to go in, grab the chemical weapons from syria, make sure they are accounted for, if not have it backed up with the authorization for military force. it gives the white house more time to seek a diplomatic solution, more time to whip
votes, makes speech writing team more anxious because they have a few more drafts to go through. >> my heart goes out to people who have to rip up scripts at the last minute. the people who are suffering aren't the white house speechwriters but syria. a question about the appetite anybody has to go in and do something about the situation on the ground. >> this is not going to save the syrian people because there are still bullets that will rain down upon them. however, relief is at hand in washington. congress doesn't have to cast a vote. they don't want to. the president doesn't have to take a loss. we get a vote in the security council. when have we had russia and china on our side in the u.n. council? now, the cost of that is to make vladimir putin, as my colleague jeff goldberg wrote, our syrian desk officer at the state department for a while.
that's handing over an awful -- >> that's a joke p.j. can appreciate. >> thank you, p.j. this doesn't solve the big problem but it sure solves some immediate ones. >> i don't want to get -- there are two conflicting sort of muscle groups here. one is the political calculus and one is the practical reality, which is chemical weapons are very hard to track to begin with, right? "the new york times" had a great piece about how the syrians have amassed one of the world's largest stockpiles of chemical weapons. they have done it piecemeal and without international observance. i guess the question is if it's that easy to procure them, is it going to be in any way feasible for the international community to somehow take over the oversight of assad's weaponry? >> well, yes and no. in terms of the stocks they have, you can look at whatever accounting syria offers up and
see if that's credible. from an intelligence standpoint you can try to figure out what have they had in the past and does this match up with what we have assessed their capability is. it doesn't mean there's knowledge here. even if you give away your current stockpile, nothing says that at some point in time you couldn't kick out inspectors and start the process again. but as katty said, that gives cause to take action. in the context of iraq, that was the success of desert fox in late 1998. it had the effect of virtually destroying saddam hussein's wmd capability. it was far better than we thought it was. so it does advance. the real issue, part one issue for congress is, okay, the president may still seek the mccain formula. give diplomacy a chance but authorize in advance a strike if diplomacy fails. that takes you back to 2002
where the bush administration asked for a vote. that vote was seen as leverage in the united nations, then bush started the war anyway. i don't know if congress is going to give him that advanced capability. work this. if it fails, come back to this. >> does congress really care how verifiable this is. there's such a sigh of relief on capitol hill. whew, dodged that one. we didn't have to go and do the vote or authorize the military strike. what happens in six month's time we don't really care about whether actually all those chemical weapons turned over. we're glad we got out of this one. >> jonathan, lets don't make a mistake, hillary clinton has already begun to say this. none of this would have happened, the russian proposal woo wouldn't have been on the table unless the president suggested military strikes and pursued
that option in the robust and public fashion he has. this is a win for the white house. >> not only the president but secretary kerry with his rather impassioned speeches over the last few days about what happened in syria. i think there's also a sigh of relief in the white house really that this whole thing could be avoided. but i also think it's a win, because remember overall it was the president's goal to be an international response to assad's use of chemical weapons. the idea that there might be inspectors going into syria, that there's a proposal on the table to do something about something assad hasn't even acknowledged not even to charlie rose but we all know about and talked about is a huge victory, i think. >> sam, what of the president's contention this is something he had been talking to putin about on the sidelines of the g-20. you hear that and hard to square with john kerry's comments which were pretty publicly dismissive
of the notion of a diplomatic option, you combine that with susan rice and their commentary about diplomatic options doa and now there is one. what do we make of that behind the scenes and if the white house was prepared for this. >> it's hard to know if this is a grand plan or gaffing the way to a solution. i think you could sell a mix of both. clearly conversations were taking place. from my understanding, the white house and obama administration officials were not confident at all a diplomatic solution could be achieved. they are still not confident. keep in mind russia is a bit skeptical of this u.n. gambit after initially proposing it. we have a ways to go here. the administration still has to work through international bodies that don't tend to work that well or function that well to begin with, then back to congress. we have a ways to go. i'm not sure there's a grand plan playing out such as reacting to major events as they
take place in realtime. >> p.j., what about the u.n. security council, the fact the french are putting this on the table. the chinese welcomed it. you can tell me in diplomatic speak seems positive, right? the fact the russians, they suggested the same as suggesting a mitigation of that. >> the details matter as any sovereign state if you're turning over significant weaponry to the international community you're having to agree to let them into your country, you now have an obligation to protect them in that process. of course, any failure to comply comes back at you as a pretext for some sort of strike that the president was forced into anyway. so it's not -- the details will matter and the question for russia is, can they deliver syrian coupes consistently over time. that remains the biggest question. the french proposal will test that proposition early and the
president will be in a stronger position if this is codified within a security council resolution, he can take action based on security council resolution. if not, he comes back to congress and says we tried this, we failed. now we need to go ahead. >> tried this and really failed. let me ask you one last question. in terms of iran. we've talked so much about this being a proxy war for iran, iranians who the u.s. should look out for how has their calculations to syria at the dawn of prosecute. >> iran like russia, china, never wants to sanction any kind of intervention on sovereign affairs. but iran is in the back of this. the administration wants to do as much as they can in the context of syria, recognize syria while important isn't as vital to the middle east as iran is. >> p.j. crowley, "huffington post" sam stein. secretary of state for public affairs png crowley deciphering
public speak in only the way you can. where does congress stand on intervention. we will discuss which way the wind is blowing and ask chris van hollen what he is hearing from the white house when he joins us live next on "now." i didn't think it was anything. i had pain in my abdomen... it just wouldn't go away. i was spotting, but i had already gone through menopause. these symptoms may be nothing... but they could be early warning signs of a gynecologic cancer, can. feeling bloated for no reason. that's what i remember. seeing my doctor probably saved my life. warning signs are not the same for everyone. if you think something's wrong... see your doctor. ask about gynecologic cancer. and get the inside knowledge. humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world.
that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us. plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?
debate continues regarding the political wisdom of president obama's choice to seek congressional authorization for military strikes in syria. as of this morning amid new diplomatic developments the gulf between the president and congress seems to be shrinking. hours ago there were new reports the president will support a new resolution being worked on by a bipartisan group of eight senators. it would grant the president the
authority to use force but only after the united nations passes a resolution acknowledging syria's use of chemical weapons. it will withhold force unless syria refuses to turn over its chemical weapons by a certain date. in a few minutes president obama will head to capitol hill to meet with senate democrats and republicans. so far the signs look good, even in the president's own party where tensions over syria had been running high. following a meeting with white house chief of stat dennis mcdonough, white house leaders seemed pleased with the latest developments. >> the fact is the russians coming -- bringing to the table a proposal that has been discussed by the president and others over time but now has muscle because of the prospect of a threat is something that i think the president deserves a great deal of credit for. >> joining me now from capitol hill is democratic congressman
from maryland's eighth district chris van hollen, top democrat on the house budget committee. congressman, thank you for your time. >> good to be with you, alex. >> congressman, where is democratic leadership these days? we know we've talked a lot about the rift between the president and members of his own party in and around syria, the authorization of force. are you confident this new diplomatic option is the way to go? >> yes, this is a very positive development. it has been emphasized. we would not have the russian proposal but for the fact that the president had the credible use of force on the table. jerry conley and i, congressman conley and i had a resolution in the house that very narrowly described that use of force to the purpose of deterring chemical weapons used by the assad regime. obviously if you can get in agreement to put that chemical weapons stockpile under international control you solve the problem of deterring future use. we are revising our draft right
now. we're sending now -- to share the news with you, we are sending that to our colleagues in the house urging their support very similar to the senate proposal where we say 30 days after passage, if the president determines that the stockpile has been put under international control or there's a credible plan to do so, then you would not proceed with the limited force. but if he says they have not been able to work it out, then you would allow the limited force -- again, limited by the proposal that we put forward earlier. okay. so just to be clear, similar to senate language that establishes a 30-day window during which syrians need to seek control of their chemical weapons to the international community. if those quns are not met, the president would have narrow authorization to use force military airstrikes similar to what has been proposed thus far. >> a 30-day window. the president could determine stockpiles are under control or he could say there's a credible
plan to do so and ask for additional time. so the idea is to try and make this proposal work, because this proposal would accomplish the ultimate goal that many of us had, which is to deter the use of chemical weapons. as you know, many in the debate of congress have a different goal, drag the united states more deeply into military intervention in iraq, which is the very reason we had our original proposal to begin with, which was to narrow the purpose just to deter chemical weapons use, not to expand u.s. military involvement in syria. >> congressman, do you think this proposal is going to find support among house republicans? >> it should if our objective is to stop poison gas use in syria and also make sure we uphold that very important international prohibition on use of chemical gas, which is important to protecting american troops in the field in future
conflicts. i certainly hope they would join us to finding a solution to preventing poison gas, both in syria and making sure that deterrent and rule is well established and enforced going forward. >> congressman margaret carlson has a question for you. >> congressman, hello. with the, quote, unbelievably small strike that we were going to undertake, according to senator kerry, there was the tacit hope make of assad's conventional weapons would be degraded. don't we give up that right now. in fact, isn't assad using those conventional weapons as we speak? >> well, margaret, this goes to the question of what was the purpose of the original resolution. the purpose of the original resolution, as articulated by the president, was very narrow, which was stop the future use of poison gas by assad, both to prevent its use in syria and prevent its use in future conflicts including against u.s. forces. obviously if we can put his
chemical weapons under international control we have established and met that purpose. now, as you say, there are others who had other motives for the use of american military force, which was to try to get involved in determining the outcome of a syrian civil war. that goal is not one that a lot of us have because we believe it would drag the united states further militarily. we all know a big part of the rebels are al qaeda extremists. you have to worry that if you don't have a plan, that if assad goes and he's replaced by al qaeda extremists, number one, those chemical weapons would fall into even less controlling hands. and number two, you would not have resolved the situation in syria in a way that's in our interests. so that's why the president's narrow focus was justified. that's why jerry conley wanted to make sure we had a resolution that really made it clear that was the only purpose. we don't want to open up
pandora's box to more u.s. military intervention. >> i think a lot of people appreciate that. the polls show 28% overwhelmingly almost 7-3 folks in the country are really wary of u.s. intervention in a middle east country. to the question of humanitarian disaster, what looked to be mass atrocities in syria, i think folks who have humanitarian interests at heart and looked at the blood letting that occurred 100,000 dead, 2 million refugees and understand the weapon of war is not chemical weapons here, it is actually the ak-47, is it not going to be hard for the president to say, okay, on these limited terms we have curbed assad's ability to use chemical weapon his own people, and yet the killing continues. that is a satisfying end to the situation in syria. >> nothing about the situation in syria is satisfying.
another goal to the president deterring chemical weapons in future conflicts against american forces. you're right. people say there are already 100,000 people killed, why ban chemical weapons. there's a reason the world since world war i has had this prohibition it's because they are mass killing machines and they kill people indiscriminate indiscriminately. let me make this final point. if you look at the largest massacre in syria with conventional weapons, about 100 people got killed. it was awful. in the chemical weapons attack ten times that many people got killed because of their mass indiscriminate nature, which is why the world made the decision these are different kinds of weapons that should be banned. >> to be clear, i think there are a lot of people that support both the ending of the humanitarian disaster and a clear statement and action on the question of international weaponry and international quorum to make sure bad actors don't have them.
to jonathan capehart with a question for you. >> back to the proposal you have. there's a 30-day window for the president to act unless he believes there is a credible plan to put the chemical weapons stockpile under international control. my question is, is this a time limit on how long the president and the administration will give that plan to work? >> yes, jonathan. what we're saying is that the president has 30 days to say to congress that that stockpile, that syrian chemical weapon stockpile has been put under international control or there's a credible plan in place to secure it. if that's not happened in 30 days, then the president would be authorized to use very limited force, which is where the other part of our original resolution comes in. that force would, again, be very narrowly prescribed because we do not want a situation like we had in iraq with an open ended
kind of resolution. even the hammer in this case is the limited use of force, not the open ended use of force. >> congressman, one quick follow-up. lets say a credible plan pops up on day 29. does that mean the plan has a day to work before the president is able to proceed with strikes or is there a certain amount of time that's given after, say, that 29th day? >> no, if the president says there's a credible plan on the table on the 29th day, there's no force that would be used. he would have determined there is a credible plan in place. we would allow him to come back and ask for use of force if that plan falls apart. we want to make sure this is given an opportunity to work, recognizing the only reason the russians put it on the table is because the president had that credible use of force on the
table. as you know, they vetoed every press release of the united nations that condemned the use of chemical weapons in syria, let alone ascribing blame. >> congress, it's worth noting to our viewers we just saw the president arrive on capitol hill. a question for you. the round robin continues. >> thank you. i was down on capitol hill yesterday and was struck by the number of republicans and democrats who said to me they were worried about how much the president's authority had been damaged by the last week or two and the way he's handled syria and what that meant for america's relations. this was americans, the rest of the world. do you think this russian proposal and what's happened in the last day if it plays out and works mitt gates some of that damage? >> look, i don't think the president had incurred that damage. i think the issue is whether or not congress was going to
respond in some way. that question obviously was open ended. there's no doubt this russian proposal vindicates the president's approach with respect to the threat of force to finally try to prevent the assad regime from using poison gas in these mass attacks on civilians we just would not have been at this moment if the president had proceeded down that course. now, a lot of us wanted to make sure if we go down that course we're very limited in our purpose and scope and duration of the action, and we would still apply those constraints if this whole effort became unwound, didn't work. but my goodness, i think everybody should want to give this a chance. that is everybody who was prepared to support the president for the purpose of deterring chemical weapons use as opposed to those that wanted to use a resolution, again, to
expand military involvement by the united states in a serious civil war. that's why many of us wanted to make sure we drew a really clear sharp line. >> democratic congressman chris van hollen, thank you for bearing with that line of questioning and for all of the information we will continue to follow your resolution as it makes its way through the lower chamber. thank you for your time. >> we'll be introducing the revised one later today. >> thanks a lot, congressman. >> special coverage begins 8:00 p.m. eastern anchored by our own rachel mad owe. the president will deliver his speech from the white house at 9:00 peastern. tea party rabble-rousers, a trip to egypt while former nba bad boy dennis rodman meets with north korea's kim jong-un. the foreign policy headaches continue. we will discuss these unlikely ambassadors next.
♪ take me into your darkest hour ♪ ♪ and i'll never desert you ♪ ♪ i'll stand by you yeaaaah! yeah. so that's our loyalty program. you're automatically enrolled, and the longer you stay, the more rewards you get. great! oh! ♪ i'll stand by you ♪ won't let nobody hurt you ♪ isn't there a simpler way to explain the loyalty program? yes. standing by you from day one. now, that's progressive.
she'and you love her for it.ide. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.
we are for standing with you. we are for standing with american contributions to your nation, so we can help you and your effort to defeat our common enemy, which are the terrorists known as the muslim brotherhood. because again, we don't misunderstood this enemy, we don't underestimate this enemy. we know the real facts of this enemy. >> meet the diplomatic b team or possibly the c, d, or f team. michelle bachmann, steve king in egypt over the weekend and gave a 15-minute press conference on egyptian tv that seemed more like parody than high-stakes politics. take, for instance, michele bachmann's suggestion the muslim brotherhood masterminded the september 11th attacks. >> we've seen the threat that the muslim brotherhood has posed around the world.
we stand against this great evil. we are not for them. we remember who caused 9/11 in america. we remember who it was that killed 3,000 brave americans. we have not forgotten. >> apparently congresswoman bachmann has forgotten indeed what caused 9/11 and the country where it originated. in other zainy news dennis rodman returned from his second trip to buddy up with kim jong-un. sponsored by irish bedding company insisted it was personal and not diplomatic. >> he's my friend for life. i don't care what you guys think about him. >> still, rodman encouraged president obama to call his friend in pyongyang saying, quote, they could talk about anything in the world. >> he's a very young individual, and he wants to really actually change things. he wants to change things around the world.
a good impression when i go back to america so i can say good, positive and good things about this country. >> rodman plans to return to north korea in january for a set of exhibition basketball games and he intends on bringing some additional ambassadors, scotty pippin and karl malone. good luck to you, gentlemen. after the break, elizabeth warren blasts the supreme court and joint hillary clinton jeb bush event leaves tongues wagging in advance of 2016. we'll discuss all of that and more. hey kevin...still eating chalk for heartburn?
yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. enjoy the relief! all your important legal matters in just minutes. protect your family... and launch your dreams. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. the five conservative justices currently sitting on the united states supreme court
are in the top 10 most pro corporate justices in half a century. follow this pro corporate trend to its logical conclusion and sooner or later you'll end up with a supreme court that functions as a wholly-owned subsidiary of big business. >> that was massachusetts senator elizabeth warren yesterday excoriating the judicial branch of government add afl-cio. offering a reality tale of his own, chief justice scalia in houston said, in order for capitalism to work, in order for it to produce a good and stable society, traditional christian virtues are essential. scalia went on to argue the governmentalization of charity effects not just the donner but the recipient. what was once asked as a favor is demanded as sbiltsment. indeed, if only the poor people
didn't demand things like shelterer, food, scare. making no bones about the fact that christian virt usz took inform decision making. >> he has a thing about entitlements, people asking for things. >> he and other people in the conservative movement have an entitlement vote. >> what did he say about entitlements, people want the entitlement to vote. i can't remember what it was earlier this year. >> i think to eat with food stamps. >> but it's amazing to me, margaret. elizabeth warren is in the u.s. senate and a political person. but amazing to me someone like scalia feels unbelievable comfortable espousing values that potentially do not dove tail with jurisprudence and a court that can look with an unflinching eye towards the decisions it must make. >> justice scalia has long imposed his personal values. he writes about it in his
decisions. the study senator warren cited is heralding and celebrating the degree to which this court has among it the 10 most pro businesses in the country. >> 70% of the cases the chamber of commerce supports, it wins. >> you might say justice roberts vote on obama care was not in that realm. remember, obama care really does undergird the insurance industry. that was the thing they wanted. without an individual mandate, the insurance companies were not in favor of health care reform. so that decision is both ways. >> go ahead. >> isn't elizabeth warren reflecting something liberals felt since 2000. they have seen this court move consistently to the right they feel and it wouldn't take very much, one or two people on the court to change to actually get it on their side. they just can't get those members of the court they need out of the court in order to be
replaced by liberals. that's a frustration they have had for years, over a decade. >> there's been a focus on social issues, doma, prop 8, also landmark cases to elizabeth warren's point, vance veshz ball state which removed workplace harassment protections, class action lawsuits at walmart, these have very long lasting effects in terms of the american worker and protections afforded the american worker. i do want to move on very quickly to 2016 and issues that will be litigated then. hillary clinton is receiving 2013 liberty medal in philadelphia. her presenter, brother of george w. bush, son of george h.w. bush and potential 2016 presidential candidate jeb bush. in a statement ahead of the ceremony bush praised clinton saying, quote, listen up, jonathan. former secretary clinton dedicated her life to serving people across the world in
democracy. these efforts as a citizen, activist and leader have earned secretary clinton's this year's liberty medal, which i think is shorthand for there is no way i'm going to run to be a republican presidential nominee. you can't say that and expect to not get primaried. >> you can say that, it's a bipartisan event, no politics. it's undeniable who she is and what she stands for and what she did as secretary of state. there's any number of ways he could spin that. >> make a pretty good fight to come up in the middle of the debate. >> you could throw it back at him but i view that statement as one in a long line of sort of cordial, classy statements that come from the bush family. >> which is amazing, cordial classy statements that come from the bush family, which shows -- >> this bush could not be nominated by his party. >> we have to take a short break. coming up, the right flank continues its quest to defy the
law of the land. that's coming up next. you raise her spirits. we tackled your shoulder pain. you make him rookie of the year. we took care of your cold symptoms. you take him on an adventure. tylenol® has been the number 1 doctor recommended brand of pain reliever for over 20 years. but for everything we do, we know you do so much more. tylenol®.
>> no. >> how about we defund the whole damn thing. >> that was senator rand paul speaking at a tea party rally today on capitol hill. the rally's goal, to exempt america from obama care, a law that was passed and signed into law more than three years ago and upheld by the supreme court over a year ago. a who's who of wacko birds are attending the rally, "mike lee, ted cruz and rand paul. with enrollment opening october 1st, the gaggle has a window before the law takes affect. we just talked about obama care, sarah palin weighed in from wherever she hides out. enough of these foreign fiasco distraction, get back to work,
it is time to bomb obama care. >> thank you, sarah, that's what we expected. my bellwether on this is senator tom coburn, who was hassled at hess town hall meeting. by the way, no happy people in august go to town hall meetings. he is a roommate of senator mike lee in the famous house on capitol hill, and he had to tell his constituents and try to explain why he didn't sign the letter and why you cannot defund obama care. republicans created this monster among their constituents saying you can, but coburn is trying to explain and to his roommate mike lee, the difference between mandatory and discretionary funding. >> exactly. also how democracy works. it amazes me -- this rally is taking place right now. we're dealing -- there is ted cruz, potentially a 2016 nominee. we're talking about the
international community coming together to decide what to do about a very serious situation in the middle east that engages a number of actors regionally and partners and allies in the west. and the republicans, the conservative base of the republican party is still obsessed with obama care. enrollment begins october 1st. is this the last gasp. >> you've got to have some sympathy for them, no one else is paying attention to them at the moment. >> because it's the law of the land. >> the law of the land is going to high pressure. what we should be working out for all the small businesses around the country need to know how this is going to affect them come october 1st. they want clarity on this. i sympathize with that. the idea you're still whatever it is two weeks before the law of the land try to radical people to defund something that would bring the government crashing down has terrible consequences for the state of the american economy and the state of this country. maybe they are so upset that -- >> wonder how many people are
attending. did they gin up a lot of people to come out. >> jonathan, the law is going to get more popular as people have to interface with it. >> which is why the republicans have been spending years now trying to beat the hell out of it in hopes people don't join exchanges and participate. the other problem they have, remember it used to be repeal obama care and replace it with something. they have conveniently dropped the replace part. >> after 40 times, jonathan, they decided, okay. >> you peel it and then what? what do you tell the people who are benefiting from obama care? it's an unbelievable cynical game they are playing. what happens if by some miracle the president does sign the piece of legislation that defunds obama care, then what will senator cruz do. >> that's a question we could ask at the end of every paragraph.
just a reminder special coverage of the president's address on syria -- on syria, not the repeal of obama care, begins here on msnbc at 8:00 p.m. eastern rancored by rachel maddow. the president will deliver his speech from the white house 9:00 p.m. eastern. we will have more when we return right after the break.
. >> the governor turning the folksy factor up to stun. thank you to our panelists. that is all for now. i'll see you back tomorrow at noon eastern. until then follow us on twitter at "now" with alex. andrea michelle reports is coming up next. and i avoid frus. you'll find reviews on home repair to healthcare, written by people just like you. find out why more than two million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes!
one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues... with three strains of good bacteria. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. [ male announcer ] that's why there's ocuvite to help replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. ocuvite. help protect your eye health.
more is better. that's why we designed the all-new nissan versa note, with more technology, to get you into, and out of, tight spots. and more space so that you always have your favorite stuff. and just for good measure, more space. 40 mpg highway. so that when you're doing more, you're spending less. the all-new nissan versa note. your door to more. ♪ i can't believe your mom has a mom cave! today i have new campbell's
chunky spicy chicken quesadilla soup. she gives me chunky before every game. i'm very souperstitious. haha, that's a good one! haha! [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup. it fills you up right. investors could lose tens of thousands of dollars on their 401(k) to hidden fees. is that what you're looking for, like a hidden fee in your giant mom bag? maybe i have them... oh that's right i don't because i rolled my account over to e-trade where... woah. okay... they don't have hidden fees... hey fern. the junk drawer? why would they... is that my gerbil? you said he moved to a tiny farm. that's it, i'm running away. no, no you can't come! [ male announcer ] e-trade. less for us. more for you. right now on andrea michelle reports. game changer russia will accept
a chemical weapons handov over. >> we believe when we accept this proposal, this means we put an end to the war and we put ours in syria for the solution. >> can the syrians and russians be trusted? >> a lot of people say that nothing focuses the mind like the prospect of a hanging. well, it's the credible threat of force that has been on the table for these last weeks that as for the first time brought this regime to even acknowledge that they have a chemical weapons arsenal. >> watch what happens when a republican congressman questions the administration's strategy. >> the senate has already delayed. >> because they don't have the votes, mr. secretary. that's why they