Skip to main content

tv   MTP Daily  MSNBC  October 3, 2017 2:00pm-3:00pm PDT

2:00 pm
straight after a mass shooting, nor in the middle of mass shootings either. it is never the right time to talk about gun control in this country. if you raise it you are being political. >> we are out of time. important to note. the president left puerto rico over an hour ahead of schedule. wonder what went wrong, if anything. my thanks to you. that does it for our hour. i'm micolle wallace, mtp daily starts right now. >> i didn't realize there was a schedule to keep. >> he left over an hour early. >> if it's tuesday, we are debating when to debate anything on guns. >> tonight, the search for a motive. and a question of why these mass murder incidents keep happening in this country. we'll have the latest on the las vegas investigation.
2:01 pm
plus, the national conversation on gun laws. >> look i'm willing to have an intelligent discussion about it but not in the middle of a crisis. >> after the biggest mass shooting we've had in modern american history, if now is not the time well when is? >> we talk to gun control advocate mark kelly as well as a leading conservative making the case against new laws. and president gets a first-hand look at storm horse power-ravaged puerto rico. >> i hate to tell you, puerto rico, but you have thrown our budget a little out of whack because we've spent a lot of money on puerto rico. and that's fine. we saved a lot of lives. >> this is mtp daily, and it starts right now. ♪ good evening, i'm chuck todd here in washington. welcome to mtp daily. perhaps nothing frustrates the public more than many sides than what's going on right now in american politics.
2:02 pm
first off this country is reeling from its deadliest mast shooting in history. you take out the word modern history. this is just history a. lot of folks are concerned about what our leaders are going to do to preev this from happen andeing again and again and to prevent this from happening to loved bun or at the least, lowering the odds of it happening again, or perhaps so brutally. a bunch of our leaders right now don't want to touch the issue one bit. >> [ inaudible ]. >> look, we have a tragedy. we'll be talking about gun laws as time goes by. >> where do you come down on the silencer bill? >> we'll talk about that later. >> i think it's premature to be discussing legislative solutions f there are any. >> we can have that discussion at another time. but it's a typical political tactic by some on the left. >> a motive is yet to be determined and it would be premature for to us discuss policy when we don't fully know all the facts or what took
2:03 pm
place. >> that dialogue does need to occur but i don't think now is the time for this. >> anyone who talks about anything political today should really in all honesty should rethink why we're here. >> that's right. even democratic senator joe manning doesn't want to talk about it. he led his party's last effort to tougher gun laws after the tragedy at sanny hook elementary school. there are plenty of democrats who are riled up. but it's the same sort of rhetoric that never seems to break through with the other side. >> if we don't panic now when will we? this is not about politics it is a policy of public health. people should be furious. >> the hunting culture is big deal in my state. i don't know anybody who goes deer hunting that needs to retrofit a gun to fire hundreds of rounds a minute of the it's to slaughter people. >> here's the question that frustrates the public.
2:04 pm
what are we debating. outlawing bump stocks, that's what senator mccaskell is talking about. is that it? are we debating the kind of guns people can have? how about the kinds of ammunition? or is it about who gets to have them? in this case the argument gets worse because we have no idea what motivated the shooter in las vegas. that's highly debatable especially if mental illness is involved. others might say the motive is irrelevant when you can legally amass an arsenal. for them it's about restricting access to the weapons regardless of who uses them. others might say the biggest problem is the cultural divide or the power of the gun lobby or the industry's marketing campaigns aimed at kids. in fact during the campaign donald trump jr. appeared in a promotional video for a company that makes gun silencers.
2:05 pm
he praised the product line because in part it might make guns easier for kids to use. >> you have got to be kidding he moo. that thing is awesome. >> it's about safety. it's about hearing protection. it is a health issue frankly for me. you know? getting little -- you know, little kids into the game. it greatly reduces recoil. it's just a great instrument. there is nothing bad about it at all. it makes total sense. it's where we should be going. >> folks, there is no doubt about what the second amendment does say. but at what point does a person's right to bear arms start infringing on his neighbor's right to live safely and freely. if you ever caught yourself checking the exits while at a concert hall or school assembly just in case you probably are already ready to have that conversation. you would think our leaders should be able to have it toochltd for the latest on the investigation into the las vegas shooting i'm joined by pete
2:06 pm
williams our justice correspondent. we talked earlier. i won't leave people in suspense, we know very little on motive right now other than the best lead is his girlfriend. >> she will be back later this week. they are calling her a person of interest. marilou danley has been living with him. she is from the philippines. she left the u.s. last week before the shooting happened before he checked into the mandalay bay and spooel she will be back in the next few days. they very much want to talk to her. chef sort of kept tabs on where she is. they are on the misic they will be able to talk to her. obviously they hope she can give some answers whether she knew why he might have done such a thing, has he ever made comments that would lead to something, did she know he was preparing for anything? did she do anything to help him? all person questions for her. >> there is some financial transaction history we learned about him today, too. both his gambling history and there are reports about money he
2:07 pm
may have sent to her. >> we don't know if it was to her. >> okay. >> probably to her. he sent last week $100,000. wired $100,000 to the philippines, which is where her relatives are from, where she was worn, and that's where she have. in terms of the gambling we know more about how much of a high roller he was. any time you have a transaction at casino that's over $10,000, it has to be reported. these transaction reports are filed. there were 16 of these in the last couple of weeks. so that means 16 transactions of at least $10,000 a piece. we don't know whether these were wins or losses but we know that is just sort of an example of how converse ant he was at being a high rolling gambler. >> the digital surveillance of him, whether in the hotel, which we know casino hotels have some of the best technology tracking people, but he seemed to be equipped with a lot of equipment as well. >> some. he had a camera in the hallway which they have made clear -- we
2:08 pm
heard about it yesterday. 2 sheriff just a moment ago talked about it. said it was in essence his surveillance camera so he could watch people coming down the hallway towards his room. >> what do we know about his weapons stockpile, everything so far is legal? >> yes. >> everything purchased in person? how recently? what do we know about how recent that was purchased? >> we don't know all the purchases. he had 42 weapons. many of which he bought in the last several months in nevada and some in utah. you can buy a weapon and one state and take it home with you to another state. some were high perred sniper rifles with scopes and bipods on the front barrel to help you stabilize it. others were ak-15, so-called assault weapons that had bump stocks on them that allows the gun to be fired at a very, very
2:09 pm
rapid rate. they are legal. >> everything so far purchased legally? >> yes. >> there is no sense he did anything illegal on that front? >> no, and he has no criminal background, nothing in his background that would make him unqualified to buy a gun. >> did he do special training to use these weapons? was he a regular at a range? >> they are certainly talking to gun ranges but it doesn't require special training to use these weapons. he was converse ant with them. he has hads for years, he was no stranger to firearms. >> pete williams, still an amazing amount we don't know when you compare this to every other incident sadly that you have covered over the years. true. >> earlier i spoke with captain mark kelly, the husband of a senator who was shot in a mass shooting in 2011. they now advocate for stricter gun regulation. i began by asking him that the white house's claims that now in the immediate aftermath of sunday night's shooting that now is not the time the talk about gun regulation.
2:10 pm
>> well, i used to say that myself. but when you see, you know, the increase in number of mass shootings and 33,000 americans dying every single year on average from gun violence, another 100,000 people getting shot, you know, if after the biggest mass shooting we have had in modern american history, if now is not the time, well when is? >> do you worry, though, that you have people that aren't listening? >> yeah, there are a lot of people aren't listening. >> that are in some ways -- i felt like watching yesterday unfold politically, you had the trauma of it all, but politically, gun control advocates were having a conversation with themselves, and gun rights advocates were having a conversation with themselves, ridiculing each side, each other, but not talking to each other. and i'm thinking, boy, there is a reason we couldn't do it after sandy hook and there is a reason we can't have the conversation
2:11 pm
right now. >> we don't ridicule anybody. i am a gun owner. we try to reach across that aisle if you want to call it that between some people that are advocating for responsible gun laws and the people that are gun guys, often rural, have a lot of firearms. i have stood on tables in the atomic cafe in bismarck, north dakota and talked to these people, what could keep communities safer things like background checks, gun trafficking legislation, these don't affect them individually but they have been told by a corporate interest that this is affecting their right. >> the argument becomes this, every policy government, i feel lying the gun control lobby -- i know the word lobby makes people angry but on the gun control advocates it's always legislation. immediately the right is able to
2:12 pm
push off legislation with two answers, one is, well, it wouldn't have stopped this one. or the second is, but that infringes upon my rights. >> first of all on the it wouldn't stop this one it's often hard to find one single thing that would stop a specific incident. sometimes the background check thing would work. often, you know, if we look around the country in states that have stronger background check laws, there is, without a doubt, there is a lot less gun violence. and states with weaker laws have more gun violence. these laws do matter. i would agree with the argument that it's often difficult to find a specific situation. in the case with what happened in vegas the other night, here's a guy who had some form of automatic weapon, we don't know what the situation was, maybe he modified them, maybe he had an attachment that helped them fire in auto. if you would have restricted
2:13 pm
these things maybe it would have made this situation less deadly. >> is there ever -- it seems as if in the political debate here the gun rights side wins because -- they usually win these debates because they make it about their freedoms, personal freedoms and constitutional rights. is there a constitutional right in there that would protect somebody from a neighbor what is a gun stockpiler? from a neighbor who is wanting to accumulate all of these automatic weapons and potentially while they may not do something somebody else may use them for no good. what is the rights for somebody there? >> we have a constitutional right in the second amendment to possess a firearm. according to the supreme court decision dc versus hellerings what that means is you have the right to own a gun to protect yourself in the home. at the same time in the majority opinion, anthony scalia said that also means that the government has a right to regulate what that means, what
2:14 pm
kind of gun, where you can have it. so we do have the ability to regulate that, and we should. you know, people have the right to own a firearm to protect themselves if they are responsible. but other people also have a right to be safe in their community. you know, the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness is at the top of the constitution. we have a right to that. we have a right to safe communities. and they can be safer. we don't have to have 33,000 people dying every year. >> realistically, what do you expect any advancement in your cause to come out of this? >> we have been fighting over the last six months to make sure three bad things don't get passed here in the u.s. capitol. the concealed carry reciprocity. silencers, the legalization of eye lensers. imagine what that parking lot, that venue would have been like if this guy had a silencer, if nobody or few people could hear it. it was debatable whether it was fireworks to begin with.
2:15 pm
how many more people would have died if he had silencers on these weapons. >> we were fighting that. what we should be doing is advancing here in washington, d.c. positive legislation, you know, that will make communities safer. we do that around the country. our organization, the one that gaby and i start americans for responsible solutions we have helped pass over 200 pieces of legislation in the states. this place here in d.c. is a lot trickier. >> markcaly, i'll leave it there. until we meet again, hopefully it's not after yet another tragedy. >> thanks for having me on. >> you got it. i'm joined by david french a writer for national review, an attorney with a concentration in tugsal law, an iraq war veteran and somebody who isn't afraid to have this debate no matter what time of day you have it. mr. french nice to see you sir, thanks for coming on. >> thanks for having me. appreciate it. >> let me ask you on this idea that now is not the time to have this conversation. what do you make of that elected leader response? because it is now a standard
2:16 pm
response on that one side of the aisle. >> i hate to be cynical you about it but it is a politicalcal tactic. it is a an evident to push a conversation beyond a news cycle or two. that's what it is. i do think there is -- there are a lot of people who very sincerely want to mourn the victims, want to support first responders. you can do both of those things at the same time. it seems very clear that what we are dealing with is a political tactic in that moment because it's not necessarily the moment that some folks want to engage on this issue. >> like i said, you are not afraid to engage on this issue, and you are not afraid to push back at probably some of the thing that mark kelly is pushing. let me ask you this, where do you see the line? when does -- it's a question i asked him. when does someone's right to bear arms get to the point where it potentially infringes on someone's right to attend a
2:17 pm
concert in an outdoor setting and not feel like it is an unsave safe experience? >> i think there is an offense answer to that. someone's right infringes on my rights the instant they start to menace me or threaten me with that weapon. it's difficult to use this particular shooting as some sort of paradigm with which to analyze the gun debate. i mean for a lot of the reasons that you have been talking about in your show, this is an extraordinarily unusual event on ground after ground after ground. but if you are talking about normal -- the normal life that we live in this country, your right to keep and bear arms infringes on my rights the instant you start to menace me. one of the things i would say in support of second amendment, that's exactly why i should be entitled to carry a weapon for example, to protect myself the moment that somebody else violates my rights in a life threatening manner. so when you hear about that, a gun owner and a second amendment
2:18 pm
supporter, when you hear about that collision of rights, says well, i need to be prepared and i need to be able to defend myself and my family when someone crosses that line. >> what about, though, the idea that says, wait a minute, i would like to know that you are a responsible gun owner. and i want to put regulations that make sure -- i'm fine with you having a gun, but i would find it in my rights that i want to make sure you are a responsible gun owner. you know what, i want extra amount of regulation, i want extra licensing, i want this or that. what about that line? i would argue it is a realistic ask of our rights, that's for sure. >> i think it is a realistic ask. and i think say we have a realistic answer. the answer is the present level of regulation that we have particularly as applied to concealed carried permit holder provides that date. the law says that a concealed
2:19 pm
carry citizenship is safer than a police officer. that's how law-abiding the concealed carry community is. the problem we have with gun violence in this country is by and large a problem of a -- of criminals who obtain guns unlawfully. that's the problem -- the primary problem we have. las vegas is different. >> i was just going to -- it's not just -- frankly, all of the recent mass shootings, if you want to go over the decade a large majority of them, the shooter acquired the weapon legally, not illegally. >> that's absolutely right. >> right. so then the question is, what about this idea that there was nothing in the second amendment that said what type of arm you could bear. and so there seems to be -- why is it that we can't seem to draw a reasonable line on saying you know what, look, there is going to be an extra set of regulation
2:20 pm
on certain weapons. we outlawed machine guns a long time. we outlawed silencers except for people that could go through an extra process perhaps until we see what congress does. what's wrong with that line? and why do you think we are not willing -- why does the gun lobby or the gun rights advocates not willing to try that? >> well, i had say that the line exists with machine guns, for example, truly automatic weapons, is a right kind of line to draw. that we have effectively and properly drawn that line. other lines, i think it begins to get much more difficult. let's talk about the so-called assault women. which is a fictional term. it's talking about semiautomatic rifles that look like military rifles. when you are talking about semiautomatic witnesses you are talking about exactly the kind of weapons that millions and millions of americans use for self-defense.
2:21 pm
we do draw lines. i think one of the things that often gets lost in this debate is people will say well we need some regulation. well, we do have some regulation. and actually when it comes to machine guns it's been very, very effective without violating the second amendment. >> what do you make of the bump technology? if you can take a semiautomatic and essentially turn it into a automatic weapon you have certainly violated the spirit of the law? >> yeah, i have no problem with an extenting a ban on -- extending regulations that apply to automatic weapons to weapons that have a bump stock. i think that you are exactly right. you are evading the intent of the law. but i will tell you this, i don't think it will have much impact at all in the real world for a couple of reasons. one, again this las vegas shooting is was unusual. you put a bump stock on weapon it becomes highly inaccurate. >> not when there is 22,000
2:22 pm
people in the fish barrel below you. >> in this incident it would have made a difference. going over the long term i don't think it's going to make a big difference. someone who is bent on committing mass murder i'm not sure that would be much of a deterrent. >> david french, i want to leave it there. i know a lot of people who defend the second amendment don't actually want to come on tv at this point in time. i appreciate you coming on. >> thanks for having me. >> thanks. coming up, president trump left puerto ricoo an hour ahead of schedule today. we'll tell you what happened while he was on the ground in the storm ravaged u.s. territory.
2:23 pm
2:24 pm
welcome back. president trump is on his way back to d.c. from puerto rico right now. he is in the air after touring storm damage, meeting with officials and making a few eyebrow raising comments as puerto rico continues to struggle to recover from hurricane maria. take a listen. >> i hate to tell you, puerto
2:25 pm
rico, but you have thrown our budget a little out of whack. because we spent a lot of money on puerto rico. and that's fine. we have saved a lot of lives. if you look at a real catastrophe like katrina, and you look at the tremendous hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people that died, and you look at what happened here with really a storm that was just totally overbearing, nobody has ever seen anything like this, you can be very proud of all of our people working together, all of our people working together. 16 versus thousands of people. you can be proud. everybody around this table and everybody watching can be proud of what has taken place in puerto rico. >> president trump's strength as a politician does not always include being a comforter in chief. those remarks came as his administration's handling of relief efforts have been criticized on the island and the
2:26 pm
public feud with the island's mayor over relief efforts. the mayor tweeted out some positive comments about the back and forth as well. up next, more on the las vegas massacre, and the debate over whether to have a debate on a debate about guns. we'll be right back. for the first time american kids are slated to live a shorter life span than their parents. it's a problem that we can turn around and change. revolution foods is a company we started to provide access to healthy, affordable, kid-inspired, chef crafted food. we looked at what are the aspects of food that will help set up kids for success? making sure foods are made with high quality ingredients and prepared fresh everyday. our collaboration with citi® has helped us really accelerate the expansion of our business in terms of how many communities we can serve. working with citi has also helped to fuel our innovation process and the speed at which we can bring new products into the grocery stores.
2:27 pm
we are employing 2,000 people across 30 urban areas, and today serve over 2.5 million meals a week. until every kid has built those life long eating habits, we'll keep working. welcome back. let me bring in tonight's panel. sue an page, brad todd, cornell belcher. all right. the debate about whether to have a debate about a debate. susan page, i appreciated david french's bluntness there, that, look, yes, i think there is no doubt people want to sometimes don't let a crisis go to waste. and you don't want to go with a political argument but sometimes you duck one because you are afraid of the political argument. >> what is shocking is that it's
2:28 pm
totally not shocking. it's completely the given after a mass shooting even one as terrible as in las vegas and we would not have a real debate of the. i talked to a democratic member of congress today and i said what would it take to change the meter on that. this member of congress said well if president trump showed leadership which is i think not likely to happen and is a sign that even those who are the strongest supporters of stricter gun laws just see no way to move this forward. >> cornle and brad what i love having the two of you on today is both of you understand numerically why this is a difficult issue. i think you both have passion about it as far as the issue it is but it is a urban, rural divide here. cornell, what would you say is the biggest mistake the gun control side makes when it tries to make an argument -- i guess it's trying to win over the middle but why is it they lose this fight with the middle? >> i think it's more than just a rural/urban divide.
2:29 pm
it is a hard core partisan divide. if you go back, they were asking whether it was more important to protect begun rights or more important to protect violence from guns. out a 50/50 divide, even in the republican side. you do have a hard core partisan divide even on issues of gun restrictions where you have democrats and independents, a majority for more gun restrictions. you don't have that majority among republicans. and it goes back to what chuck you and i always talk about here, a lot of it is really gerrymandering, when you look at republicans where their number one challenge is, within their republican primaries it's kind of hard for them to go against where the majority of republicans are on this issue. i think democrats make the mistake when they don't make this about a world view issue, a world view issue that says more
2:30 pm
guns in more places is fundamentally wrong. right? and it's immoral. i think that is a world -- sort of a big macro world issue that democrats miss. >> they are almost too tactical. steven bannon said something today. he was quoted saying if somehow -- because i don't think anybody at this table would be shocked if in two months somehow president trump walked out of a meeting with chuck and nancy and said i'm no favor of mansion toomey. but steve banson said there would be nothing worse for him and his within with the base than mess with the gun rights issue. >> two of the three presidential debates were heavily focused on
2:31 pm
gun control and the second amendment. 47% of americans in swing states said the issue to the supreme court was extremely important. and the issue of the supreme court was the proxy. >> you think supreme court is a proksy. more about guns than abortion. >> it was in 2016. president trump, those people who said it was extremely important, that half of the country, he won them by 14 points. we had a gun debate in the election and the public came out clearly on it. >> if you ask the public about specific gun measures there is overwhelming support each among gun owners for things like expanded background checks. one thing you find in the pew data is that more people support specific gun control measures but when you asked would you refuse to vote for someone who disagrees with you on guns. four times more likely. that is for people who support gun rights it is a voting issue, in a way that it is for those who support gun control.
2:32 pm
>> brad, the nra has not paid a price for fighting essentially any gun regulation bills. they have not paid -- in fact. it's gone the other way around, enhanced their power. is there a point where their all or nothing approach is risky for them. we'lll ask this of brad. >> the nra were set to go up on television next door in virginia at the governor's race, they were set to go on the air with a big ad buy in virginia but they pulled back. i think democrats don't make them pay a price for it. so democrats have been too gun shy, frankly. look, we are not necessarily -- it wasn't a 50/50 split in this last election. donald trump has less of a vote nationally than myth romney did. i don't think we've had sort of the gun debate sort of full front and center nationally, and certainly not in these
2:33 pm
congressional districts. again it's really tough to have these debates in these gerrymandered congressional districts because it departs and divides is in fact so strong. no, back to my larger point. the nra's point world view is more guns more places. i would love to see democrats take on the world view and say that's not a world view that's going to make our children safer. >> brad one of the debates that was being had inside the leadership of the nr during mansion toomey because there was some thought, there were some who said you know what let's not score it. let mansion toomey happen, let that one go. and there was a fight about that. some argued inside the nra said hey we want to have juice both with the democrats and the republicans. but when they decided not to do that it cost them any remaining democratic support that they had. there a risk of being all or nothing. >> i think your timing is off. i think the democrats left the gun rights movement before that. in the 2010 elections the nra
2:34 pm
endorsed 60 members of the house. that number is down to six. >> because they were voted out. there is no shuler's left. >> they got voted out. >> they don't recruit in those places. >> ohio. >> the nra doesn't support them. >> nra stands by them regardless of party. >> wow. >> go back to is there a risk here for them to be all or nothing on the slippery slope argument. >> we ask campaigns. different actor who engage in campaigns. the nra is trusted by 50%, more than either political party. >> we found this out. planned parenthood and the nra have higher ratings than the democrats and republicans. we found that out multiple times. thank you brad and susan. we'll talk about this more later in the show. stick with us. we'll be right back. let's take a look at some numbers:
2:35 pm
4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom... is a stroke. 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease? preventable. and 149 dollars is all it takes to get screened and help take control of your health. we're life line screening... and if you're over 50... call this number, to schedule an appointment... for five painless screenings that go beyond regular check-ups. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries... for plaque which builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and cardiovascular disease. and by getting them through this package, you're saving over 50%. so call today and consider these numbers: for just $149 you'll receive five screenings
2:36 pm
that could reveal what your body isn't telling you. i'm gonna tell you that was the best $150 i ever spent in my life. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more.
2:37 pm
2:38 pm
s still ahead, why the gun control debate was already escalating. humira has a proven track record of being prescribed for nearly 10 years. humira works inside the body to target and help block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to symptoms. in clinical trials, most adults taking humira were clear or almost clear and many saw 75% and even 90% clearance in just four months. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal, infections and cancers, including lymphoma have happened
2:39 pm
as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. join over 250,000 people who have chosen humira. ask about the #1 prescribed biologic by dermatologists. humira & go. my "business" was going nowhere... so i built this kickin' new website with godaddy. building a website in under an hour is easy! 68% of people... ...who have built their website using gocentral, did it in... ...under an hour, and you can too. type in your business or idea. pick your favourite design. personalize it with beautiful images.'re done!
2:40 pm
and now business is booming. harriet, it's a double stitch not a cross stitch! build a better website - in under an hour. free to try. no credit card required. gocentral from godaddy.
2:41 pm
welcome back. nevada has long been a flash point in the discussion over guns. you could argue the state is split right down the middle. a background check on the ballot last year passed by the thinnest of margins but has since been held up from actually being implemented. essentially it was clark county, las vegas, versus the rest of the state on that issue.
2:42 pm
joining me, editor of one of the great new attempts at great journalism, the nevada independent. mr. ralston, welcome back to the show, sir. >> hi, chuck. >> this idea of a gun debate actually taking place, a gun debate taking place in washington, d.c. seems unlikely. but in your state, both in the city and in the state when you have tourism impacted, suddenly it's possible that you have a real debate. what's 2018 and the rest of this year look like when it comes to the gun debate in nevada? >> you know, it's interesting, chuck. you say it's possible that we have a real debate. but i think in some sense nevada is a micro chasm of washington, d.c. you are already seeing people staking out their position. what is going to be interesting to watch. you mentioned in because you are savvy about the vote totals. clark county passed that background check initiative by 100,000 votes. and the entire rest of the state, 16 counties, went against it by 90,000, 91,000 votes.
2:43 pm
so there is that real divide. but inside the republican party here as elsewhere, chuck, the nra has a lot of sway, and especially with the gun culture out in the republican rural counties you have dean heller who is running for re-election, has a primary against danny tarkanian, both of whom are going to be big second amendment guys, right? you have a governor's race where the grandson of the former senator and governor lacksalth is a conservative darling, he is the one who essentially held up the background check ballot that passed. right now we posted a statement from the governor who is under threaten of a lawsuit saying he is punting it back saying i'll implement it if lacksalth says week. >> nevada is a one party state. the party is the casino
2:44 pm
business. you are mgm. you are bally's. you are caesar's. and you look -- where do they fall -- how much of an impact could they have on this debate when at the end of the day if people don't show up to the strip that's a lot of lost revenue for the state? >> that's a great point, chuck. i'm sure there is a lot of thinking going on inside all of these casinos based on the horrific actions that happened here. and you are right, it is a one-party state. but within that party, chuck, there are many factions. and the most powerful faction in some way is sheldon addleson and steven wynn. wynn is an official with the republican national committee. and addleson is also conservative. i haven't heard either of them speak out about guns. the head of the mgm resorts is much more of a left leaning guy.
2:45 pm
he put out statements expressing horror of course at what happened. but the gaming industry is going to be divided in those two big races. that's going to be very, very interesting to watch. >> let me ask you this, the city, how likely are they going to try to enforce new gun laws or have they basically maximized everything they can do? >> they have maximized most of what they can do at the local level although i'm sure you are going the see a lot of things proposed both at the city, county, and the legislative level. you know that's what happens in reaction to the shootings is politicians try to jump on it. what is interesting -- and the mayor of las vegas has been all over this station and elsewhere talking about this. she has no say over this. most people don't know this. i know you do, chuck. the strip where we are standing right now is not in the city of las vegas. they have no jurisdiction. it's clark county. clark county is the most powerful local government body in the state. the chairman of that body, guess what, is running for governor. he's the lead democratic
2:46 pm
candidate for governor. i doubt he is going to say that much even though he's a moderate. he may have a primary though against a very liberal member of that county commission. i bet she will say something about this eventually. >> well, whether you have a real debate or not, i have a feeling the issue will certainly be involved in many, a television ad. john, i see you have gone full beard. you are a real newspaper man. no more goatees. that's too bad. people mistaken you for my younger brother. >> i kept getting mistaken as todd. that's why i did it. >> john ralston, check out his work at the nevada independent one of the great public journalism sites that started non-profit all on their own. take look. i hope you read it. coming up, why some people think the time is never right. r, but you also have a higher risk of heart attack or stroke. non-insulin victoza® lowers a1c, and now reduces cardiovascular risk.
2:47 pm
victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar better than the leading branded pill. (avo) and for people with type 2 diabetes treating cardiovascular disease, victoza® is now approved to lower the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (avo) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so, stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin
2:48 pm
may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. ask your doctor about victoza®. welcome back. in the wake of las vegas tonight i'm obsess washington, d.c. timing. we hear it after every incident like this. and we have heard it again today. now is not the time to talk about how to deal with gun violence. now is not the time. think about that. why is now not the time? when planes flew into the world trade center is and the pentagon did we say now is not the time to talk about terrorism or homeland security. when our banking system nearcally collapsed in 2008 did we say it's not the time to talk about bank regulation. when we heard that records were
2:49 pm
breached at equifax did we say now is not the time to talk about cyber security. when north korea launched longer range missiles and did we say now is not the time to talk about nuclear proliferation? this point is, this is exactly the time to start talking about political issues, gun violence included. in fact, if we applied the same logic to every other debate and every other crisis that this country faces that we do to the gun debate we never would have focused on any of those issues either. then again, maybe that is the point. we'll be right back.
2:50 pm
2:51 pm
welcome back. time for "the lid." president trump just wrapped up day one of what will be two could not secondive days of comforter in chief. we sort of knew going in this was not a strong spot for him
2:52 pm
when it comes to playing that role of comforter. today he had to bring up the puerto rico crisis and made it as if florida and texas weren't taxing the budget but puerto rico was. >> and here's a question, does it cost him anything? it won't, does it cost him anything to have not been very effective in anything? does he get a pass because that's not what he does? and i guess with his voters, it doesn't make a difference but it is one more thing that keeps him from expanding his support to people who might not have otherwise been for him. >> even in florida, he started talking about rick scott's senate race. he is not comfortable in these moments. >> a lot of journalists have said for years, they couldn't wait until they had an unscripted president. so you guys should be thrilled. >> we like unscripted.
2:53 pm
we don't like his staff that gets up in front of him. >> another issue -- >> do you see it as a missed opportunity some. >> well, i think, of course i think it is a missed opportunity. i think he's given high marks for how he handled florida and texas and high marks on the virgin islands. hurricane recovery doesn't happen in two days or two weeks. >> here's the problem for me with puerto rico and how it is a missed opportunity. when you talk to puerto ricans and people of latino descent, the way the people talked about puerto rico as if they were not citizens, it is an othering. it is a continuation of the othering narrative. we can debate that. but we certainly understand that there's a narrative about this president about, division and othering and this doubled down
2:54 pm
and reinforced the othering debate. it was a real opportunity for him to sort of heal some of that. his words there made puerto ricans feel like they were others. >> i think that's, he has not fully embraced puerto rico as like his problem. at least, it comes across that way to puerto ricans. >> well, i think, again, puerto rico's infrastructure was in a much more difficult spot to start with. and the governor there is working very hard to try to get this fixed as quickly as possible. the logistics to being a lot of people away from the mainland is pretty tough sflfl the president talking about taxing the budget, if you were trying to sell a tax cut, do you want to talk about a bulking budget? >> you do not. and i think there's some cost beyond puerto rico of seeming insensitive on puerto rico. if there's something bipartisan that people expect a president to do, it is to stand up in a national crisis. an oklahoma shooting for
2:55 pm
president clinton or katrina with president bush. and i think there's a cost beyond the one place that is affected. >> what does he say tomorrow? i'll be honest, you can say, he's going awfully early. we don't know, usually in a case like this, there's a memorial service. i hate to say that we have a usual, but unfortunately there is a usual pattern. >> that is a difficult spot. if you don't go quickly, you don't go quick enough. if you go quickly, you go too quickly. it is a tough spot for an executive in a major national catastrophe to decide when to go. they don't want to cause a lot of commotion. it takes first responders off their other jobs. it is a tough call to make of when. >> cornell, i know you won't be asked for advice for the president but how would you advise him? i think it is tough timing. i don't know la the good timing
2:56 pm
is in something like this but it's tough. >> it is central to the job of a presidency. whether you're a republican or a democrat, the healer in chief is a central pillar of the presidency. whether you're talking about bill clinton, bush, obama. it is a, it is part of job. if he doesn't do this part of the job well, i think it cuts against him. he should stay in the middle. >> i have to stop you there. thank you all. we've had a long show and a short amount of time put it in. remember that accident i got in
2:57 pm
with the pole, and i had to make a claim and all that? is that whole thing still dragging on? no, i took some pics with the app and... filed a claim, but... you know how they send you money to cover repairs and... they took forever to pay you, right? no, i got paid right away, but... at the very end of it all, my agent... wouldn't even call you back, right? no, she called to see if i was happy. but if i wasn't happy with my claim experience for any reason, they'd give me my money back, no questions asked. can you believe that? no. the claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it. only from allstate. you know what's difficult? adulting... hi, guys. i'm back. time to slay! no,i have a long time girlfriend. you know what's easy? building your website with godaddy. get your domain today and get a free trial of gocentral. build a better website in under an hour.
2:58 pm
hey. what can you tell me about your new social security alerts? oh! we'll alert you if we find your social security number on any one of thousands of risky sites, so you'll be in the know. ooh. sushi. ugh. being in the know is a good thing. sign up online for free. discover social security alerts.
2:59 pm
3:00 pm
that's all we have for tonight. mr. melber? >> when is a good time? that's the theme i took from you. if you think it is difficult now, they would have never passed anything. president trump facing two major crisises. the unfolding hurricane disaster and impact in puerto rico. we begin on that island. trump met with responders. here he is passing out emergency supplies to


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on